Worst of Both Worlds

Tobacco farmers and anti-smoking activists are working on a juicy bargain: The former get a bigger chunk of your tax money, in exchange for which the FDA will get regulatory authority over tobacco.

Comments

[nm156]

Why on earth would you want to subsidize tobacco farmers? If it was to get them to change over to a different crop I could, maybe, see that as workable. But this is just stupid.

[Tom]

So I, the non-smoking taxpayer, will be forced to pay for the tobacco farmer's subsidy and the FDA's inevitable workforce expansion so they can handle this extra authority. What do I get in return? As is usual with the government, nothing.

[D Lusional]

Sound a bit like selling your soul to the devil.

[EcoDude]

Looks like a perfect example of the "Bootleggers & Baptists" theory...

[WLC]

I wonder sometimes if we don't have to wait until the whole system collapses a la USSR before things will improve. Bleh--in eight hours, it'll be Leine time.

[Jason Ligon]

"Why on earth would you want to subsidize tobacco farmers?"

Well, if you are in California, you need to encourage tobacco production so that you can sue to get the money you need to pay off the minorities who have been victimized by your out of control police force.

See?

[Richard]

The reason why we subsidize our tobacco farmers is simple. They can't compete against their competitors. They are either stupid, lazy, or just plain-old inefficient. This is a horrible idea and anti-smoking activists (and abortion, both sides, and gun control, both sides) should be called out for what they really are...quasi-corporations with a vested interest in making sure nothing happens to their revenue stream...STOP GIVING THESE PEOPLE MONEY!!!

[Andy]

"Sound a bit like selling your soul to the devil."

Umm... which one's the devil?