Cigarette companies are acutely aware that raising taxes effectively reduces cigarette consumption. According to Philip Morris' surveillance in California after the 1989 cigarette tax increase, raising cigarette taxes proved an extremely effective way to reduce overall cigarette consumption and promote quitting. Here's what PM found:
"Effective January 1, 1989, the California cigarette tax rate was increased from 10 cents per pack to 35 cents...Relative to smokers in other states, Californians reduced their cigarette consumption [and] increased their quit rates... Californians smoked fewer cigarettes per day in 1988 than others in the rest of the country and even fewer in 1989 than 1988. The difference in their consumption rates between the years is almost three times as large as the difference for the rest of the sample ... Californians also quit smoking more frequently than those in the rest of the country."
The seven-page document can be seen [http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/kvp83e00 here]
Anne Landman
I'm not a big fan of corporate greenwash, but Chevron did this some time ago. Originally, they took comments. So, um, not the first time an oil company has used social media in this context.
"Law makers, and others who claim that operation scheduled departure as inhumane because these illegal immigrants 'Have children here, have jobs, or have homes here' are out of line."
You mistated the argument. The argument is that Operation Scheduled Departure will not work because many of these people are so heavily invested in the community in which they live - they attend their local church service, have kids in the local school, work, pay taxes etc. The idea that people will deport themselves is quite honestly ludicrous. As the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights director pointed out this is simply a publicity stunt by ICE to cover up the brutal workplace raids.
"As for their children, I feel there needs to be redress in what constitutes an American citizen, birth on US soil is NOT enough."
Your suggestion of abandoning birthright citizenship a practice throughout the entirety of United States is extreme. Despite the moral and nationalistic arguments against this there are quite rational arguments against this. What do you suggest that we do with these children? Do we wait until they are 18 and send them off to whatever country we think they are from? Do we preform blood tests to determine this? What if the parents are from different countries? What if one of the parents was born in Korea and lived in China then immigranted threw Canada? Then what country do we ship off the child to? Quickly, rationally thinking threw your argument shows just how flawed it is.
"if they weren't here to begin with, they couldn't be exploited here. Suspects arrested should have their status verified and illegals need to be deported, the costs for such transportation can come out of any aid/relief packages that have been negotiated between the US and whatever country the illegal is from."
I think that there are many families from numerous refugee families that fled from their country of origin in search of the American dream that would strongly disagree with this statement. The idea that we should force countries to trap in their citizens by bullying them with aid/relief money is one of the most blatenly nativist arguments that I have heard. Completely disregarding the development of a global society.
Please lets put aside these nativist arguments and fluff policies like Operation Scheduled Departure and look for real solutions to the immigration issue.
..in their pre-construction costs, because then consumers would REALLY be mad at their new bills!
Actually, since the nuclear waste turns into salt water taffy, it's a win-win for all!
Seriously, how can they NOT include the cost of storing the waste for thousands of years in the cost of these plants? I would think the cost per kilowatt hour would not be so economical if they were being honest.
But then again, they're not being honest about the safety aspects either, so I guess that I shouldn't expect anything different.
I'm not a big fan of corporate greenwash, but Chevron did this some time ago. Originally, they took comments. So, um, not the first time an oil company has used social media in this context.
I'm glad McDonald's is open to forums like Mom- to- Mom. At least both sides can talk about obesity, diet, etc.
"Law makers, and others who claim that operation scheduled departure as inhumane because these illegal immigrants 'Have children here, have jobs, or have homes here' are out of line."
You mistated the argument. The argument is that Operation Scheduled Departure will not work because many of these people are so heavily invested in the community in which they live - they attend their local church service, have kids in the local school, work, pay taxes etc. The idea that people will deport themselves is quite honestly ludicrous. As the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights director pointed out this is simply a publicity stunt by ICE to cover up the brutal workplace raids.
"As for their children, I feel there needs to be redress in what constitutes an American citizen, birth on US soil is NOT enough."
Your suggestion of abandoning birthright citizenship a practice throughout the entirety of United States is extreme. Despite the moral and nationalistic arguments against this there are quite rational arguments against this. What do you suggest that we do with these children? Do we wait until they are 18 and send them off to whatever country we think they are from? Do we preform blood tests to determine this? What if the parents are from different countries? What if one of the parents was born in Korea and lived in China then immigranted threw Canada? Then what country do we ship off the child to? Quickly, rationally thinking threw your argument shows just how flawed it is.
"if they weren't here to begin with, they couldn't be exploited here. Suspects arrested should have their status verified and illegals need to be deported, the costs for such transportation can come out of any aid/relief packages that have been negotiated between the US and whatever country the illegal is from."
I think that there are many families from numerous refugee families that fled from their country of origin in search of the American dream that would strongly disagree with this statement. The idea that we should force countries to trap in their citizens by bullying them with aid/relief money is one of the most blatenly nativist arguments that I have heard. Completely disregarding the development of a global society.
Please lets put aside these nativist arguments and fluff policies like Operation Scheduled Departure and look for real solutions to the immigration issue.
..in their pre-construction costs, because then consumers would REALLY be mad at their new bills!
Actually, since the nuclear waste turns into salt water taffy, it's a win-win for all!
Seriously, how can they NOT include the cost of storing the waste for thousands of years in the cost of these plants? I would think the cost per kilowatt hour would not be so economical if they were being honest.
But then again, they're not being honest about the safety aspects either, so I guess that I shouldn't expect anything different.
Pages