Author Topic: What brand of cigarette do you smoke?  (Read 4974 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TheWho

  • Posts: 7256
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: What brand of cigarette do you smoke?
« Reply #75 on: March 30, 2009, 03:02:05 PM »
Femanon fatal wrote:
Quote
You just can't tell any of these people not to do what they choose to do plain and simple, they choose to smoke, and I choose not to care.
It really doesnt bother me either way except I dont want to pay for it.  Obama has a different idea, he is taxing the smokes and putting the tax money towards kids health and prevention programs.  Then when nationalized health is put into place the ones who are bent on killing themselves will get little or no coverage or placed on such a long waiting list that they die before any quick intervention could be useful (like in Europe).  There will be no one to sue anymore because they will be in control of their own oversight (like todays programs).

If they just raised the tax another $2.00 and put the money towards drive thru Kemo and disposable oxygen devises so that we can keep the hospital beds freed up for the sick people and those who will contribute back to society upon leaving, I will be happy and keep my trap shut.  Second hand smoke doesnt bother me personally, I kind of like the smell.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline FemanonFatal2.0

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 548
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: What brand of cigarette do you smoke?
« Reply #76 on: March 31, 2009, 05:50:23 AM »
I think its possible with the proper advancements for cigarettes to be made with non toxic ingredients, rendering cigarette smoke to not be physically addictive, or cause any unreasonable risk of health problems. It has only been in the last decade that cigarettes have been become toxic. Part of the existence of "smokers" is that it is simply a cultural pastime, just like with alcohol, hence the age old saying "drink and be merry" we are all aware of the social and health problems associated with consumption of alcoholic beverages yet intoxicating ourselves has been a constant in society for ages! I think prohibition is simply the wrong approach to the realization that an addiction to these substances can cause harm to the body. The people's choices shouldn't be in question (because really these people are only seeking happiness) its the products themselves and how addictive and unhealthy properties within these substances should be erraticated. Preventive measures within society need to be taken to ensure addiction is medically treatable, and not punishable and avoided at all costs, My main suggestion for this problem is a national health-care system so that people can be properly medicated instead of feeding their addiction in a life of crime. There also needs to be proper drug education. Moderation is a very important lesson that people need to obide by early on in order to effectively avoid becoming physically addicted to substances. But this is just all things a scared shit-less society would fight, because its more important to separate everything into "wrong" and "right" in order to justify criminalizing normal "sinful" human behavior. I just figure that too much of the tax payers money goes toward fighting human nature instead of finding solutions to our society's problems. Its like... throwing the baby out with the bath water. too many people are just afraid that they are getting older and the world is still not what the bible tells you its supposed to be. I'm just so sick of this stubborn agenda, so afraid to take the risks humans need to evolve. but there I go... thinking about the bigger picture again.

What about if they legalize marijuana... what if the stores started selling marijuana cigarettes?  Do you know how many people would be harping about that... not to mention sending their kids to programs for acquiring any. But the fact that humans have been partaking in the same rituals for centuries, it just makes no sense that these things would be so bad now a days. Ill be the first one to recognize that drugs, and problems related to alcohol and other mind altering substances have spiked in the last 50 years but we cant just assume its because its wrong to do.... its because it has been criminalized, the topic censored and the fear of addiction over exploited, benefiting only to the opportunistic and sometimes criminally inclined "drug dealers". Put that shit on the market, study it, regulate it, and see how it would go. Advance growth in the industry and promote change in society's outlook and preparation for legal drug usage and you would have very few mentionable problems with "drug use" and those that CHOOSE to partake in them. There is nothing bad about weed, or alcohol or many other substances if used in a responsible manner, the problem is people choose to over indulge and through their own decision making create problems for themselves. That's when and only then do drugs become a problem. I tend to think its possible to make enough social and medical advances that these problems can be prevented, drug use can be regulated and the crime and health issues that destroyed the lives of millions of people can be drastically reduced.

But I'm sure they'd all rather sit around and point the finger, judge and condemn anyone who doesn't decide to completely abstain out of fear, basically who doesn't practice a prudent, "christian" way of life. I'm more inclined to think that's the real agenda here.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
[size=150]When Injustice Becomes Law
...Rebellion Becomes Duty...[/size]




[size=150]WHEN THE RAPTURE COMES
CAN I HAVE YOUR FLAT SCREEN?[/size]

Offline TheWho

  • Posts: 7256
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Smokers are not a burden on society
« Reply #77 on: April 08, 2009, 02:51:08 PM »
The government is being cautioned not to over tax cigarettes due to the present economic situation.  Smokers are presently costing the united states $96 Billion a year in direct healthcare costs and an additional $97 Billion in lost productivity according to the CDC.  This has always been a driving force to raise taxes on smokers in a attempt to get them to quit.  But taxation has reached a point where people are starting to quit and younger people are not taking it up as quickly as they use to.  What the reports have left out of their studies is that they have found that smokers die 10 – 15 years earlier than nonsmokers therefore saving the country money in Medicare, Social Security, private pensions and other programs.

Vanderbilt University economist Kip Viscusi studied the net costs of smoking-related spending and savings and found that for every pack of cigarettes smoked, the country reaps a net cost savings of 32 cents.

So I think we should start seeing the taxation on cigarettes leveling out so as to not dissuade too many people from quitting.  Smokers are not the burden on society that people think.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »