cigarettes online

North Carolina  - By far, the leading U.S. export to Iran is Cigarettes. Also among the leading exports are Bra’s and Bull Semen. Bull Semen? This may explain Iranian women and those facial scarves.

When asked about the export of American Cigarettes to Iran an anonymous source at the Pentagon replied "can you think of an easier way to conquer Iran?" He paused momentarily and then continued "If we can’t send in Rambo we’ll send in the Marlboro Man. If we can’t send in Chuck Norris we’ll send in Joe Camel. Who needs Smith and Wesson when you have Benson & Hedges"?

Lt. Gov. Brian Krolicki says he hopes legislators consider approving his plan that could raise $600 million to $775 million in revenue without increasing taxes to address the budget shortfall.

"These are extraordinary times, and Nevada needs to take extraordinary measures," Krolicki said Thursday by phone from Beijing, where he is heading a state trade mission.

Under his plan, the state would sell bonds and use the revenue to cover current debts. The bonds would be repaid from the annual payments the state receives from tobacco companies.

Nevada receives about $50 million a year from the tobacco industry to compensate for the medical costs to the state of tobacco-related illnesses.

"The situation is so dire now it makes sense to use tobacco securitization to balance the state budget," Krolicki said. "You can’t nickel and dime your way out of a $1 billion budget shortfall."

Legislators next week are scheduled to go into a special session to cut $100 million to $200 million more in state spending because of falling tax revenues. Lawmakers and Gov. Jim Gibbons already have approved $914 million in cuts to the two-year budget that ends June 30, 2009.

Krolicki’s plan isn’t without its critics.

In a letter Wednesday to Gibbons, state Treasurer Kate Marshall said her office has been unable to secure the "working papers" on the assumptions Krolicki used to arrive at the estimated proceeds from his plan. If the Legislature considers the proposal, Marshall said, she wants to work with the attorney general "to determine the extent to which such action would put the state at risk of engaging in fiduciary failure."

Marshall also pointed out that Krolicki in 2003 told the Senate Committee on Government Affairs that a tobacco securitization plan would be a "tremendous fiduciary failure" and should not be used to "balance today’s budget."

At the time, Krolicki was state treasurer.

Krolicki said that in earlier sessions he advocated legislators issue bonds against the tobacco money. But at the 2003 session, he said, he opposed the plan because "it is too expensive and the market is not right."

The situation has changed dramatically since 2003, Krolicki said, and the plan is needed because there is no guarantee Nevada will continue to receive money from the tobacco industry at current levels.

The tobacco money now is used to cover some of the expenses of the Millennium Scholarship and SeniorRx programs.

"It is one of the few options that can raise a considerable amount of money without raising taxes or substantially harming a considerable amount of people," Krolicki said.

Legislators and the governor are looking at ways to cut spending without laying off workers.

Krolicki said his plan is available on his Web site and in handouts he has distributed to the media. He said he proposed creation of a working group, which would include the treasurer, to review the plan before any bonds were sold.

"I would be pleased to work with her (Marshall) and show how the model works," he said. "She is making noise now in a nonconstructive way."

Since Marshall assumed his job in January 2007, the two have been at loggerheads.

Krolicki has been investigated by the Nevada Division of Investigation because of concerns Marshall raised over his handling of a college tuition program and office e-mail messages. No charges have been filed against him.

It may sound like an oxymoron…a fire safe cigarette. But they are real and they are law in two states in our area. That means every pack sold is labeled FSC or fire safe cigarettes. The Marlboro cigarettes are made to go out on their own and the new law has plenty of people fired up.
At cigarette stores across Kentucky, three letters are igniting quite the controversy. "I don’t really care for them. They don’t taste the same anymore," says Danny Scott. His cigarettes taste different because they are FSC. It’s not a brand, but rather a brand new rule in Kentucky that all cigarettes sold be fire safe.
So they go out on their own. If you see the initials FSC on a pack of cigarettes it means each one has special paper to slow the burning process. Simply put, if you’re not puffing, it’s going out. "If you are just sitting here talking like you and me are and you’ve got one lit, don’t take fifteen seconds and it’s out," says Scott.
Actually, we tested that theory and it took an unattended cigarette five minutes and 41 seconds to go out. But it’s not the inconvenience most people complain about."It doesn’t give me a headache just gives me a copper taste in my mouth. It’s nasty," says smoker Jewell Robertson. It may be nasty, but Deputy Fire Marshall Greg Cherry says the new law basically boils down to safety. "We realize they are going to be an inconvenience to some people but the overall big picture is that they end up saving property and possibly lives," Cherry says.
For Danny Scott, there is another option, "We’ll buy them in Missouri or Arkansas, that way they’re not fire safe," he adds. But he may not have that option for long because Missouri is close to adding the three letters to their Marlboro cigarettes too.
Kentucky and Illinois have laws on the books that require cigarettes sold to be fire safe. Legislation is pending in both Missouri and Tennessee.

The Society says it is incomprehensible that cigarettes can be sold in the same way as bread and milk.
The New South Wales State Government is proposing to remove tobacco products from open display and keep them behind counters and the society’s tobacco control adviser Belinda Hughes says the idea should be adopted in New Zealand.
Ms Hughes says positive anti-smoking initiatives include images on cigarettes packages showing the consequences of smoking but shops have been used as a selling vehicle since other forms of advertising were banned in 1990.
She says children should have the right to grow up without being influenced by tobacco marketing and it is society’s responsibility to protect them from smoking.

A hike in New York’s cigarette tax has at least one mom and pop’s shop worried about sales. The hike is part of the state budget passed on Wednesday.
Sue Richter owns a convenient store in Pine Valley. She says the cigarette tax increase will cut her cigarettes sales by half. Richter says that’s what happened in 2002 when the state last raised it.
“It really has impacted my business quite a bit because when people don’t come in for cigarettes, they also don’t come in to buy their soda, gas, or other things so my total sales go down,” says Richter.
New York State lawmakers approved the tax hike in this year’s budget. The tax will go up by a $ 1.25, making the total $2.75 per pack of cigarettes. That puts New York ahead of New Jersey for the nation’s highest cigarette tax. The move will raise about $265 million for health programs.
“I typically sell 200 cartons a week and I expect that to go down to about 100. That’s what happened last time when the state legislature put such a high tax increase,” says Richter.
Smokers aren’t surprised by the hike and say they’ll continue to pay for a habit they enjoy.
“To me it really doesn’t make a difference. I mean if you smoke, you just got to hustle a little a bit harder if you want cigarettes,” says Andrew Owens from Elmira.
“I probably have to go get a job and then buy cigarettes that way,” says Zach Fields of Elmira.
“I’m cutting back anyway but I think that’s crazy. Besides most people are going to PA any to buy cigarettes,” says P.C Benson from Elmira.
Again, in New York you’ll pay an additional $2.75 on a pack of cigarettes. By comparison, you’ll only pay an additional $1.35 in Pennsylvania. The new cigarettes tax hike in New York will take effect June 3rd.

You support taxing my cigarettes an additional $1 per pack for the benefit of two things you like: providing money to programs that help poor Floridians, and discouraging smoking.
I would prefer taxing the Orlando Sentinel $1 a copy, for the benefit of two things I like: reducing property taxes in Central Florida, and discouraging people from reading Orlando Sentinel editorials that propose raising my taxes.
Both ideas are crazy, because they advocate a funding source for a desired program that would cause income from that source to decline. In fact, both ideas will produce zero income for the first goal if the second goal is attained. But both ideas are politically viable because they tax a minority group of people for the benefit of a larger group of people.
If you truly want to achieve the dual benefits envisioned by your editorial, you should seek a reliable funding source for the government programs you like, and call for making cigarettes illegal. If your position really is that enough smokers will keep smoking to fund your desired program, then you are simply advocating a regressive tax, and should say so plainly.