Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Big Ragu said:Buck said:It would have immediate economic repercussions.
The timing of it right now would be awful.
But if the economic climate were different, while it would still have a huge negative effect, it would eventually be weatherable.
In terms of our economy, why would getting rid of something that conservatively costs our economy more than $100 billion annually in medical costs be awful timing wise?
Ace said:Why do smokers think that cigarette butts are a license to litter? You think that crap is organic material like a banana peel or something?
Inky_Wretch said:Ace said:Why do smokers think that cigarette butts are a license to litter? You think that crap is organic material like a banana peel or something?
That's one of my pet peeves. Especially in the summer drought season when you see highway medians burned out from a smoker tossing a butt from his car.
Care Bear said:People would be fatter. Supermodels would cease to exist.
Ace said:Why do smokers think that cigarette butts are a license to litter? You think that crap is organic material like a banana peel or something?
imjustagirl said:I would become way bitchier.
The Big Ragu said:Buck said:It would have immediate economic repercussions.
The timing of it right now would be awful.
But if the economic climate were different, while it would still have a huge negative effect, it would eventually be weatherable.
In terms of our economy, why would getting rid of something that conservatively costs our economy more than $100 billion annually in medical costs be awful timing wise?
EStreetJoe said:The Big Ragu said:Buck said:It would have immediate economic repercussions.
The timing of it right now would be awful.
But if the economic climate were different, while it would still have a huge negative effect, it would eventually be weatherable.
In terms of our economy, why would getting rid of something that conservatively costs our economy more than $100 billion annually in medical costs be awful timing wise?
Because the economy (states combined and federal) would likely lose more than $100 billion in tax revenue from the per-pack taxes charged and income taxes the cigarette companies (or their parent companies) pay.
Plus the tens of thousands people involved in the manufacture of cigarettes (from farm employees to the factories where the cigarettes are made to delivery people) would suddenly become unemployed.