🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3719kh$ehf@hpscit.sc.hp.com>,
Danny Low <dlow@ppg01.sc.hp.com> wrote:
>DaveHatunen (hatunen@netcom.com) wrote:
>: The commercials are paid for out of a special tobacco tax. If you are
>: not a smoker, you are not paying for them.
>
>Not exactly correct. The ads are SUPPOSE to be paid out of a special
>tobacco tax. When the tax was approved, Gov. Deukmeijan confiscated
>the tax into the general fund and allocated some money to pay for
>the ads. The amount is far smaller than what the tax revenue brings
>in. The people who created the tax basically said this was illegal
>but did nothing to stop it. So smokers are subsidizing non-smokers
>through this tax. The ads are only a token effort to be technically
>legal and are really paid out of the general fund.

Despite the creative accounting, I think you could still say the ads are
paid for from the tobacco tax. But I guess the authors of the
initiative should have written in penalties for violaltion of the
intent of the act.


-- 


    ********** DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@netcom.com) **********
    *                Daly City California:                *
    *       where San Francisco meets The Peninsula       *
    *       and the San Andreas Fault meets the Sea       *
    *******************************************************