Last minute gift ideas...

Santa blows smoke

Vintage Santa Clause advertising for you folks. Enjoy.

Blowing Smoke

Mail Bag Time:

"Hey Cap,
wide spread implementation currently underway. get it? wide spread...implementation....."

Smoke Break in the Rose Garden

President Obama paused, snubbed out the cherry into the bottom a White House glass ashtray, and then signed a new anti-smoking bill while still standing outside in the Rose Garden.

The new law, an anti-smoking bill that will give the Food and Drug Administration unprecedented authority to regulate tobacco, allows the FDA to reduce nicotine in tobacco products, ban candy flavorings and block labels such "low tar" and "light." Tobacco companies also will be required to cover their cartons with large graphic warnings.

Obama has spoken publicly of his own struggles to quit cigarettes.

Although, this writer wonders, how will the FDA - an agency that has been as effective as the Detroit Lion's offense - possibly be up to the challenge of regulating Big Tobacco? My guess is that Big Tobacco has already thought that one out and it is why they've allowed these new regulations.

Cheep Smokes? Not any more.

Anyone still smoking cigarettes, or any other tobacco product, probably won't be soon.

The major cigarette makers raised prices a couple of weeks ago, partly to offset any drop in profits once the per-pack tax climbs from 39 cents to $1.01. That's on top of a cigarette price increase from the tobacco companies, adding .71 to .80 cents per pack to offset future losses.

Why? Tobacco taxes are soaring to finance a major expansion of health insurance for children. On February 4, 2009, Congress enacted, and President Obama signed into law, a 62-cent increase in the federal cigarette tax, along with increases in other tobacco taxes, to fund expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). The federal cigarette tax will increase to $1.01 per pack on March 31, 2009.

Advocates against smoking will see nothing but WIN in this...(link here)

And other states, like the Great Corrupt State of Illinois is viewing this as an opportunity to tack on another DOLLAR of tax on top of the already steep increase. (link here)

Of course, the obvious unintended consequence of raising cigarette, and other tobacco product's taxes, is that they are tying funding to a source of fluctuating income. In other words, if you tax it too much, the smokers will go away. Now your funding is gone.

Another thought is that black market cigarettes, or even funneling cigarettes through Duty-Free stores will sky rocket. And if you think rolling your own is a solution around it? Guess again. The tax on RYO tobacco goes from $1.10 per pound to $24.78 per pound. That's more than 2,100 percent! Tuesday, a sack of RYO tobacco will cost $15; Wednesday it will be $40.

So how many of you will be smoking on April Fools Day?
Got plans to quit, or will you just pay... oh, 10 or 11 bucks a pack in Chicago or New York?

Can't Loose Them All

Tick a win for the smokers!

The U.S. Supreme Court tossed out Maine's law taxing the Internet sales of tobacco products, a statute intended to keep cigarettes out of minors' hands by regulating transportation companies, and raising Maine's taxes.

In a unanimous ruling, the justices concluded the federal government's overall interstate commerce authority trumped the state's public health policing powers. A federal appeals court earlier had found the law unconstitutional.

Imagine that? Trade and commerce more important than health. Well, you are livin' in 'Merica.

Don't cough too long there, Mr. Blacksmoke center. This ruling just shows lawmakers the "correct" way to write their legislation that will enforce morality. After striking down this law, they practically begged Congress to come up with a Federal replacement. Just another one of those pesky imprudent interjection of the Court's opinion into a political question.

(singing) Livin' in 'Merica! I feel (cough-cough-cough) go on with out me. I'm just going to catch my breath...

Legislating Morality

Welcome to 2008. For those of you in Illinois, you will notice that you are no longer allowed to enjoy a cigarette indoors.

While Smoking Bans are not specifically part of a socioeconomic system based on a classless society with common ownership of the means of production, they do reek of some form of government that is not based on a free market society.

Is it wrong for lawmakers to assume it is their right
to make decisions on behalf of business owners and patrons of those establishments? Too late. The debate is over, a freedom lost. Common sense lost - yet again.

Smokers are just like non-smokers in that, if you ask them nicely, they'll typically accommodate others. Smokers are aware others don't like the smoke, and most of them will gladly move somewhere else of asked politely. If you act like a jerk - they'll tell you where you can stick your righteous indignation.

Most of addiction is psychological - to smoke or not is a matter of choice and, in some cases, discipline or convenience. Cigarettes don't turn people into mindless zombies incapable of rational thought. People make their choices and live with them.

Despite the party line hysteria regarding the health effects of smoking, the bottom line is that everyone responds to tobacco differently. Thousands of people live to a ripe old age smoking a pack a day, while others get emphysema after only a decade of smoking. Sure the risks are there, but no more risky than fatty foods, a sedentary lifestyle, mass alcohol consumption, or working in an environment with toxic airborne chemicals. Stay tuned - those items are in Committee somewhere.

I have yet to see any hard evidence linking second-hand smoke to an epidemic of respiratory illness. Yes, there may be some individual cases, but it's quite a stretch to claim that all second-hand smoke is always dangerous to every person around. The fact the CDC can't name a single person who has actually died of second hand smoke has to be worth something to the argument.

In two states that passed smoking bans I've run across more people upset at the ban than happy about it - smokers and non-smokers alike.

Whatever happened to the power of persuasion? I don't have a problem with a business owner - be it locally-owned or a corporate chain - banning smoking on their premises. That's their choice and they could be effected by the wallet by their choice.

I do however, have a problem with corrupt bureaucrats who think they have the power to dictate what can happen on private property. Toss in threatening criminal prosecution and denial of property rights to those who don't comply with hysterical nonsense - oh yeah, I'm not so happy about that. The not-so-slippery slope is: now that the power and precedent to flex a 'ban' has been established and accepted - what's next?

Trans fats have already been banned in New York and Chicago. Chicago also has banned fois gras.

We lost prohibition. We lost the war on drugs. Yet we allow our leaders to continue to enforce morality on us. It just doesn't work.

However, once a freedom is given up - it will not be returned.

That is, without force.