Email from President Bush

[hova45]

Best response I have seen so far.

[coryj]

Originally Posted by hova45

Best response I have seen so far.

Thankfully its from the office with the most power!

[Fenwick]

A very well thought out position on the issue and one that makes sense.

[NCatron]

Originally Posted by Bob

Hope the veto gets on this one!! Big Pharma wants to push NO SMOKING because they want to sell nicotine like drugs and patches as fixes for smokers. It's Big drugs against Tobacco. The one that wins will be the one that lobbies the most and has the most money....Follow the MONEY!!

Some of the DRUGs can make a person quite scrapy and on edge and some people a bit psychotic. Welcome to todays America where the freedom to choose gets withered away. If it continues I see Expatriots leaving to countries where at least a simlitude of freedom resides.

Sorry, I had to reply because this one is just a bit far-out...

I work for big pharma, and the last thing we want is to become nicotine peddlers. For one thing, nicotine is not under patent by any company, so generics can make nicotine products... meaning the profit margins on nicotine products are razor thin.

In fact, we're researching lung cancer drugs, so if anything we would want MORE smokers so that we have someone to sell our lung cancer drug to

(Disclaimer: We don't want more people to get lung cancer that was a joke!)

[Budprince]

I've also heard and read that the President will veto this bill and from all accounts it sounds like there isn't enough votes to overtun the veto - hope he sticks to his guns on this one!

[Corona Gigante]

Originally Posted by coryj

This brightened my day a little bit... say what you want about the man, but he seems to be 100% dead-on with his thinking on this issue. I especially liked the bit about tobacco taxes being "among the most regressive revenue raising measures one could propose"... so many politicians say "well, if we raise the taxes then more people will quit smoking"... no one ever seems to ask "then how are you going to continue collecting the money you need from said taxes?"

Well, yes. Sales taxes are pretty much the definition of regressive taxation.

The sentence that caught my eye was "Federal revenues are already above their historical average relative to the size of the economy." If that's the case, and if it's a problem (which is debatable amongst economists if not amongst the rest of us), then I can think of a couple of ways he could save some money.

[Bigwaved]

Originally Posted by Corona Gigante

Well, yes. Sales taxes are pretty much the definition of regressive taxation.

The sentence that caught my eye was "Federal revenues are already above their historical average relative to the size of the economy." If that's the case, and if it's a problem (which is debatable amongst economists if not amongst the rest of us), then I can think of a couple of ways he could save some money.

To the tune of about $7.4 million per hour?

[c2000]

Hey I've got a novel Idea,,,let the people that squeeze these kids out pay for their own insurance,, I'm sick and tired of paying for other people's problems/mistakes..Now the government is looking into helping out all the people that over extended on a house they bought and thought they would pay interest only payments at 3% forever,,,maybe they ought to look into taxing tobacco to pay for this too..

Jerry in Minnesota.

[Bob]

Originally Posted by NCatron

Sorry, I had to reply because this one is just a bit far-out...

I work for big pharma, and the last thing we want is to become nicotine peddlers. For one thing, nicotine is not under patent by any company, so generics can make nicotine products... meaning the profit margins on nicotine products are razor thin.

In fact, we're researching lung cancer drugs, so if anything we would want MORE smokers so that we have someone to sell our lung cancer drug to

(Disclaimer: We don't want more people to get lung cancer that was a joke!)

Like big pharma doesn't want cardiac drugs or diabetes drugs or people sick? Hmmmm....? I wonder where their business would be then?? Gotta wonder...? Like the fast food companies are into it for our health? I guess I fell off a turnip truck a long time ago!! Somehow I got the wrong idea about business, where did I go wrong??

[Bob]

Originally Posted by thassanice

I think the state budget argument is one of the better arguments that is being floated. States already rely tobacco taxes, so in essence, the federal government would be reducing the revenue that the states take in from tobacco sales in order to support the expansion of this program. It just really doesn't make sense for the purpose of a tax to generate revenue off the very activity it's also aiming to prevent.

I gotta agree with ya on this one!! Very interesting is the idea that STATES would LOSE money by backing it. Seems kinda interesting that some of the Senators and Representatives....have their heads stuck up their A** on this one.

I suppose that they believe they will be helping the Health care industry down the road....Prevent more smokers getting cancer and dying and the government having to foot the bill for the perceived threat smokers are to the health care system.

Doing a supposed good deed...they can't see the forest for the trees!!

[Sturat]

Sounds positive. Lets hope he follows through.

[SmokeyJoe]

Best news I have seen on the hike... WTG Pres. Bush!

[Sisyphus]

Originally Posted by Bob

Like big pharma doesn't want cardiac drugs or diabetes drugs or people sick?

I don't think anyone said otherwise.

I, too, hope Bush follows through on the veto. No reason he wouldn't.

-Ken

[Tbain]

Did he give you a phone number too?

[12stones]

I'm wondering, though, with the support that the Senate is giving this if there'll be enough for them to override the veto. I know there's still a lot of details to be worked out between the two versions of this bill, but with they way everyone feels about Bush, there just might be enough to push this through.

I hope everyone's still calling their senators and representatives.