New Jersey Cigar Tax Proposed

[Eichen]

Just as a heads up to those from NJ. There's some proposed legislation going through your statehouse right now which seeks to impose a 150% tax on cigarillos and small cigars.

NJ State House:
http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/

Search for Bill S2901 or A4498

-E

[carbonbased_al]

Lucky for me the vast majority of my purchases aren't taxed

[opus]

Originally Posted by carbonbased_al

Lucky for me the vast majority of my purchases aren't taxed

Lucky so far, they want to start taxing thoses purchases as well.

[carbonbased_al]

Originally Posted by opusxox

Lucky so far, they want to start taxing thoses purchases as well.

Long live the embargo!

[Hammerhead]

Originally Posted by carbonbased_al

Long live the embargo!

Ah. I see. So, you got yours, and to hell with everyone else, right?

[carbonbased_al]

Originally Posted by Hammerhead

Ah. I see. So, you got yours, and to hell with everyone else, right?

By no means rob. I'll protest this bill just as much as I have other (letters, and emails). I been protesting since Whitman was governor lol. However with the heavy, corrupt, democratic state government we have in place I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if this passes.

So maybe yes, to hell with everyone else. Too many people in NJ don't complain and not enough people vote. If this passes it's their fault, not mine. I did my part. I'm happy with my habanos.

[Hammerhead]

Originally Posted by carbonbased_al

By no means rob. I'll protest this bill just as much as I have other (letters, and emails). I been protesting since Whitman was governor lol. However with the heavy, corrupt, democratic state government we have in place I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if this passes.

So maybe yes, to hell with everyone else. Too many people in NJ don't complain and not enough people vote. If this passes it's their fault, not mine. I did my part. I'm happy with my habanos.

Ok, I'm confused. Didn't you vote for Corzine? Aren't you a self-identified 'liberal'?

What I'm getting at is that there are some inconsistencies here that confuse the hell out of me. You're a cigar smoking gun advocate, yet you vote for the very politicians who would seek every opportunity to take your freedom away, while taxing the begeezes out of you for the doing of it.

By the way, Christie Todd Witless was useless, IMO. I wasn't living in NJ when that election went down, so I had nothing to say about it. In the meantime, get a gander at that bill. Right. A fund to give to 'select' hospitals for 'research'. Right. In a state where the political corruption stems from a General Fund that corrupt legislators all are dipping their ladles in. Just how long do you think that money will actually stay in the fund to be used for its intended purpose, pray tell? And how, exactly, are those hospitals chosen... by some 'committee' that will dole out the money to those who sponsor the politicians on that committee... more patronage. Business as usual here, Joe.

This reminds me of Proposition A from 2000, when we voted to keep the state gas tax revenue in the state, then McGreedy tells us they need another $25 million for a DMV overhaul. Where was the money going before the proposition passed, and where did it go afterward that they couldn't pay for those improvements by the gas tax levvied in this state?

D'ya see what I'm getting at?

There's an old saying: "If you keep doing what you've done, you'll keep getting what you got".

If you REALLY want to change New Jersey, then VOTE YOUR RIGHTS, not what some asshole suit tells you he can "do" for you or the state. That shold raise a red flag right away, because when a legislator tells you he's going to "do" something, you can rest assured in New Jersey, that he's going to "do" it to YOU.

[mosesbotbol]

That sucks, they should tax fast food at 150%

[RcktS4]

Originally Posted by Hammerhead

Ok, I'm confused. Didn't you vote for Corzine? Aren't you a self-identified 'liberal'?

What I'm getting at is that there are some inconsistencies here that confuse the hell out of me. You're a cigar smoking gun advocate, yet you vote for the very politicians who would seek every opportunity to take your freedom away, while taxing the begeezes out of you for the doing of it.

But Rob, there are other things involved that some of us may consider more important. You won't catch me defending Corzine, but I would jsut like to point out that just because someone has libertarian views, that does not mean that they cannot also vote against a republican candidate. There were a lot of other questions on the table, not least of which were education and research.
Personally i am much more concerned with these things than whether I can smoke in public, or whether it is difficult to own a firearm. I am not saying these are not important issues, but they are not the most important to me. It's good that there are people like you who are so intent on these areas, but that doesn't mean that they are (or even should be) the focus for everyone.

My main concern, to be honest, is education and research. Stem cell research alone (which Forreseter was unsettlingly vague about for most of the election) would have decided this for me.

[Hammerhead]

Originally Posted by RcktS4

But Rob, there are other things involved that some of us may consider more important. You won't catch me defending Corzine, but I would jsut like to point out that just because someone has libertarian views, that does not mean that they cannot also vote against a republican candidate. There were a lot of other questions on the table, not least of which were education and research.
Personally i am much more concerned with these things than whether I can smoke in public, or whether it is difficult to own a firearm. I am not saying these are not important issues, but they are not the most important to me. It's good that there are people like you who are so intent on these areas, but that doesn't mean that they are (or even should be) the focus for everyone.

My main concern, to be honest, is education and research. Stem cell research alone (which Forreseter was unsettlingly vague about for most of the election) would have decided this for me.

Raney, you can consider whatever you want to be important. Just don't force me to pay for it, or stick it up my ass.

It is never one man's business to put his hands in another man's pocket, nor deny him his liberties or tell him what to do. And that's exactly the kind of attitude that's run amok here in New Jersey. There's a reason why we're the laughing stock of the nation, and the level of corruption is the highest in the country. Because we just don't have a concern to protect our neighbor's rights when there's something that we can get.

And, sadly, in this state, voters have been conditioned to what they can get. What was it that Kennedy said? "Ask not what your Country can do for you... ask what you can do for your Country". Funny how times change.

The voters of the state rationalize what they want because it's simply expedient for them, and don't have a mind to whom it affects or what impact it has on our liberties and how it emboldens legislators to continue their power grubbing ways.

The problem that many people don't fathom is that when they vote, they're hiring a thug called a "legislator" to mug their fellow citizen, and they do it in the most cowardly fashion, by hiding behind a curtain and pushing a button. At least the street punks steal your money in person. When certain ethnic groups engage in this kind of behavior, it's labeled 'racketeering', the term of art in the vernacular is 'protection money'.

As innocuous as "research and education" sounds, if we start chiseling away at everyone's liberties because we start picking and chosing what we personally find desireable, it's a direct violation of my soverign rights, and in contravention of that which our founders intended, and what is supposed to make America different than the rest of the world.

What good is "freedom" if we increment it away through rationalizations, taxes and restrictions?

All I can say is that I hope you or your lifestyle don't get caught in the crosshairs of what some legislator decides is 'important'.

[RcktS4]

Originally Posted by Hammerhead

Raney, you can consider whatever you want to be important. Just don't force me to pay for it, or stick it up my ass.

It is never one man's business to put his hands in another man's pocket, nor deny him his liberties or tell him what to do. And that's exactly the kind of attitude that's run amok here in New Jersey. There's a reason why we're the laughing stock of the nation, and the level of corruption is the highest in the country. Because we just don't have a concern to protect our neighbor's rights when there's something that we can get.

And, sadly, in this state, voters have been conditioned to what they can get. What was it that Kennedy said? "Ask not what your Country can do for you... ask what you can do for your Country". Funny how times change.

The voters of the state rationalize what they want because it's simply expedient for them, and don't have a mind to whom it affects or what impact it has on our liberties and how it emboldens legislators to continue their power grubbing ways.

The problem that many people don't fathom is that when they vote, they're hiring a thug called a "legislator" to mug their fellow citizen, and they do it in the most cowardly fashion, by hiding behind a curtain and pushing a button. At least the street punks steal your money in person. When certain ethnic groups engage in this kind of behavior, it's labeled 'racketeering', the term of art in the vernacular is 'protection money'.

As innocuous as "research and education" sounds, if we start chiseling away at everyone's liberties because we start picking and chosing what we personally find desireable, it's a direct violation of my soverign rights, and in contravention of that which our founders intended, and what is supposed to make America different than the rest of the world.

What good is "freedom" if we increment it away through rationalizations, taxes and restrictions?

All I can say is that I hope you or your lifestyle don't get caught in the crosshairs of what some legislator decides is 'important'.

The most important liberty I have is my right to choose for myself what I see as important. Personally, I think that the idea that Forrester was going to 'clean up the corruption' would have gotten my vote in an instant if there was any part of my being that believed it.

I could use the same rationale you just applied to my concerns about education: many people are so concerned with their taxes and perceived sovereign rights violations that they are completely willing to sacrifice what I consider to be perhaps the most important asset America has, which is our education and research capabilities.

If you think my views are based on self-serving interests, then I can see we are not even having a discussion here because you obviously haven't heard a word I've said. I am giving you every right to have your own political views, please don't think these rights include being able to dictate what I should believe. You can scream ignorance til the cows come home, but I don't think you'll ever convince me that you are better suited to decide for me.

Take care, I'm done here.

R

[Hammerhead]

Originally Posted by RcktS4

The most important liberty I have is my right to choose for myself what I see as important. Personally, I think that the idea that Forrester was going to 'clean up the corruption' would have gotten my vote in an instant if there was any part of my being that believed it.

Precisely! You're not hearing what I'm saying.

You're NOT choosing for yourself. In this state, others are choosing for you!

You can choose for yourself what's important. Nobody is suggesting otherwise. Where we need to draw a line is between what we want personally, and what we force someone else to go along with or pay for. When what someone wants is a thing that another person has to pay for, that's when things get ugly. What's happened here is that in the process of voting for public policy for things that we individually want, instead of running our own lives, we have legislators doing it for us. That's given rise to corruption out the wazoo.

And puh-leeze don't tell me that New Jersey's school districts are superior in terms of quality to others, if you factor in the cost of them. Have you looked at your property taxes? Based on what we're paying here, all our kids should be rocket scientists. Sadly, the majority of them can't make change for a buck without a computer doing it for them, nor tell the difference between homonyms or where apostrophes are supposed to go, like "book's for sale".

As for Forrester, I think he's a schlub. But he's not the communist that Corzine is. Something is seriously wrong with this state. We continually find ourselves in a hole, and yet inexplicably insist on voting again for the legislators who have shovels in their hand, as though they won't dig the hole deeper.

It's amazing, really.

[RcktS4]

Originally Posted by Hammerhead

Precisely! You're not hearing what I'm saying.

You're NOT choosing for yourself. In this state, others are choosing for you!

You can choose for yourself what's important. Nobody is suggesting otherwise. Where we need to draw a line is between what we want personally, and what we force someone else to go along with or pay for. When what someone wants is a thing that another person has to pay for, that's when things get ugly. What's happened here is that in the process of voting for public policy for things that we individually want, instead of running our own lives, we have legislators doing it for us. That's given rise to corruption out the wazoo.

And puh-leeze don't tell me that New Jersey's school districts are superior in terms of quality to others, if you factor in the cost of them. Have you looked at your property taxes? Based on what we're paying here, all our kids should be rocket scientists. Sadly, the majority of them can't make change for a buck without a computer doing it for them, nor tell the difference between homonyms or where apostrophes are supposed to go, like "book's for sale".

As for Forrester, I think he's a schlub. But he's not the communist that Corzine is. Something is seriously wrong with this state. We continually find ourselves in a hole, and yet inexplicably insist on voting again for the legislators who have shovels in their hand, as though they won't dig the hole deeper.

It's amazing, really.

I nevver suggested our school districts are superior, but one of the first proposals Forrester actually hinted at was a property tax relief that would be paid for from the state's budget. Where would that money have come from? I'd pay more in a second if it was funneled into the school system. I will balk at anyone who isn't directly addressing this issue.

I think we have some common ground here, but you seem to be suggesting that there is some alternative to having elected officials legislating for us. What does it look like when we all 'decide for ourselves'? I'm just not understanding what you are advocating.

The last election, and the one before that, and the one before that... they've all been a Lesser of two evils situation - get used to it. It's been like that for two generations, and it's probably gonna stay that way for quite a while. I could not in good conscience vote for Forrester. I found him much more dangerous than the 'communist'. At the very least, I doubt the communist in this case is looking to get rich off his stay in office... I personally had a lot more doubts regarding the other guy.

[Hammerhead]

Originally Posted by RcktS4

I nevver suggested our school districts are superior, but one of the first proposals Forrester actually hinted at was a property tax relief that would be paid for from the state's budget. Where would that money have come from? I'd pay more in a second if it was funneled into the school system. I will balk at anyone who isn't directly addressing this issue.

I think we have some common ground here, but you seem to be suggesting that there is some alternative to having elected officials legislating for us. What does it look like when we all 'decide for ourselves'? I'm just not understanding what you are advocating.

The last election, and the one before that, and the one before that... they've all been a Lesser of two evils situation - get used to it. It's been like that for two generations, and it's probably gonna stay that way for quite a while. I could not in good conscience vote for Forrester. I found him much more dangerous than the 'communist'. At the very least, I doubt the communist in this case is looking to get rich off his stay in office... I personally had a lot more doubts regarding the other guy.

LOL!

Well, there's more about Corzine than you'd care to know that's a total danger. His overarching philosophy is counter to the fundamental principles that we cherish as Americans. The reason he wanted so badly to be Governor is so that he wants so desperately to be President. Look for a Corzine/? ticket in 2012 or 2016.

The problem is that in voting for the lesser of two evils, we still get an evil. We have to get out of the habit of voting for what we personally want, or what we think is "best" and vote with an eye to candidates who preserve our rights and would seek to de-escalate the amount of shit coming out of Trenton.

There was never a law that gave freedom. They only take it away or restore those which have been stolen.

By the way, speaking just for myself, I would have voted in a heartbeat for Lonegan. Sadly he didn't get as much traction as we hoped, but he was a truly out-of-the box thinker on many issues. For instance, repealing the Abbot School Districts that siphon money away from "wealthy" districts to give to inner city schools. So, there's a high school in Newark with a rooftop swimming pool, when the middle class borough of Bogota doesn't even have enough in their budget for a ball field because the taxes are redirected out of political correctness.

I spent hours with Lonegan one evening going through the budget to target idiotic spending items that someone thought would be 'nice' to have because they "chose" for themselves, and somehow the rest of us wound up paying for it. If you had any idea what the budget line items are, you'd be as outraged as I am.

Trust me on this one... Corzine is an absolute danger to the state and the country. You might as well vote for George Soros.

[RcktS4]

Originally Posted by Hammerhead

The problem is that in voting for the lesser of two evils, we still get an evil.

So you are suggesting a vote for the greater of two evils? Really only two choices.

Originally Posted by Hammerhead

Trust me on this one... Corzine is an absolute danger to the state and the country.

That's just it... No offense, but I trust me more than I trust you. just because you see it this way doesn't mean I should. I think we have some differing priorities. I think we both agree that an out-of-the-box thinker, and an incorruptible libertarian would be ideal, but I am a pragmatist, and I don't see this happening.

The discussion on here is great, and it does affect others' views. First thing that comes to mind (and you'll be particularly gratified to hear this) is that my views on gun control have been very much shifted by some discussions on here, coupled with some personal research (which is what really makes my decisions).

However, I am deeply troubled by the tendency for so many to be so deeply invested in the belief that they have a corner on the 'truth' market that any disagreement is a sign of ignorance and idiocy.

Now I am really done here. I have work to do