The area south of L5P is gentrifying at an amazing speed, and there'd be soccer-mom types with toddlers in The Vortex.

A world of no.

Our props were for raising the minimum wage (yes!), banning the manufacture, sale, or possession of assault weapons* (yes!), and, um, pulling out of Iraw (silly, but what the hell).

*not including Judy Barr Topinka's famous rolling pins

Seven states have no state income tax: Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Texas, Washington and Wyoming. Two others, New Hampshire and Tennessee, tax only dividend and interest income.

Personal income tax is prohibited by the constituion here. Don't think it is likely to change. No inheritance tax either. They tax the tourists and homeowners. Gas, smoking, etc. I read someplace that we are the 2nd most regressive tax structure in the states. The sales tax in Palm Beach is 6.5%. There are worse counties. When I was in NY the county tax was 9%.

I don't know if there are any other states out there that don't charge income tax.

Alaska doesn't.

Not getting into the smoking issue.

Only 10% of that $2.60 per pack goes to smoking cessation programs. The rest of it is said to go to hospitals and the like, but it won't.

Yeah, that's what I read too. Weirder still, even the Yes ads that tout that 100% of the money goes to healthcare note that only 11% goes to smoking cessation programs. The other three squares seem to be hospital-related, but there are apparently these strange antitrust exemptions in the bill that sound...not good.

If as a smoker, I am asked to pay this huge tax on my habit, then why aren't knitters and quilters and drinkers taxed this big as well?

Knitting doesn't kill anyone? Unless you're in Idle Hands ?

If as a smoker, I am asked to pay this huge tax on my habit, then why aren't knitters and quilters and drinkers taxed this big as well?

I thought the line of reasoning was because of the huge burden that smokers placed on health resources, insurance companies, and whatnot. I could be wrong, I don't know too much about it.

I thought the line of reasoning was because of the huge burden that smokers placed on health resources, insurance companies, and whatnot. I could be wrong, I don't know too much about it.

From what I can tell, the basic gist is, "If we raise the price of cigarettes, fewer people will smoke, and kids won't be able to afford to start smoking, either."

If as a smoker, I am asked to pay this huge tax on my habit, then why aren't knitters and quilters and drinkers taxed this big as well?

Probably because those hobbies don't aggravate some kid's asthma or give non-smokers cancer.

My apologies to the smokers--really. But it is a big public health expense via medicare and medicaid. So high taxes are the way to fund anti-smoking education and for dealing with the expense of smoking related ailments for the uninsured.

Is there a "penalty" tax on alcohol? I wouldn't mind paying a little more tax on alcohol to fund detox programs.

Hmm.... P-C's link is swaying me a little, but whenever I see sites like that, I want to know who is behind the "facts" site. Props 1a through 1e are about raising taxes to pay for things like schools, roads, infrastructure stuff. My position that I'm in favor of all those things is only strengthened by the fact that the people who are against them in the voters booklet are a group called the Taxpayer Protection Something or Other, which basically sounds like a group of Republicans who just don't want to pay for the things these bills are supposed to pay for.

I'm almost automatically in favor of anything that group is against.

I went no on the 2.60 tax - even though I am haveing a harder and harder time being near smokers. I though it was a heavy tax on an end user. Esp. since the addictive powers of smokeing are huge. I had the easiest time quitting of anyone I know - because I limited my smokeing pretty severly from the beginning. Not sure I ever had a physical addiction. And once again - everything was so decptively worded that who what where the benifit was seemed lost.

If as a smoker, I am asked to pay this huge tax on my habit, then why aren't knitters and quilters and drinkers taxed this big as well?

Probably because those hobbies don't aggravate some kid's asthma or give non-smokers cancer.

Yes. Smoking (and drinking) puts a huge, unpaid burden on the public health system, which is why smoking gets disproportionately taxed.

Yes, maybe you as a smoker don't put that burden on the system yourself, but you also get taxed to pay for roads in Eureka, which you will never, ever drive on, as well as the roads here in LA that you drive on every day. Either way, you drive, and the taxes to raise the money needed to pay for road repairs around the state gets applied across the board. You smoke, and while you don't necessarily require public health care because of your smoking, the tax burden needs to be applied evenly anyway.