Personally, I have never objected too much to the sales tax if it's set at a reasonable rate, say no higher than 10%. That's because among the various forms and categories of taxation, it is the least coercive, being that a consumer is not forced to purchase most products that are taxed.
In Mexico, for instance, there are not state sales taxes--just a federal sales tax known as the IVA. Basic food items, medicine, and medical supplies are not subjected to the IVA. Candy, tobacco, and alcoholic beverages are taxed at 15%. Everything else has a sales tax of 10%. The sales tax is already included in the price of most items as well.
Theft is theft.
"I do not believe in or advocate
the initiation of force (or fraud)
as a means of achieving political or social goals."
Ron: theft is theft but taxation is only theft in some cases. Most people believe in taxation and consent to it and thus for them it not theft. They may not like how it is spent but they do consent. And consenting taxes are not theft. Only a small percentage of people think taxes are theft and they are being robbed since they do not consent. For most people there is no theft.
Actually, when the state levies ever-increasing taxes on tobacco, they are manipulating exactly the same addiction that the tobacco companies are accused of creating. They already know that taxation, in itself, doesn't reduce smoking any more than minimum wage creates jobs; they're riding the monkey that rides the smoker's back all the way to the state treasury.
I disagree partially. Higher taxes do reduce smoking though there will be some people who resist and merely enter the black market. Higher taxes discourage everything that is taxed -- that is you have less of it. Otherwise you are saying, absurdly, that a price of $100 per pack will not have any impact on smoking. Many smokers would quit and those who don't would go to the drug cartels that would now have a new product to sell thanks to stupid govt. policies.
Commenting by HaloScan
