Their job is to represent the people of their district.
This is a little tangential, but I slightly disagree. I think they're elected to do what they think is right. I mean, it's not as if the representative process is in place just to keep from having to do a mass vote to decide every issue...
hows that the representative is perfectly willing to prey on the weaknesses of his constituency ... take advantage of their ignorance or addiction to increase revenues
I see what you're saying, but I'm not willing to buy into the ignorance/addiction excuse. If I get pulled over for speeding, I get fined - even if I'm not aware of the speed limit and if I'm racing to the store to buy some smokes. Is the law, then, unjust and are those who passed the law "taking advantage of me" to increase revenues? No. It's a law designed to keep the streets safer, and the fine is a penalty. Taxes on cigarettes are penalties for those who participate in something that makes society sicker and dirtier.
Don't get me wrong, though. I'm not saying I'm "pro" this sort of tax; I just don't think the "immoral" angle makes any sense.

Add a Comment
Email This
Statistics

RSS


RE: Taxing smokers is unjust and ludacris
I don't think that really has anything to do with it.
Look at it from this perspective. The people who propose and vote for these taxes are elected government representatives. Their job is to represent the people of their district.
The choice to propose and approve a tax like this shows that the representative is perfectly willing to prey on the weaknesses of his constituency. That's hardly doing a proper job of representing them.
Saying, "tough - you can quit if you really want to" is beside the point. There will be many smokers, still.
There are lots of ignorant and addicted people out there, but they're still Americans, and they're still entitled to proper representation in their government. For the government to simply take advantage of their ignorance or addiction to increase revenues is pretty lousy morality.
Cheering it on isn't much better.
View Full Discussion