I hope everyone that supports this coupled with UHC enjoys their government mandated diet later on. MMMM, soylent green. Nothing like taking away personal choice in the name of personal biases.
Where did you guys get the idea that someone is losing their ability to choose to smoke or not smoke? Nicotine is a highly addictive drug added to cigarettes to make them more addictive. Why shouldn't the FDA regulate it?
Why not sugar, caffeine or alcohol? Sugar is practically a drug, you get a rush of serotonin whenever you eat junk food. Alcohol is just as addictive as tobacco and does far more damage to people (individuals and families alike) than tobacco does.
You can't make this argument for tobacco without making the same argument for just about every substance we ingest.
You know what, I'm starting to feel like I'm part of President Obama's "quit smoking" plan. This is the biggest disagreement I've had with him next to not smacking down the Telecoms I can remember.
Modelworks
Lifer
- Feb 22, 2007
- 16,240
- 7
- 76
I don't really support this wholeheartedly. Some of it like requiring companies to publish exactly what is in the product is long overdue. Tobacco can contain everything from the normal nicotine to pesticides. Up till now they were free to put whatever they wanted into the pack as long as it didn't kill someone right away.
Bans on smoking altogether I think are wrong. What an adult does, even if it is bad for them is their choice. Smoking in public I do think should be up to the individual owners. If I want a bar filled with smoke that should be my choice. I would just require they have a sign on the door that it is a smoking area and the usual health problems apply.
Bans on smoking altogether I think are wrong. What an adult does, even if it is bad for them is their choice. Smoking in public I do think should be up to the individual owners. If I want a bar filled with smoke that should be my choice. I would just require they have a sign on the door that it is a smoking area and the usual health problems apply.
Revoke everyone's financial aid if they are caught smoking on any college campus.
If you are stupid enough to smoke, you are too stupid to go to school.
Make it illegal to smoke on any college campus.
If you are stupid enough to smoke, you are too stupid to go to school.
Make it illegal to smoke on any college campus.
Once in a while a post finds a way to sink below the usual low standard for ignorance and confusion of posts here. No, my comment has nothing to do with what you said.
Your post is so confused, it barely matters that it's even in the English language. For just one thing, Neocons have nothing to do with the abortion issue.
They may tend to be right-wingers who coincidentally also mostly oppose abortion rights, but it's completely unrelated to the Neocon ideology/agenda.
And drinking. And pot. And driving without wearing your seatbelt. We won't need colleges at all.
Hacp
Lifer
- Jun 8, 2005
- 13,923
- 2
- 81
This is the one program that I think the democrats have right. My only regret is that they didn't raise the taxes to upwards of 10 dollars a pack. The one thing I hate is someone in front of me on a bus line puffing the cancer causing fumes in my face. Plus, they increase the health care expenses for everyone.
Go get a gas mask if you are so worried about getting cancer from breathing. The pollutants in the air from industry, cars, that very bus you ride on do more damage.
Sugar isn't a drug. Caffeine isn't as addictive. Alcohol is not 'just as addictive' either. You don't see groups of people outside the office downing a cold one because they haven't had a beer in 90 minutes.
You would retain all but one error with that change, not much of a correction to the still-confused post, utterly inaccurate about my post.
Except that it is incorrect in every way.
Smokers are taxed to fix budget holes, not for some altruistic reason.
What public transit system lets you smoke on it? I've never in my life seen one.
Also, smokers cost LESS in the long run in health care expenses due to a shorter life span.
All you are trying to do is force your beliefs on others.
It's true. You spew more harmful pollutants from your vehicle than a cigarette.
It's like cigarette arguments make people unable to look up facts for themselves. 0.o
Caffeine is most definitely as addictive as nicotine. Thankfully for addicts, it doesn't bother people nearby.
Alcohol is even worse than nicotine. You can die from alcohol withdrawal. There's a reason why you don't see groups of people outside the office drinking beer...they're not alcoholics.
I f'en hate alcohol and caffeine.
- Aug 23, 2003
- 25,375
- 142
- 116
True, smokers cost less in health care. They also produce less with lower workplace productivity, absenteeism and early retirement.
Studies show that secondhand smoking kills 50,000 people in the US each year. They also increase health-care costs for *non-smokers*, with secondhand smoke aggravating 150,000+ lower respiratory tract infections, hundreds of thousands of asthma symptoms, ear infections, etc.
My point with my comment about how polarizing smoking is was simply to demonstrate how people for this bill have zero sympathy for smokers. I have smokers in my immediate family, and while I'm sure they don't support this legislation, even the fact that we're blood relatives won't change my opinions about smoking. Imagine how little I care when a complete stranger complains about it.
Studies show that secondhand smoking kills 50,000 people in the US each year. They also increase health-care costs for *non-smokers*, with secondhand smoke aggravating 150,000+ lower respiratory tract infections, hundreds of thousands of asthma symptoms, ear infections, etc.
My point with my comment about how polarizing smoking is was simply to demonstrate how people for this bill have zero sympathy for smokers. I have smokers in my immediate family, and while I'm sure they don't support this legislation, even the fact that we're blood relatives won't change my opinions about smoking. Imagine how little I care when a complete stranger complains about it.
Alcohol's dependency is different than nicotine's. If you've ever seen a person suffering from alcohol withdrawal, you'd say differently. Secondly, who cares about addictiveness? Alcohol is a destructive drug that cuases hundreds of thousands of fatalities a year, even more than tobacco smoke.
Sugar may not be a drug in the colloquial sense of the word, but it definitely has drug like propeties for those that eat it. Why do you continue to endanger the health of our children? Obesity and diabetes are directly and causally linked to sugar intake. Where is your outrage over the fact that a pack of twinkies has 50g of sugar? Where is your siren call to tax soda pop at 2 dollars/can? A can of soda is just as damaging as smoking. Addiction to soda is just as debilitating as addiction to tobacco. Obesity, diabetes, heart problems, all these are linked to a diet high in sugar.
Funny, the right wing is all about keeping smoking unregulated, yet they are against euthanasia, abortion, etc. Ironic.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 20K
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter