FDA vs CHIP

Aug 18, 2011 by John S

FDA vs CHIP

Next? Alcohol, Chocolate, or Fast Food

If you are not reading the European papers you may be missing out on some real interesting American news. The FDA has declared war on CHIP, Children’s Health Insurance Program, They are out to cut their funding and increase taxes on the rest of America. This has lead to at least four U.S. tobacco companies suing the government.

Product

Tobacco companies make a legal product. That product is just as legal as a Tonka truck or a bottle of beer. Most jurisdiction do have age requirements beginning at 18 to purchase tobacco unlike beer where they require you to be 21 (ages are United States based.) However, like alcohol they are greatly over taxed and most of that tax is paid by the poor. According to data from Philip Morris the approximate break down of a pack of cigarettes is split as follows: 56.55 percent goes to governments, 14.48 percent is trade market up, and 28.97 percent is manufacture’s price.

Since the inception of the United States tobacco as been a legal product, just like so many other products. Unlike most products tobacco is and has been a plethora of cash for the government.

Packaging

Now comes the FDA, spearhead by uber-progressives, to save the world from something. The solution is a packaging requirement so strict you may not be able to tell what brand you buying. But the good news is Obama will be creating jobs from this. (see Obama’s New Job Plan)

The Daily Mail reported that “The companies also said the new labels will cost them millions of dollars for new equipment so they can frequently change from warning to warning and designers to make sure the labels meet federal requirements while maintaining some distinction among brands.”  Here are the package covers that have everyone wound up:

FIN

So what if it scares people off from buying cigarettes? With almost $5.70 of every $10.00 spent on cigarettes, going to the government; that means that tax money has to come from somewhere. So to make up the downfall in revenue does the government need to look at a fat tax or a vegetable tax. That dollar hamburger could be two bucks and that $3.00 could have $3.00 more in taxes to make up the difference.

Besides a vegetable tax would be good for the environment, forcing people to eat more meat would cut down on cows passing gas and save the planet from global warning. Though you would not put warnings on the vegetables, because you would not want to violate free speech; by making the farmer use 90 percent of his label, on his say his carrots, to state that “It is a proven FACT that humans that have consumed carrots have DIED.”

Does not anyone ever want to accept responsibility for any of their actions? Must some near-they-well-do-gooder progressive have to nanny state us to death? What is next, having to wear goggles  and a rain coat in the shower from fear of getting wet?






Related Posts

Tags

Leave a Comment

Recommendations

Popular Posts

Get Our Widget HERE