http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_8888028?source=rss the stanky, communist foot got in the door with the tobacco tax increase...so logically booze should follow. of course we all know how bad butter is for you...
"Mom, please flush it all away"
I know you may love drinking gallons of cheap Booze. But in the end this is a good way of saving lives and saving money.
now I dont drink by choice, had enough when i was in my teens and than the navy. smoke the cigs and the reefer, i do. cigs i will quit on my own time. promised my son when we move to florida this year. so that'll be done.
this applies to you and Nasica. your statement 'but in the end this is a good way of saving lives and saving money.', that statement, in my view, can also be used in arguements to raise taxes on 'traditional, unhealthy foods" such as butter. why use them when there are healthier alternatives. save money on health costs down the road. prevent heart attacks ie save lives.
this carbon tax is next and itll be ridiculous.
someone close to me. a healthy liberal democrat who does not smoke was just diagnosed with some rare disease that will cost her, her life, in 2-10 years with a slow decay in motor functions thru the course. there is no cure. she just retired from the board of education last year.
my mom is almost 70 and (unfortunately) still smokes 3 packs a day. still nothing medically wrong with her. she's flying up this week to see my sons holy communion.
politicians will use this health shit to redistribute mine and my families money. im not cool with that. never. i may need that money to bury my mother one day.
You let them get away with one thing (tobacco, for example) and it will start a chain reaction.
How will this chain reaction manifest itself?
1st will be tobacco.
2nd will be alcohol.
3rd will be fatty foods.
Each will start with a public health awareness campaign. The dangers will be added as part of the curriculam in schools. That will be followed up by restrictions on advertising and taxation. Government institutions will all adopt a voluntary ban. This will go on to limited civil restrictions and eventually outright bans will be unavoidable.
Politicians know that they can't make you do what you don't want to do if they come right out and say it, so they give you a series of bite sized unpleasant measures that though easier to swallow end up with the same result.
You cant make bread with tobacco, actually the only thing you can make with tobacco is cigarettes. It is purely a vice, unlike butter which, as i have stated, is a staple of our diet.... just dont go eating it by the pound full and you will be fine, you will find that fats are a part of the healthy food pyramid.
vice1 //
Audio Help/va?s/Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[vahys]Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation,
–noun
1.
an immoral or evil habit or practice.
2.
immoral conduct; depraved or degrading behavior: a life of vice.
3.
sexual immorality, esp. prostitution.
4.
a particular form of depravity.
5.
a fault, defect, or shortcoming: a minor vice in his literary style.
6.
a physical defect, flaw, or infirmity: a constitutional vice.
7.
a bad habit, as in a horse.
8.
(initial capital letter) a character in the English morality plays, a personification of general vice or of a particular vice, serving as the buffoon.
And on the third day God said, smoking is evil.
"Vice". LMAO.
Have a word with yourself Nas. You've the lost the plot.
I think the word you are looking for is "luxury". Smoking is purely a luxury. (Much like soap is).
For many people smoking is a healthy way to relax. A stress break. There is more to health than diet. Physical health is directly affected by mental health. Tobacco isn't physical food, it's soul food.
Drinkers and smokers are very social people, unlike the extreme anti-society nuts who don't.
regardless of weather or not smoking or drinking is healthy, it is still the individual's choice to participate in these activities.
People also argue that gaming is an "unhealthy" habit. Would you be as enthusiastic about a large tax on the purchase of a game, a tax added to the monthly fee, and eventually the banning of gaming altogether (for your own good, decided by someone else) ?
Even better...as in cigarette taxes, they could claim that they were using the money to help people who have developed an illness related to excessive gaming, and instead use the money to fund an anti-gaming ad campaign made up of bogus statistics and scare-tactic wording.
MMM...just think...paying someone to make your decisions for you. Can't be a bad thing, can it? Especially when they are helping you to avoid unhealthy activities (which can follow some very loose definitions).
Nasica, comparing the illegal shooting of heroin to the smoking of a cigarette is like comparing apples to monster trucks.
I agree with the previous posters about the ridiculousness of all these smoking restrictions. Smoking is illegal for me EVERYWHERE on campus, and is a finable offense if broken. Smoking is illegal in any indoor establishment that serves food. What I can't seem to grasp is how this isn't the restaurant/bar owner's decision. How and why does the government have any say in whether or not people can smoke in my establishment. Take Waffle House for example: Every time I go to a Casa de Waffle I ask all of the staff their opinion on the smoking ban, and only 2 waitresses have advocated it out of the 20 or so I've asked. So, if >75% (I'll be generous here, as I believe it is much much higher) of my customers and employees enjoy a cigarette, why do I have any obligation to cater to this non-smoking minority? If you don't like it, you don't have to eat there.
As for this tax-the-fuck-out-of-cigarettes trend that is becoming so popular, I fail to see why the gubment is so selective about what to tax, as others have stated before. If we are basing the tax strictly on the substances potential to harm you and/or others, then we need to start taxing car emissions, lay's potato chips, fast food chains, air freshener, cold medicine, mouthwash, yadda yadda.
Either way, my opinion is irrelevant because people like you, who for some reason feel I need to be punished for making a personal lifestyle choice with which you don't agree, will feel the compulsion to support these "holier than thou" taxes and laws that are all the rage. You're like MADD, except their lobbying at least held some form of merit. But by all means, keep shitting on my wallet and my rights, just know that I wouldn't stoop to your level. I respect other people's rights, even if I don't agree with what they are doing. And if legislation were to come about that proposed a ridiculously large tax on, say, SUVs, I wouldn't vote for this legislation just because I don't drive one. We all work hard to make our money. What kind of heartless, backwards, spineless douchebag would I be if I voted to lower someone else's expendable income out of pure selfishness on my part?
Do you want me to get a step-ladder for you? You're sitting mighty high on that horse.
"a foolish or worthless form of self-indulgence" I whole-heartedly agree with you that it is a luxury
As you have kindly shown, vice is the correct word in the context i was seeking. It is a bad habit, you can continue to fool and delude yourself with whatever arguments you may choose. Last time i checked though, cigarettes did not have any anti-bacterial qualities to it. Smoking may be a way to relax, but it most certainly isnt a healthy way to do it, by any measure be it mental or physical. I used to smoke to relax, and now i dont.... does this mean i am incapable of relaxing now, of course not im more relaxed than i have ever been, and more happy. I have to ask though, is a heroin addicts choice of relaxation healthy? What about a cocaine addict? Or someone who takes to much 'ice' (Crack cocaine i believe it is called in the states)? Also, if you believe that smoking and drinking are the only way that you are capable of socialising with people, im afraid that is not a healthy attitude to have. I have just spent the last 2 hours talking to my mother while she smoked cigarettes out in her back yard, i didnt smoke once. I am also capable of going out and not drinking and having a great time.... although i do drink, albeit lightly, when i do go out the majority of the time (1-2 beers over a night). I do not have any allusions that taking a depressant improves my social skills in any way shape or form though. I will pose this question to you though. I am capable of going out and socialising with smokers and drinkers, have a great night, and have great conversations. Yet you think that those who do not drink are 'anti-social nuts'. My question is, i can hang out with both drinkers and non-drinkers, you are only willing to hang out with drinkers.... who is more anti-social in that regard then? You are the one who needs to have a serious word with yourself if you believe that all those who wont get pissed with you are anti-social nuts.
I'm not sugestting that smoking and drinking are the only way to socialise with people, only that they are one of the most common ways. That drinking and smoking are social habits, and that as a consequence, smokers and drinkers tend to be more social and better adjusted people.
I'm willing to hang out with all walks of life, and regularly do so. Thats why I judge I am able to see the difference between the well adjusted ones and the not so well adjusted.
Having one or two drinks isn't enough to lose all your inhibitions. It is untrustworthy not to regularly lose you inhibitions with people. It is not just your ability to talk that is the point, it is your ability to reveal all. Your willingness to do so, and the ability of your friends when faced with an unpleasant truth about yourself that you would normally prefer not to raise, to address it, understand it and allow you receive feedback about it. When you let it all hang out, you find out what is socially acceptable or not. When you don't, you never learn pecisely where that fine line lays.
And your friends, unable to see you at your "worst" never quite know enough about you to bond as closely as they might with others.
P.S., I don't think mental health is necessarily a bacterial problem. How you deal with your health, how you balance your physical or mental health is your own affair. Best of luck to you. What a pity you are unable to show others a comparable amount of human kindness and mutual respect to that which they have clearly shown you.
What a pity that you choose to define to others what is an acceptable level of safety to relax. I suppose you are anti contact sports too. Or are certain more dangerous ways to relax acceptable to you, as long as you personally happen to enjoy them?
With regards to crack and heroine addicts, that is a choice for each person to make in my opinion. I certainly don't think heroine is as safe a way to relax as having a cigarette. But I don't spend my time lecturing heroine users. Having been a smoker, having used cigarettes to relax, what a shame that you are incapable of treating others who merely wish to live as you yourself have done with the same respect as you wanted to be treated with when you lived that way.
Question: Why do I have to pay for someone who smokes?
(Frankly I'd prefer to see my money be used to get people off their addictions.)
I fail to see how YOU are paying for anything.
Smokers pay the MOST taxes, and have the FEWEST rights.
It's actually very, very simple. People who refuse to take care of themselves are a drain on society. When someone gets cancer, they cost money in terms of health care. And when they die they represent an IMMENSE loss of labor power and potential. The wasted money in terms of education alone...
People are interdependent. When someone else fucks up, I have to pay.
Thus it's a lot more intelligent to minimize the risk of someone fucking up and then minimizing the damage when they fuck up.
Taxation on cigarettes not only pays for smokers health care in my country, it also pays for a good part of everybody elses. And their education too. How dare people die before they have done more work for you.
I'd prefer to see the taxes be used to decrease the amount of smokers.
Question: Why do I have to pay for someone who smokes?
(Frankly I'd prefer to see my money be used to get people off their addictions.)
I fail to see how YOU are paying for anything.
Smokers pay the MOST taxes, and have the FEWEST rights.
It's actually very, very simple. People who refuse to take care of themselves are a drain on society. When someone gets cancer, they cost money in terms of health care. And when they die they represent an IMMENSE loss of labor power and potential. The wasted money in terms of education alone...
People are interdependent. When someone else fucks up, I have to pay.
Thus it's a lot more intelligent to minimize the risk of someone fucking up and then minimizing the damage when they fuck up.
and people who believe that others rights should be taken away for ANY reason, including the ones you have listed, are a social cancer.
Besides, last I knew, I was the only one who pays my medical bills.
Where Madace and I live health care is funded by taxation. (Although I like you pay my own).
Originally posted by MadAce
Originally posted by baff
Taxation on cigarettes not only pays for smokers health care in my country, it also pays for a good part of everybody elses. And their education too. How dare people die before they have done more work for you.
I'd prefer to see the taxes be used to decrease the amount of smokers.
I prefer to see the amount of taxes decreased.
But since they are taxes you don't actually pay, what business is it of yours?
Smoking is a kind of Catch 22 taxation, there comes a point where smoking is so demonised, that society will stop doing it, at which point all the non smokers subsidies will be over, they will start having to pay more for their health care.
Question: Why do I have to pay for someone who smokes?
(Frankly I'd prefer to see my money be used to get people off their addictions.)
I fail to see how YOU are paying for anything.
Smokers pay the MOST taxes, and have the FEWEST rights.
It's actually very, very simple. People who refuse to take care of themselves are a drain on society. When someone gets cancer, they cost money in terms of health care. And when they die they represent an IMMENSE loss of labor power and potential. The wasted money in terms of education alone...
People are interdependent. When someone else fucks up, I have to pay.
Thus it's a lot more intelligent to minimize the risk of someone fucking up and then minimizing the damage when they fuck up.
and people who believe that others rights should be taken away for ANY reason, including the ones you have listed, are a social cancer.
Besides, last I knew, I was the only one who pays my medical bills.
As far as I know there are very, very few countries where people pay all of their medical expenses. Almost in every country the government pays at least a very minor part.
Think of it this way. You're a drug addict. Then you steal from me to support your habit. In a sense smokers do the same thing. They exercise the right of killing themselves (not like suicide is illegal or anything) and then rely on the government to jelp them. Not only that, they forfeit the investments previously made by the government in terms of education, safety, ...
So yes, I believe your right to suicide should be revoked.
Originally posted by baff
I prefer to see the amount of taxes decreased.
But since they are taxes you don't actually pay, what business is it of yours?
Smoking is a kind of Catch 22 taxation, there comes a point where smoking is so demonised, that society will stop doing it, at which point all the non smokers subsidies will be over, they will start having to pay more for their health care.
I wouldn't mind paying more taxes in a more productive society. More productive as it won't have to suffer as many people with cancer (not to mention the myriad of other diseases caused by smoking).
huh...well, I'm looking at a medical bill right now, and I don't see anyone paying it. Odd. Guess I'll have to do it.
Incidentally, when my grandfather ended up getting stomach cancer, guess who paid the bill? Sure as hell wasn't the government.
NO ONE has the right to tell someone else how to live their life, and you can argue against that all you want, it is still one of the basic truths of life.
You are the kind of person who actually swallows the load of shit the governments feed us, in their effort to convince us that taking away our rights is for our own good, and that they know what's best for us.
huh...well, I'm looking at a medical bill right now, and I don't see anyone paying it. Odd. Guess I'll have to do it. Incidentally, when my grandfather ended up getting stomach cancer, guess who paid the bill? Sure as hell wasn't the government. NO ONE has the right to tell someone else how to live their life, and you can argue against that all you want, it is still one of the basic truths of life.
The US government does pay a part of your medical bill. Read up on it if you care to have your assumptions killed. (watch out, the world gets only more and more complicated when doing so...)
If you're having issues with the concept of partial payment then I suggest you go and cancel that next lobotomy. Sure, it'll kill a lot of fun while watching reality shows. But you can always pretend to be reading a book. Makes you look smart in the process.
And you keep ignoring the fact that someone who wastes his life is an immense loss of investment.
Contrary to you I understand I'm not alone on this planet and that I do have responsibilities...
BTW, society does preserve the right to take certain freedoms from you. One of them being the right to steal and another one is the right to kill someone else. I'm sure you can think of other examples in that area...
While I agree that smoking should be restricted and taxed. AS it should be an illegal drug. Or all drugs should be legal. (Keep in mind that Alcohol and Cigarettes kill more people then any illegal drug does) Tobacco isn't the only thing in cigarettes and all of the other things in it will eventually kill people.
You should not be able to smoke in public places because there is no way for you to control where your cigarette smoke goes and as long as that smoke can affect my body then you have no right to. Heck if you want to smoke in public places then you should have to wear some type of air-proof helmet that keeps all of that smoke in with you.
MadAce, not everyone's medical bills are paid for even in part by the government. There are tons of people who make enough money that they do not get any type of medical assistance from the government.
Currently playing: LOTRO & WoW (not much WoW though because Mines of Moria rocks!!!!)
Looking Foward too: Bioware games (Dragon Age & Star Wars The Old Republic)
huh...well, I'm looking at a medical bill right now, and I don't see anyone paying it. Odd. Guess I'll have to do it. Incidentally, when my grandfather ended up getting stomach cancer, guess who paid the bill? Sure as hell wasn't the government. NO ONE has the right to tell someone else how to live their life, and you can argue against that all you want, it is still one of the basic truths of life.
The US government does pay a part of your medical bill. Read up on it if you care to have your assumptions killed. (watch out, the world gets only more and more complicated when doing so...)
If you're having issues with the concept of partial payment then I suggest you go and cancel that next lobotomy. Sure, it'll kill a lot of fun while watching reality shows. But you can always pretend to be reading a book. Makes you look smart in the process.
And you keep ignoring the fact that someone who wastes his life is an immense loss of investment.
Contrary to you I understand I'm not alone on this planet and that I do have responsibilities...
BTW, society does preserve the right to take certain freedoms from you. One of them being the right to steal and another one is the right to kill someone else. I'm sure you can think of other examples in that area...
Sorry, but no one pays any of my medical bills, thank you, government or otherwise.
And I believe the exact opposite...the living are a waste of resources. The dead waste nothing. I'd far prefer there were less humans around wasting space, oxygen, food, energy, and my time.
I'm all for suicide, you see...the less of you bastards I have to deal with on a regular basis, the less likely I am to start "freeing up resources" in a forceful manner.
According to your skewed logic, we should all be mass producing babies, living in bubbles, and worshipping the almighty government who knows all.
I have a pretty good idea who is a waste of resources around here, and it's not the smokers.
Shouldn't I be able to smoke in a public place with other consenting smokers?
As long as that smoke isn't entering your body, you have no right at all.
Smokers have the good grace not to smoke in non smoking area's, would it be so unreasonable for non-smokers to reciprocate.
What is your policy on car fumes. Do people still have a right to drive in your utopia?
Can I paint the walls of my house or is that unreasonable to the passers by.
Do I need a filter for my campfire or bonfire to prevent that smoke entering your lungs too?
What about the radio signals from my mobile phone?
How about infectious diseases? Shall we ban sick people from public places. Only allow healthy people into hospitals and doctors surgeries perhaps?
Passive smoking is hardly as damaging as catching a cold. Where do you draw the line?
Honestly if you are that worried about passive smoking, how do you cope with the idea of sunlight? What about putting food in your mouth. The fear of cancer must truely be a miserable thing.
Just how far are you willing to take this principle of yours anyway?
huh...well, I'm looking at a medical bill right now, and I don't see anyone paying it. Odd. Guess I'll have to do it. Incidentally, when my grandfather ended up getting stomach cancer, guess who paid the bill? Sure as hell wasn't the government. NO ONE has the right to tell someone else how to live their life, and you can argue against that all you want, it is still one of the basic truths of life.
The US government does pay a part of your medical bill. Read up on it if you care to have your assumptions killed. (watch out, the world gets only more and more complicated when doing so...)
If you're having issues with the concept of partial payment then I suggest you go and cancel that next lobotomy. Sure, it'll kill a lot of fun while watching reality shows. But you can always pretend to be reading a book. Makes you look smart in the process.
And you keep ignoring the fact that someone who wastes his life is an immense loss of investment.
Contrary to you I understand I'm not alone on this planet and that I do have responsibilities...
BTW, society does preserve the right to take certain freedoms from you. One of them being the right to steal and another one is the right to kill someone else. I'm sure you can think of other examples in that area...
Sorry, but no one pays any of my medical bills, thank you, government or otherwise.
Good. For a second there I was afraid you were going to read up on your lies. I'm not sure what kind of mental damage it would've done. I'd hate to be responsible for your head exploding.
And I believe the exact opposite...the living are a waste of resources. The dead waste nothing. I'd far prefer there were less humans around wasting space, oxygen, food, energy, and my time. If that were true then mankind would've seized growing a long time ago. Did this happen? No, it didn't. You're wrong. I'm all for suicide, you see...the less of you bastards I have to deal with on a regular basis, the less likely I am to start "freeing up resources" in a forceful manner. Lead by example I say. According to your skewed logic, we should all be mass producing babies, living in bubbles, and worshipping the almighty government who knows all. According to my logic you should accept responsability for everyone you're connected to. Which is in some way or another... Everyone. And then according to this responsibility, a government should be formed. You see, if the government sucks then it's your fault. Responsibility. I'm kinda surprised you can live with yourself, as you're advocating parasitism.
Originally posted by baff Shouldn't I be able to smoke in a public place with other consenting smokers? If smoking won't hurt you or someone else... Sure.
What is your policy on car fumes. Do people still have a right to drive in your utopia? Of course they do. As long as they're not taking away any freedom from others (by polluting, killing, ...) Can I paint the walls of my house or is that unreasonable to the passers by. Sure you can. If it's non-toxic paint. Do I need a filter for my campfire or bonfire to prevent that smoke entering your lungs too? If you're burning non-toxic stuff, no. What about the radio signals from my mobile phone? If it doesn't harm anyone, keep on calling. If it doesn't harm you, keep on calling.
How about infectious diseases? Misfortune. No ones fault. It falls under no ones responsibility. Shall we ban sick people from public places. Of course not. Passive smoking is hardly as damaging as catching a cold. Where do you draw the line? Catching a cold is involuntary. Smoking isn't. BTW, involuntary smoking kills more people than the common cold does.
Done ridiculing a very logical concept (take responsibility for what you cause) ?
Regardless, when no one can afford to smoke anymore, and everyone quits, the lost taxes will simply be applied to something else. And then something else. And then something else. All while being "justified" by biased case studies with inaccurate or manipulated statistics.
And then they will have succeed in eliminating the "undesirable" elements. Your choice, and your freedom.
And I would appreciate it if the same consideration were given to the OWNERS of those public places. You know, since they own it, they should be able to set the rules of their property.
If they decide to allow smoking, they should be able to.
Some of the bars in my city have a donation jar set up. They allow smoking on premises, as long as when they get fined, they have enough in the jar to pay the fine.
We already HAD non-smoking bars in town. Why not allow the choice to be with the owner? If people don't want to breathe it, there are alternatives..you don't HAVE to go to where the smoke is, no one is forcing you.
Smoking is still legal in tobacco shops here, thankfully. But I had to laugh once when a customer had the audacity to complain about the smoke....in a smoke shop...clearly labeled with a huge neon sign....and another sign on the door saying "Yes, you can smoke in here"...
Comments
I know you may love drinking gallons of cheap Booze. But in the end this is a good way of saving lives and saving money.
now I dont drink by choice, had enough when i was in my teens and than the navy. smoke the cigs and the reefer, i do. cigs i will quit on my own time. promised my son when we move to florida this year. so that'll be done.this applies to you and Nasica. your statement 'but in the end this is a good way of saving lives and saving money.', that statement, in my view, can also be used in arguements to raise taxes on 'traditional, unhealthy foods" such as butter. why use them when there are healthier alternatives. save money on health costs down the road. prevent heart attacks ie save lives.
this carbon tax is next and itll be ridiculous.
someone close to me. a healthy liberal democrat who does not smoke was just diagnosed with some rare disease that will cost her, her life, in 2-10 years with a slow decay in motor functions thru the course. there is no cure. she just retired from the board of education last year.
my mom is almost 70 and (unfortunately) still smokes 3 packs a day. still nothing medically wrong with her. she's flying up this week to see my sons holy communion.
politicians will use this health shit to redistribute mine and my families money. im not cool with that. never. i may need that money to bury my mother one day.
chips, dips chains & whips.
How will this chain reaction manifest itself?
1st will be tobacco.
2nd will be alcohol.
3rd will be fatty foods.
Each will start with a public health awareness campaign. The dangers will be added as part of the curriculam in schools. That will be followed up by restrictions on advertising and taxation. Government institutions will all adopt a voluntary ban. This will go on to limited civil restrictions and eventually outright bans will be unavoidable.
Politicians know that they can't make you do what you don't want to do if they come right out and say it, so they give you a series of bite sized unpleasant measures that though easier to swallow end up with the same result.
Audio Help /va?s/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[vahys] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation,
And on the third day God said, smoking is evil.
"Vice". LMAO.
Have a word with yourself Nas. You've the lost the plot.
I think the word you are looking for is "luxury". Smoking is purely a luxury. (Much like soap is).
For many people smoking is a healthy way to relax. A stress break. There is more to health than diet. Physical health is directly affected by mental health. Tobacco isn't physical food, it's soul food.
Drinkers and smokers are very social people, unlike the extreme anti-society nuts who don't.
regardless of weather or not smoking or drinking is healthy, it is still the individual's choice to participate in these activities.
People also argue that gaming is an "unhealthy" habit. Would you be as enthusiastic about a large tax on the purchase of a game, a tax added to the monthly fee, and eventually the banning of gaming altogether (for your own good, decided by someone else) ?
Even better...as in cigarette taxes, they could claim that they were using the money to help people who have developed an illness related to excessive gaming, and instead use the money to fund an anti-gaming ad campaign made up of bogus statistics and scare-tactic wording.
MMM...just think...paying someone to make your decisions for you. Can't be a bad thing, can it? Especially when they are helping you to avoid unhealthy activities (which can follow some very loose definitions).
Nasica, comparing the illegal shooting of heroin to the smoking of a cigarette is like comparing apples to monster trucks.
I agree with the previous posters about the ridiculousness of all these smoking restrictions. Smoking is illegal for me EVERYWHERE on campus, and is a finable offense if broken. Smoking is illegal in any indoor establishment that serves food. What I can't seem to grasp is how this isn't the restaurant/bar owner's decision. How and why does the government have any say in whether or not people can smoke in my establishment. Take Waffle House for example: Every time I go to a Casa de Waffle I ask all of the staff their opinion on the smoking ban, and only 2 waitresses have advocated it out of the 20 or so I've asked. So, if >75% (I'll be generous here, as I believe it is much much higher) of my customers and employees enjoy a cigarette, why do I have any obligation to cater to this non-smoking minority? If you don't like it, you don't have to eat there.
As for this tax-the-fuck-out-of-cigarettes trend that is becoming so popular, I fail to see why the gubment is so selective about what to tax, as others have stated before. If we are basing the tax strictly on the substances potential to harm you and/or others, then we need to start taxing car emissions, lay's potato chips, fast food chains, air freshener, cold medicine, mouthwash, yadda yadda.
Either way, my opinion is irrelevant because people like you, who for some reason feel I need to be punished for making a personal lifestyle choice with which you don't agree, will feel the compulsion to support these "holier than thou" taxes and laws that are all the rage. You're like MADD, except their lobbying at least held some form of merit. But by all means, keep shitting on my wallet and my rights, just know that I wouldn't stoop to your level. I respect other people's rights, even if I don't agree with what they are doing. And if legislation were to come about that proposed a ridiculously large tax on, say, SUVs, I wouldn't vote for this legislation just because I don't drive one. We all work hard to make our money. What kind of heartless, backwards, spineless douchebag would I be if I voted to lower someone else's expendable income out of pure selfishness on my part?
Do you want me to get a step-ladder for you? You're sitting mighty high on that horse.
https://easynulled.com/
Free porn videos, xxx porn videos
Onlyfans nudes
Onlyfans leaked
Question: Why do I have to pay for someone who smokes?
(Frankly I'd prefer to see my money be used to get people off their addictions.)
CLICK HERE TO GET A LIST OF FREE MMO LISTS!!!
Smokers pay the MOST taxes, and have the FEWEST rights.
I'm not sugestting that smoking and drinking are the only way to socialise with people, only that they are one of the most common ways. That drinking and smoking are social habits, and that as a consequence, smokers and drinkers tend to be more social and better adjusted people.
I'm willing to hang out with all walks of life, and regularly do so. Thats why I judge I am able to see the difference between the well adjusted ones and the not so well adjusted.
Having one or two drinks isn't enough to lose all your inhibitions. It is untrustworthy not to regularly lose you inhibitions with people. It is not just your ability to talk that is the point, it is your ability to reveal all. Your willingness to do so, and the ability of your friends when faced with an unpleasant truth about yourself that you would normally prefer not to raise, to address it, understand it and allow you receive feedback about it. When you let it all hang out, you find out what is socially acceptable or not. When you don't, you never learn pecisely where that fine line lays.
And your friends, unable to see you at your "worst" never quite know enough about you to bond as closely as they might with others.
P.S., I don't think mental health is necessarily a bacterial problem. How you deal with your health, how you balance your physical or mental health is your own affair. Best of luck to you. What a pity you are unable to show others a comparable amount of human kindness and mutual respect to that which they have clearly shown you.
What a pity that you choose to define to others what is an acceptable level of safety to relax. I suppose you are anti contact sports too. Or are certain more dangerous ways to relax acceptable to you, as long as you personally happen to enjoy them?
With regards to crack and heroine addicts, that is a choice for each person to make in my opinion. I certainly don't think heroine is as safe a way to relax as having a cigarette. But I don't spend my time lecturing heroine users. Having been a smoker, having used cigarettes to relax, what a shame that you are incapable of treating others who merely wish to live as you yourself have done with the same respect as you wanted to be treated with when you lived that way.
Smokers pay the MOST taxes, and have the FEWEST rights.
It's actually very, very simple. People who refuse to take care of themselves are a drain on society. When someone gets cancer, they cost money in terms of health care. And when they die they represent an IMMENSE loss of labor power and potential. The wasted money in terms of education alone...
People are interdependent. When someone else fucks up, I have to pay.
Thus it's a lot more intelligent to minimize the risk of someone fucking up and then minimizing the damage when they fuck up.
CLICK HERE TO GET A LIST OF FREE MMO LISTS!!!
Taxation on cigarettes not only pays for smokers health care in my country, it also pays for a good part of everybody elses.
And their education too.
How dare people die before they have done more work for you.
Maybe if you paid your own way instead of so depending on others you wouldn't need to be such a little Hitler.
I'd prefer to see the taxes be used to decrease the amount of smokers.
CLICK HERE TO GET A LIST OF FREE MMO LISTS!!!
Smokers pay the MOST taxes, and have the FEWEST rights.
It's actually very, very simple. People who refuse to take care of themselves are a drain on society. When someone gets cancer, they cost money in terms of health care. And when they die they represent an IMMENSE loss of labor power and potential. The wasted money in terms of education alone...
People are interdependent. When someone else fucks up, I have to pay.
Thus it's a lot more intelligent to minimize the risk of someone fucking up and then minimizing the damage when they fuck up.
and people who believe that others rights should be taken away for ANY reason, including the ones you have listed, are a social cancer.Besides, last I knew, I was the only one who pays my medical bills.
Where Madace and I live health care is funded by taxation. (Although I like you pay my own).
I'd prefer to see the taxes be used to decrease the amount of smokers.
I prefer to see the amount of taxes decreased.
But since they are taxes you don't actually pay, what business is it of yours?
Smoking is a kind of Catch 22 taxation, there comes a point where smoking is so demonised, that society will stop doing it, at which point all the non smokers subsidies will be over, they will start having to pay more for their health care.
Smokers pay the MOST taxes, and have the FEWEST rights.
It's actually very, very simple. People who refuse to take care of themselves are a drain on society. When someone gets cancer, they cost money in terms of health care. And when they die they represent an IMMENSE loss of labor power and potential. The wasted money in terms of education alone...
People are interdependent. When someone else fucks up, I have to pay.
Thus it's a lot more intelligent to minimize the risk of someone fucking up and then minimizing the damage when they fuck up.
and people who believe that others rights should be taken away for ANY reason, including the ones you have listed, are a social cancer.Besides, last I knew, I was the only one who pays my medical bills.
As far as I know there are very, very few countries where people pay all of their medical expenses. Almost in every country the government pays at least a very minor part.
Think of it this way. You're a drug addict. Then you steal from me to support your habit. In a sense smokers do the same thing. They exercise the right of killing themselves (not like suicide is illegal or anything) and then rely on the government to jelp them. Not only that, they forfeit the investments previously made by the government in terms of education, safety, ...
So yes, I believe your right to suicide should be revoked.
I wouldn't mind paying more taxes in a more productive society. More productive as it won't have to suffer as many people with cancer (not to mention the myriad of other diseases caused by smoking).
A healthier society is a more productive society.
CLICK HERE TO GET A LIST OF FREE MMO LISTS!!!
Taxes are traditionally a larger impediment to productivity than cancer.
Old people who live longer are a strain on productivity not an asset to it.
Frankly if I am going to be keeping slaves I'd rather have happy slaves who get to take the odd 5 minute productivity break.
A happy slave is a productive slave.
huh...well, I'm looking at a medical bill right now, and I don't see anyone paying it. Odd. Guess I'll have to do it.
Incidentally, when my grandfather ended up getting stomach cancer, guess who paid the bill? Sure as hell wasn't the government.
NO ONE has the right to tell someone else how to live their life, and you can argue against that all you want, it is still one of the basic truths of life.
You are the kind of person who actually swallows the load of shit the governments feed us, in their effort to convince us that taking away our rights is for our own good, and that they know what's best for us.
AS someone posted in another thread:
The US government does pay a part of your medical bill. Read up on it if you care to have your assumptions killed. (watch out, the world gets only more and more complicated when doing so...)
If you're having issues with the concept of partial payment then I suggest you go and cancel that next lobotomy. Sure, it'll kill a lot of fun while watching reality shows. But you can always pretend to be reading a book. Makes you look smart in the process.
And you keep ignoring the fact that someone who wastes his life is an immense loss of investment.
Contrary to you I understand I'm not alone on this planet and that I do have responsibilities...
BTW, society does preserve the right to take certain freedoms from you. One of them being the right to steal and another one is the right to kill someone else. I'm sure you can think of other examples in that area...
CLICK HERE TO GET A LIST OF FREE MMO LISTS!!!
While I agree that smoking should be restricted and taxed. AS it should be an illegal drug. Or all drugs should be legal. (Keep in mind that Alcohol and Cigarettes kill more people then any illegal drug does) Tobacco isn't the only thing in cigarettes and all of the other things in it will eventually kill people.
You should not be able to smoke in public places because there is no way for you to control where your cigarette smoke goes and as long as that smoke can affect my body then you have no right to. Heck if you want to smoke in public places then you should have to wear some type of air-proof helmet that keeps all of that smoke in with you.
MadAce, not everyone's medical bills are paid for even in part by the government. There are tons of people who make enough money that they do not get any type of medical assistance from the government.
Currently playing:
LOTRO & WoW (not much WoW though because Mines of Moria rocks!!!!)
Looking Foward too:
Bioware games (Dragon Age & Star Wars The Old Republic)
The US government does pay a part of your medical bill. Read up on it if you care to have your assumptions killed. (watch out, the world gets only more and more complicated when doing so...)
If you're having issues with the concept of partial payment then I suggest you go and cancel that next lobotomy. Sure, it'll kill a lot of fun while watching reality shows. But you can always pretend to be reading a book. Makes you look smart in the process.
And you keep ignoring the fact that someone who wastes his life is an immense loss of investment.
Contrary to you I understand I'm not alone on this planet and that I do have responsibilities...
BTW, society does preserve the right to take certain freedoms from you. One of them being the right to steal and another one is the right to kill someone else. I'm sure you can think of other examples in that area...
Sorry, but no one pays any of my medical bills, thank you, government or otherwise.And I believe the exact opposite...the living are a waste of resources. The dead waste nothing. I'd far prefer there were less humans around wasting space, oxygen, food, energy, and my time.
I'm all for suicide, you see...the less of you bastards I have to deal with on a regular basis, the less likely I am to start "freeing up resources" in a forceful manner.
According to your skewed logic, we should all be mass producing babies, living in bubbles, and worshipping the almighty government who knows all.
I have a pretty good idea who is a waste of resources around here, and it's not the smokers.
Shouldn't I be able to smoke in a public place with other consenting smokers?
As long as that smoke isn't entering your body, you have no right at all.
Smokers have the good grace not to smoke in non smoking area's, would it be so unreasonable for non-smokers to reciprocate.
What is your policy on car fumes. Do people still have a right to drive in your utopia?
Can I paint the walls of my house or is that unreasonable to the passers by.
Do I need a filter for my campfire or bonfire to prevent that smoke entering your lungs too?
What about the radio signals from my mobile phone?
How about infectious diseases? Shall we ban sick people from public places. Only allow healthy people into hospitals and doctors surgeries perhaps?
Passive smoking is hardly as damaging as catching a cold. Where do you draw the line?
Honestly if you are that worried about passive smoking, how do you cope with the idea of sunlight? What about putting food in your mouth. The fear of cancer must truely be a miserable thing.
Just how far are you willing to take this principle of yours anyway?
not to mention the fear of US getting cancer, as he just may go broke paying all of our medical bills.
The US government does pay a part of your medical bill. Read up on it if you care to have your assumptions killed. (watch out, the world gets only more and more complicated when doing so...)
If you're having issues with the concept of partial payment then I suggest you go and cancel that next lobotomy. Sure, it'll kill a lot of fun while watching reality shows. But you can always pretend to be reading a book. Makes you look smart in the process.
And you keep ignoring the fact that someone who wastes his life is an immense loss of investment.
Contrary to you I understand I'm not alone on this planet and that I do have responsibilities...
BTW, society does preserve the right to take certain freedoms from you. One of them being the right to steal and another one is the right to kill someone else. I'm sure you can think of other examples in that area...
Sorry, but no one pays any of my medical bills, thank you, government or otherwise.Good. For a second there I was afraid you were going to read up on your lies. I'm not sure what kind of mental damage it would've done. I'd hate to be responsible for your head exploding.
And I believe the exact opposite...the living are a waste of resources. The dead waste nothing. I'd far prefer there were less humans around wasting space, oxygen, food, energy, and my time.
If that were true then mankind would've seized growing a long time ago. Did this happen? No, it didn't. You're wrong.
I'm all for suicide, you see...the less of you bastards I have to deal with on a regular basis, the less likely I am to start "freeing up resources" in a forceful manner.
Lead by example I say.
According to your skewed logic, we should all be mass producing babies, living in bubbles, and worshipping the almighty government who knows all.
According to my logic you should accept responsability for everyone you're connected to. Which is in some way or another... Everyone. And then according to this responsibility, a government should be formed. You see, if the government sucks then it's your fault. Responsibility.
I'm kinda surprised you can live with yourself, as you're advocating parasitism.
CLICK HERE TO GET A LIST OF FREE MMO LISTS!!!
Regardless, when no one can afford to smoke anymore, and everyone quits, the lost taxes will simply be applied to something else. And then something else. And then something else. All while being "justified" by biased case studies with inaccurate or manipulated statistics.
And then they will have succeed in eliminating the "undesirable" elements. Your choice, and your freedom.
And I would appreciate it if the same consideration were given to the OWNERS of those public places. You know, since they own it, they should be able to set the rules of their property.
If they decide to allow smoking, they should be able to.
Some of the bars in my city have a donation jar set up. They allow smoking on premises, as long as when they get fined, they have enough in the jar to pay the fine.
We already HAD non-smoking bars in town. Why not allow the choice to be with the owner? If people don't want to breathe it, there are alternatives..you don't HAVE to go to where the smoke is, no one is forcing you.
Smoking is still legal in tobacco shops here, thankfully. But I had to laugh once when a customer had the audacity to complain about the smoke....in a smoke shop...clearly labeled with a huge neon sign....and another sign on the door saying "Yes, you can smoke in here"...
....SOME people will bitch about anything.