Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

California

(35,392 posts)

3. okay, here's a "conservative spin" on the "aimed at poor people" point ...

Tue Apr 24, 2012, 07:31 PM

Apr 2012

maybe if they didn't literally "burn" their money by buying cigarettes ... maybe they wouldn't be as "poor" ...

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

17 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Anyone else noticing the "No on 29" ads? [View all] Auggie Apr 2012 OP

I'll have to read it. Mz Pip Apr 2012 #1

Well, they had my sympathy til they lied. Kalidurga Apr 2012 #2

Conservatives don't say that. Gold Metal Flake Apr 2012 #5

I was referring to the opinions expressed by conservative citizens. Gold Metal Flake Apr 2012 #7

Good, I hope it fails DJ13 Apr 2012 #4

+1 Gold Metal Flake Apr 2012 #8

For people who quit -- rich and poor -- it's a big savings Auggie Apr 2012 #9

You have a point. The per-pack tax is regressive. KamaAina Apr 2012 #12

I agree. Cancer research roody Apr 2012 #11

When they say "cancer research" do they mean cause or cure? Merlot Apr 2012 #13

There will be preventative efforts aimed at children and adults Auggie Apr 2012 #14

TOTALLY agree. This one gets a big NO from me. nt Raine May 2012 #17

nt. ges5626sek Apr 2012 #15

I was polled about this last night, bemildred Apr 2012 #16