McCrabby needs to rant: Sorry this isn't job-related, but it struck a chord, and since this is McCrabby's blog, and he gets to rant when he wants, here's one.
Last week, the voters of California chose to defeat a state bill that would have increased the federal tax on a pack of cigarettes by one dollar. That one dollar was to go to cancer research. McCrabby's not so upset that the ballot issue lost, as much as he wants to point out what that loss represents.
McCrabby has only been in California 2-3 times in 60 years, so this result probably won't be a major impact to the McCrabby family. But, it points out some bigger issues. And, note the final bullet above -- here are a few pictures to prove it.
We'll get back to our job search ideas now - the first is, DON'T SMOKE!!!
How 'bout following us on Twitter, or signing up here.. We'd love to see you.. We only have 80 folks, and we'd love to get to a couple hundred (sign up on the left, where it says "join this site") so we can see your picture on this site. And follow us on twitter (@curtmacrae), where we don't post much, but we'd love to see you there. 
Last week, the voters of California chose to defeat a state bill that would have increased the federal tax on a pack of cigarettes by one dollar. That one dollar was to go to cancer research. McCrabby's not so upset that the ballot issue lost, as much as he wants to point out what that loss represents.Several weeks ago, the support for that initiative stood at 67 per cent. Last week, it took 2-3 extra days to count the 10 million ballots, because the tally was so close. The effort to add the tax, led by many health activists, including Lance Armstrong, lost by a 50.3 - 49.7 margin.
Why? Big tobacco interests poured $47 million in advertising into the California contest, and swayed 17+ per cent of voters to change their minds. What does this say about the typical U.S. voter, the marketing effort to sway his vote, and his ability to intelligently make informed choices at the ballot box?
- It illustrates how easily American voters can be swayed by slick advertising and repetitive messages -- does anyone really believe that the presidential election in November won't be swayed by how gas prices, unemployment and the European economy are doing in October? In December, it won't matter; we'll just start complaining again.
- Tobacco companies lost an opportunity to increase sales by marketing the advantages of the new cigarette tax -- Imagine the ad campaign that says, "Fight cancer tomorrow, smoke more Camel cigarettes today!"
- Only 12 per cent of California residents smoke (second lowest in the U.S.), but with a population of 38 million, that translates to more then 4 million smokers -- the tobacco companies spent $12 in advertising, per smoker, to save $1 / pack (seems like a good investment).
Even with California's relatively low smoker rate (the U.S. average is more than 19%), The New America Foundation estimates that the cost of smoking in California, due to health-related issues, is $17 Billion (with a B) per year. Nationally, that number is closing in on $200 Billion.and the cost is not just financial -- an estimated 430,000+ deaths occur in the U.S. each year from smoking-related causes. - Everyone that smokes looks so cool and smells so good.
McCrabby has only been in California 2-3 times in 60 years, so this result probably won't be a major impact to the McCrabby family. But, it points out some bigger issues. And, note the final bullet above -- here are a few pictures to prove it. We'll get back to our job search ideas now - the first is, DON'T SMOKE!!!
How 'bout following us on Twitter, or signing up here.. We'd love to see you.. We only have 80 folks, and we'd love to get to a couple hundred (sign up on the left, where it says "join this site") so we can see your picture on this site. And follow us on twitter (@curtmacrae), where we don't post much, but we'd love to see you there. 
