• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Why do smokers think it is okay for them to litter?

Page 11 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.


<< In the meantime enjoy the sin tax on every pack and carton that you buy and the added expense to your health insurance. >>



You can smile and laugh at that. But remember, sometime when you or your wife or kid are hurt or alone or in danger or in a smashed up car on the side of a deserted road. There may well be a smoker who comes by, looks at them, and keeps going, deciding that will be the day he has his little tiny piece of revenge for an injustice done him in life.

Some people never, ever, forget....

 


<<

<< In the meantime enjoy the sin tax on every pack and carton that you buy and the added expense to your health insurance. >>



You can smile and laugh at that. But remember, sometime when you or your wife or kid are hurt or alone or in danger or in a smashed up car on the side of a deserted road. There may well be a smoker who comes by, looks at them, and keeps going, deciding that will be the day he has his little tiny piece of revenge for an injustice done him in life.

Some people never, ever, forget.... >>

Whaaaaaa? So you're implying that smokers are petty, revenge-seeking, and spiteful? I'm not sure what you're trying to say because the last time I checked, I didn't pass the taxing laws and nor did I tell health insurance companies to charge smokers more. In fact, maybe Aceman should tell his healthcare provider that they needn't charge extra because he's so healthy, despite all of their evidence to suggest otherwise that smokers tend to be greater health risks. Of course, this might be a conspiracy of the Militant Non-Smokers (MNS) to further their crusade.

I'm simply pointing out in a not so subtle way that you will pay more, monetarily, for smoking.

cheers 🙂
 


<< You can smile and laugh at that. But remember, sometime when you or your wife or kid are hurt or alone or in danger or in a smashed up car on the side of a deserted road. There may well be a smoker who comes by, looks at them, and keeps going, deciding that will be the day he has his little tiny piece of revenge for an injustice done him in life.

Some people never, ever, forget.... >>



OK, thats just psychotic and scary, man. Are you really saying thats how smokers think?

Geez! Thats some massive hatred against non-smokers that guy would have to have. Would he stop if the wife and kid had been smoking?


Sheesh!

I wouldn't care if they were smokers or not - I'd stop and help.
 


<<

<<

<< In the meantime enjoy the sin tax on every pack and carton that you buy and the added expense to your health insurance. >>



You can smile and laugh at that. But remember, sometime when you or your wife or kid are hurt or alone or in danger or in a smashed up car on the side of a deserted road. There may well be a smoker who comes by, looks at them, and keeps going, deciding that will be the day he has his little tiny piece of revenge for an injustice done him in life.

Some people never, ever, forget.... >>

Whaaaaaa? So you're implying that smokers are petty, revenge-seeking, and spiteful? I'm not sure what you're trying to say because the last time I checked, I didn't pass the taxing laws and nor did I tell health insurance companies to charge smokers more. I'm simply pointing out in a not so subtle way that you will pay more, monetarily, for smoking.

cheers 🙂 >>




By smiling and obviously taking some sort of pleasure in the fact, your in on it.

It's not a perfect happy world at all, people are vengfull and screwy and spitefull, wars have been fought and people died by the millions for a lot less, this is what it is to be human. By merrily living in a society that allows and even condones such a thing like sucking more and more money for a simple pleasure, your automaticly a target. Take heart in the fact that most people are weak kneed and will just gripe and be bitter. But there are those who are not however.

My icon isnt a wolf for nothing.


cheers to you
 


<< But that facts are that you will have problems later in life if you persist with 3-4 packs a day. >>



Please edit your sentence and remove the "will" with "may". That's where the facts are........in the may category. Why? Because many doctors and scientists are leaning more and more to these diseases being genetic.





<< In the meantime enjoy the sin tax on every pack and carton that you buy and the added expense to your health insurance. >>



Sorry, I don't pay that much in "sin tax" as I buy my cigarettes on a military installation and they don't get taxed by the state. I also get free medical insurance now from the military and it will be free once I retire from the military.🙂

Thanks for your concern though.
 
Sheesh - stand up to the smokers and they go after your wife and children.

Jimbo attacks mine in this thread on 2 seperate occasions and now "wolfy talks about vague kinds of psychotic revenge against women and children by the overtaxed smokers....



 
Hey now, Optimus, I never attacked you personally or Elita or your kids. I'll only personally attack someone when they throw out outlandish or unfounded remarks about the issue
 


<<

<< You can smile and laugh at that. But remember, sometime when you or your wife or kid are hurt or alone or in danger or in a smashed up car on the side of a deserted road. There may well be a smoker who comes by, looks at them, and keeps going, deciding that will be the day he has his little tiny piece of revenge for an injustice done him in life.

Some people never, ever, forget.... >>



OK, thats just psychotic and scary, man. Are you really saying thats how smokers think?

Geez! Thats some massive hatred against non-smokers that guy would have to have. Would he stop if the wife and kid had been smoking?


Sheesh!

I wouldn't care if they were smokers or not - I'd stop and help. >>




No that isnt how "smokers" think, not how everyone thinks, nor how no one thinks, just some. Thinking and acting are two different things also.

Dosent matter is they smoke or not, it's princaple, reprisentatives of the society in general.

Psycotic and scary? Maybe to some. Historicly it isnt, not by a long shot. No for non-smokers specificaly, it's an eye for an eye. This society values money over most things, so why not exchange a bit of huminatarian aid for a lifelong endured tax?

what goes around comes around

 


<< By smiling and obviously taking some sort of pleasure in the fact, your in on it.

It's not a perfect happy world at all, people are vengfull and screwy and spitefull, wars have been fought and people died by the millions for a lot less, this is what it is to be human. By merrily living in a society that allows and even condones such a thing like sucking more and more money for a simple pleasure, your automaticly a target. Take heart in the fact that most people are weak kneed and will just gripe and be bitter. But there are those who are not however.

My icon isnt a wolf for nothing. >>

I'm taking pleasure in the fact that you're apparently saying this in all seriousness. I would venture say that the 99% of smokers out there would not appreciate your characterization of them.

If you're implying that wars should be fought over this, then you obviously have not learned anything from history. Your statement is just as proposterous as Aceman's comparison to the Native American's.

Also, it would seem that your implying that you yourself would deem it justifiable to not help people because you feel wronged by the government. I really hope that is not what your saying because if so that's a very sad statement of your own character.

 


<<

<< But that facts are that you will have problems later in life if you persist with 3-4 packs a day. >>



Please edit your sentence and remove the "will" with "may". That's where the facts are........in the may category. Why? Because many doctors and scientists are leaning more and more to these diseases being genetic.





<< In the meantime enjoy the sin tax on every pack and carton that you buy and the added expense to your health insurance. >>



Sorry, I don't pay that much in "sin tax" as I buy my cigarettes on a military installation and they don't get taxed by the state. I also get free medical insurance now from the military and it will be free once I retire from the military.🙂

Thanks for your concern though. >>

...and this is what my American tax dollars are funding.
rolleye.gif
Cheap cigerettes and free medical care for puffy-ego-ed conscripts with smoking habits.

...maybe Ramses had a point. 😉
 
aceman:

Actaully I have absolutely no beef with you. You seem to agree we can reasonably comprimise about 2nd hand smoke, and I agree with your right to smoke (where reasonable) free from harrassment and over-taxation.

So we seem to be able to live with each other and you aren't verbally attacking my family and I'm not 'hysterically trying to steal your cigs' - ain't it strange? 🙂

Cheers!

-Optimus
 


<< Sheesh - stand up to the smokers and they go after your wife and children.

Jimbo attacks mine in this thread on 2 seperate occasions and now "wolfy" Ramses here vaguely threatens some kind of psychotic revenge against women and children by the overtaxed smokers.... >>




It's not that complicated really, not like threatening violence, not threatening at all.

Now take this tax on smokes, what can I do about it? Nothing, if there was something to be done others with better legal minds and financial backing would have done it, for all practical porposes I cant effect it and must pay it. So all my life I'm stuck with this arguably un-just tax, amoung other similier things.

It eats at you, feeds your bitterness, feeds your distaste for what passes for commen place these days.
You live, you go on, you do nothing, what can you do afterall that will not land you in jail? Who wants that? Your not a criminal by nature anyway, you just like to be left alone, which unfourtunantly dosent go over well these days.

So one day your bitter cynical rear is traveling down a road after just shelling out $5 for a pack of smokes that takes $1 to make, and you see a car turned over in a ditch. Nice car maybe, old car maybe, maybe kids, maybe not. You think about stoping, you've done it before in the past. But this time your little be-nice voice in your head is silent. And you look the other direction, and keep driving. Odds are someone else will come along, but maybe not, and you can live with that.

No one owes you anything when your born, and vice-versa, but it dosent stay that way forever, people will not let it stay that way. I owe someone for lots of things over the course of my life, most I'll eventually just let go, but not all. There's no real single person that can be singled out, so society at large becomes a target(for lack of a better term) for that feeling. THEY let silly laws be passed, THEY let this and that happen.

People think terrorist's and such come from this kind of logic, not true, they always have either a relegious or political agenda, two things I dont have any care for at all. I suppose maybe the ocasional "postal worker" type thing happens from this kind of thinking, but that's the exception rather than the rule. Most people are just bitter and angry and die that way.

But not all of them.



 
Ramses:

It isn't "eye for an eye" to go after innocent bystanders, though.

I could understand the following:

Bob is a smoker. Jim is a very vocal anti-smoker. Jim lobbies to get some anti-smoking legislation passed.
Later Bob sees Jim with a flat tire on the side of the road, and Bob drives on.

That is, while uncharitable, eye for an eye so to speak.

But for "Bob" to drive along and see a random woman and child in danger, and with no knowledge of thier stance on smoking, he leaves them there in some kind of strike at non-smokers everywhere....

Thats just plain sick.
 
Ramses sez:

<< Now take this tax on smokes, what can I do about it? Nothing, if there was something to be done others with better legal minds and financial backing would have done it, for all practical porposes I cant effect it and must pay it. So all my life I'm stuck with this arguably un-just tax, amoung other similier things. >>

Just out of curiousity, seriously, why do you think the tax is unjust? Alcohol has a tax, so why would cirgerettes having this tax be any more or less unjust? They are both drugs. Neither one is particularly good for people. The biggest difference I see is that alcohol is actually regulated more. You have to go to a bar to drink it. You can't stand outside of work and suck down a Miller Lite. You're not even allowed to drive with an opened container in most states, without the obvious law against drunk driving. Heck I cough up ~35 for a bottle of scotch once every month. It would seem that part of the burden is of your own doing because you choose to smoke more or less because it's allowed more places.
 


<<

<< By smiling and obviously taking some sort of pleasure in the fact, your in on it.

It's not a perfect happy world at all, people are vengfull and screwy and spitefull, wars have been fought and people died by the millions for a lot less, this is what it is to be human. By merrily living in a society that allows and even condones such a thing like sucking more and more money for a simple pleasure, your automaticly a target. Take heart in the fact that most people are weak kneed and will just gripe and be bitter. But there are those who are not however.

My icon isnt a wolf for nothing. >>

I'm taking pleasure in the fact that you're apparently saying this in all seriousness. I would venture say that the 99% of smokers out there would not appreciate your characterization of them.

If you're implying that wars should be fought over this, then you obviously have not learned anything from history. Your statement is just as proposterous as Aceman's comparison to the Native American's.

Also, it would seem that your implying that you yourself would deem it justifiable to not help people because you feel wronged by the government. I really hope that is not what your saying because if so that's a very sad statement of your own character. >>




I'm not characterizing smokers, just *some* people, there are many other issues this applies too.

Ahh, noooo, not declaring war over cig taxes, although I do seem to recall a war of sorts over a TAX or two a little while ago, exactly how is this all that different? really?

Not wronged only by the government, wronged by a society that let it happen, and there's no small ammount of self blame here either, I've not done all I could on a number of issues.

My charactor? Blemished, to say the least. Sometimes in the act of doing what one feels they must for the good of others, they themselves dont come out of it in such good shape, either physicaly or emotionally/psycologicly. Life does strange things over time. To quote PoPeye, I am what I am...

 
The cigarette tax (and alcohol tax) seem unjust because the thought process is to tax the crap out of the product, which should reduce the amount of the product being sold. If there's no reduction in the sale of the product, there's plenty of money for pork barrel spending. A smoker feels that they are getting way overtaxed on a philosophy that doesn't work. I don't like paying $2/pack for cigarettes that 6 years ago I paid 50 cents a pack for. I'm still gonna buy the cigarettes
 


<< Ramses,
You just completely lost me with your analogy!😕 >>



Your probibly better off, most people that follow everything I think start haveing problems of one sort or another in life.. 😉
 


<< I'm not characterizing smokers, just *some* people, there are many other issues this applies too. >>

I'm an optimist, so I guess I think there's a very small percentage of people that would consciously choose not to help someone.


<< Ahh, noooo, not declaring war over cig taxes, although I do seem to recall a war of sorts over a TAX or two a little while ago, exactly how is this all that different? really? >>

If you're referencing the tea taxation while the U.S was still a colony, I think that's a very different situation. This is more along the lines of me proclaiming that cable television is my "right" rather than a privilege.


<< Not wronged only by the government, wronged by a society that let it happen, and there's no small ammount of self blame here either, I've not done all I could on a number of issues. >>

There's a funny quote from the Depair calendar that says, "No single raindrop believes it responsible for the flood."


<< My charactor? Blemished, to say the least. Sometimes in the act of doing what one feels they must for the good of others, they themselves dont come out of it in such good shape, either physicaly or emotionally/psycologicly. Life does strange things over time. To quote PoPeye, I am what I am... >>

I should point out, I'm definitely not implying that I'm perfect by any measure. Not in the least. I just think that your example is a bit extreme and far fetched.
 


<< Ramses sez:

<< Now take this tax on smokes, what can I do about it? Nothing, if there was something to be done others with better legal minds and financial backing would have done it, for all practical porposes I cant effect it and must pay it. So all my life I'm stuck with this arguably un-just tax, amoung other similier things. >>

Just out of curiousity, seriously, why do you think the tax is unjust? Alcohol has a tax, so why would cirgerettes having this tax be any more or less unjust? They are both drugs. Neither one is particularly good for people. The biggest difference I see is that alcohol is actually regulated more. You have to go to a bar to drink it. You can't stand outside of work and suck down a Miller Lite. You're not even allowed to drive with an opened container in most states, without the obvious law against drunk driving. Heck I cough up ~35 for a bottle of scotch once every month. It would seem that part of the burden is of your own doing because you choose to smoke more or less because it's allowed more places. >>




The most legitimate reason is because of my mothers side of the family. They were fairly small time tobaco farmers in N.C., as were there fathers and fathers fathers. I've worked in fields, I can plant a barn and drag it to market as well as anyone, I know how much work and sweat and pain go into a field.
And these guys can hardly make a living. They dont see a darn thing form the money made on tobacco, it's astounding how little a couple hundred pound bale of goes for. Do you know how many cigars and cigarettes are made from that bale? LOTS. And it isnt the farmers that get the money, not that they ever did, but it's getting to be less and less, not to mention the government regulating the growing of it to start with, mandating what chemicals be dumped on it in the field. It's silly. Now I know people say "go grow something else", but it isnt that simple. There's a lot of money invested in tobaco specific equipment, some of that tax money would help to offset the loss of that, theere's plain old not knownig much about other crops, there's other crops not paying as well as tobaco used to, so now all the sudden your land you farm isnt enough to feed the family and keep the trucks and tractors running, what then? There SOL basicaly, no one cares. That's one of the reasond it ticks me off. If atleast 3/4 of the money was honestly put back into the farmers, I wouldnt complain.

 
Ramses said

<< The most legitimate reason is because of my mothers side of the family. They were fairly small time tobaco farmers in N.C., as were there fathers and fathers fathers. I've worked in fields, I can plant a barn and drag it to market as well as anyone, I know how much work and sweat and pain go into a field.
And these guys can hardly make a living. They dont see a darn thing form the money made on tobacco, it's astounding how little a couple hundred pound bale of goes for. Do you know how many cigars and cigarettes are made from that bale? LOTS. And it isnt the farmers that get the money, not that they ever did, but it's getting to be less and less, not to mention the government regulating the growing of it to start with, mandating what chemicals be dumped on it in the field. It's silly. Now I know people say "go grow something else", but it isnt that simple. There's a lot of money invested in tobaco specific equipment, some of that tax money would help to offset the loss of that, theere's plain old not knownig much about other crops, there's other crops not paying as well as tobaco used to, so now all the sudden your land you farm isnt enough to feed the family and keep the trucks and tractors running, what then? There SOL basicaly, no one cares. That's one of the reasond it ticks me off. If atleast 3/4 of the money was honestly put back into the farmers, I wouldnt complain. >>

That's a good point for how the tax money could be used better. So, in theory, if it more was put back to the farmers, you'd be fine with the sin tax. But what I'm also asking is how is it any more unjust than the tax on alcohol, which affects even more people?

Aceman

<< The cigarette tax (and alcohol tax) seem unjust because the thought process is to tax the crap out of the product, which should reduce the amount of the product being sold. If there's no reduction in the sale of the product, there's plenty of money for pork barrel spending. A smoker feels that they are getting way overtaxed on a philosophy that doesn't work. I don't like paying $2/pack for cigarettes that 6 years ago I paid 50 cents a pack for. I'm still gonna buy the cigarettes >>

It is a clever way to generate money. Tax something that people will always buy. I can't say that I like it, but with any vice it's probably somewhat of a deterant to reasonable people or people with finite means. I don't know anyone that would bankrupt themselves for a carton of smokes, do you?
 


<< Ramses:

It isn't "eye for an eye" to go after innocent bystanders, though.

I could understand the following:

Bob is a smoker. Jim is a very vocal anti-smoker. Jim lobbies to get some anti-smoking legislation passed.
Later Bob sees Jim with a flat tire on the side of the road, and Bob drives on.

That is, while uncharitable, eye for an eye so to speak.

But for "Bob" to drive along and see a random woman and child in danger, and with no knowledge of thier stance on smoking, he leaves them there in some kind of strike at non-smokers everywhere....

Thats just plain sick. >>



Well, you understand the basic concept, it's a matter of degree. There have been volumes written on wether sin or goodness have degrees, or are they all equal in the eyes of (insert diety). I'm of the equal school of thought. Within reason, course I probibly sound pretty unreasonable to you. Hitler was unreasonable too, and he ruled a country. Were not breaking any new ground here.

And no I dont care for nazi's...

 


<< That's a good point for how the tax money could be used better. So, in theory, if it more was put back to the farmers, you'd be fine with the sin tax. But what I'm also asking is how is it any more unjust than the tax on alcohol, which affects even more people? >>



Well, taken to an extrem, we all see how well prohabition worked. If I were a betting man I'd bet taxing and controlling alcohol would not go over as well and easily as it does with smokeing. It's the same thing though, the difference for me is I dont drink. Painfully honest and human, eh? No one ever called me a liar with good reason....
 


<<

<< Try driving behind a smoker at night at about 50mph. You can easily be 50 yards behind the guy that dumped his ashes and still see glowing ash whizzing by you. >>

You are suck a Fsking Liar. This does not happen as you describe.
Oh. You're still an IDIOT. >>



What dream world do you live in that winds on a highway always flow straight down as to never enable a butt to hit a car behind them? I have had my car hit with ashes and or butts plenty of times, and you don't have to be tail gaiting to have it happen. I have had my car hit by people throwing them out from other lanes. You can't tailgate someone not in your lane of traffic.
 
Ramses

<< Well, taken to an extrem, we all see how well prohabition worked. If I were a betting man I'd bet taxing and controlling alcohol would not go over as well and easily as it does with smokeing. It's the same thing though, the difference for me is I dont drink. Painfully honest and human, eh? No one ever called me a liar with good reason.... >>

See, I would argue that alcohol is already controlled more than smoking. People don't complain as much about the sin tax because alcohol is already so tightly controlled, whereas smoking is still is much more acessible and free. in comparison. Granted there are geographic restrictions and age requirements for smoking, but not as tightly as alcohol. Thus, the sin tax seems more oppressive. Does that make the tax right? Not necessarily, but why should cigerettes get preferencial treatment. I'll tell you why; because Big Tobacco made a deal with the federal government to have it regulated differently than all other drugs. Part of that, however, is because of the economic impact that would happen if the tabacco companies fell.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top