Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site ihu1g.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!vax135!houxz!houxm!ihnp4!ihu1g!fish From: fish@ihu1g.UUCP (Bob Fishell) Newsgroups: net.misc,net.med Subject: Re: Why Smoke? Message-ID: <439@ihu1g.UUCP> Date: Wed, 20-Jun-84 09:27:21 EDT Article-I.D.: ihu1g.439 Posted: Wed Jun 20 09:27:21 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 21-Jun-84 07:21:25 EDT References: <3045@brl-tgr.ARPA>, <332@ames-lm.UUCP> <3055@brl-tgr.ARPA> Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL Lines: 17 Anti-smoking legislation has less chance of passage than just increasing the taxes on it even more. I'd favor a $2.00/pack Federal nuisance tax on cigarettes, in addition to the already exhorbitant taxes on them now. The tax would be collected by the manufacturer, and would only filter (pun unintentional) down to the consumer through the usual chain of middlemen. This would reduce black-marketeering. The money collected could be used to fund cancer research and go toward anti-smoking information campaigns. The large price of cigarettes would induce more people to stop, discourage young people from starting (when I was a kid, I had to be frugal with my allowance. Unfortunately, cigs were $0.35 a pack then, and I smoked 'em), and put the burden of public expense for smoking on the people who cause the problem. -- Bob Fishell ihnp4!ihu1g!fish