A post by Maynard
FoxNews is reporting that cigarette smugglers in New York are funneling profits to terrorists. The G-men are looking to crack down, as a matter of national security, not to mention the large loss of revenue.
Does everybody understand that the zeal to punish smokers has merely stolen from the poor and given to the rich (media outlets and professional antismoking profiteers), while making criminal activity hugely profitable? I’m not defending smokers or smoking (and I don’t smoke), but smokers have become the modern whipping boy of the new political puritans.
As another bit of social engineering, New York’s policy of “forebearance” (they ignore sales of Native American tax-free cigarettes to non-Native Americans) has created a source of untaxed cigarettes which are quickly diverted into taxable channels.
Actually, this is all old news. Five years ago, the Cato Institute published this article which said pretty much the same thing:
Smugglers are now being investigated for possible terrorist ties….Mayor Michael Bloomberg hiked the city’s cigarette excise tax from 8 cents to $1.50 per pack. That hike, coupled with a series of recent increases in the state cigarette tax, has pushed the price of legal brand name cigarettes to more than $7.50 per pack. As a result, it is possible to earn hundreds of thousands of dollars on every truckload of cigarettes smuggled into the city…The tax hikes also spurred crime against legal businesses, [causing] distributors and retailers to be confronted almost daily with the risk and dangers of personal violence which are now inherent in their industry.
So, thanks to artificially high prices, hijacking a cigarette truck is almost as profitable as hijacking a bank truck.
These are the laws of unintended consequences. If taxes are low and reasonable, we shrug and pay them. If they’re high and arbitrary, the government loses respect and people become motivated to evade. Criminal activity becomes entrenched and widespread.
Why is this simple logic, which is so obvious to the man on the street, such an alien concept to our leaders?
Why is that which is obvious to the man on the street an alien concept to “our leaders?” Simple: 1) “Our leaders” avoid the street as much as possible, and 2) “our leaders” are almost universally chosen, for intelligence and common sense, from the bottom 10% of the population.
It’s not about power it’s about control. From a liberal politician’s point of view it’s better to have criminal activity than non-criminal activity. With criminal activity you can use the force of the state’s police to insure compliance with any edict by using the absurd law which is broken frequently as a cudgel to beat the proles into submission. That’s why there are laws against a whole range of normal human activity for the sole purpose of giving the state weapons to use against the citizens.
For God’s sakes it shouldn’t have taken a Stephen Hawkings to figure out this would happen.
I smoke and even my lowly mechanic’s brain knew that when the value of a carton of cigarettes exceeded a gram of Cocaine the damn things would become targets like bootleg liquor was in the thirties.
How in the hell do Politicians ever pass the bar exams since most of them also happen to be Lawyers? Their stupidity is breathtaking.
One other thing. To any anti-smoking zealot: I’ve paid enough in tobacco taxes over the last forty years to pay for two or three heart/lung transplants so don’t say I’m a burden to society. BTW, outside of diabetes my health is perfect.