When will the government ban cigarettes outright?
- Thread starter AcuraTech
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
Well, they surely do have "free will" ..but in a nation where freedom is literally equated to $$$ ....
Think of it as a warped version of Victory Vodka in the contemporary USA version of INGSOC. The difference is that they tax the pacifier for the proles.
Think of it as a warped version of Victory Vodka in the contemporary USA version of INGSOC. The difference is that they tax the pacifier for the proles.
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
I am willing to giving you an invitation to make $900/min and I'll guarantee a 40hour week.. in my office. No requirements. All you have to do is endure totally vulgar language of a sexual nature ...and cigarette smoke. It's open to people of all genders and creeds ..national origins ....whatever.
I'll do it for $899/min. When do I start?
I am willing to giving you an invitation to make $900/min and I'll guarantee a 40hour week.. in my office. No requirements. All you have to do is endure totally vulgar language of a sexual nature ...and cigarette smoke. It's open to people of all genders and creeds ..national origins ....whatever.
I'll do it for $899/min. When do I start?
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Well, they surely do have "free will" ..but in a nation where freedom is literally equated to $$$ ....
I don't see where you're going with that. Money is a reason to use free will to quit smoking or stop playing the lottery.
Well, they surely do have "free will" ..but in a nation where freedom is literally equated to $$$ ....
I don't see where you're going with that. Money is a reason to use free will to quit smoking or stop playing the lottery.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Well, they surely do have "free will" ..but in a nation where freedom is literally equated to $$$ ....
I don't see where you're going with that. Money is a reason to use free will to quit smoking or stop playing the lottery.
...because you only read half of the thought...
You're someone who can afford your vices and (probably) your "life's worth" makes your vices seem like chump change.
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Well, they surely do have "free will" ..but in a nation where freedom is literally equated to $$$ ....
I don't see where you're going with that. Money is a reason to use free will to quit smoking or stop playing the lottery.
...because you only read half of the thought...
You're someone who can afford your vices and (probably) your "life's worth" makes your vices seem like chump change.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
does playing the stock market count as "gambling" ?
I get a better return on going to Vegas....
I get a better return on going to Vegas....
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Quote:
When you overeat or abuse alcohol you are basically hurting yourself.
Then you're not one of the thin whiners about medical costs of the tubby's?
Quote:
When you smoke, you hurt yourself and anybody else in the room with you with your second hand smoke.
There is no place in the USA that requires you to be anywhere near second hand smoke. You don't have to endure it at the work place, and you ALWAYS had the option of NOT going into any place that permitted it.
I want places where no one talks. Their verbal emissions pollute my mind. It's toxic to me. I don't require the world to provide me with a custom configured existence. I can choose NOT to go into places where people talk.
I am willing to giving you an invitation to make $900/min and I'll guarantee a 40hour week.. in my office. No requirements. All you have to do is endure totally vulgar language of a sexual nature ...and cigarette smoke. It's open to people of all genders and creeds ..national origins ....whatever.
Decline the offer? It's your right. Don't walk in the door if you don't accept the "terms of use".
Thank you.
The stupidest example of outright hypocrisy and ignorance is a city/state that bans smoking in bars. "I had no idea that Americans have enjoyed tobacco with their alcohol for centuries!"
Yet, for all the talk of all the people that supposedly die from second hand smoke every year, one fails to hear (mentioned in the same breath) about all the people that die from second-hand drinking every day.
But, back on topic- I don't think anybody on this forum that voted for the person responsible for the biggest tobacco tax increase in history has a right to say a word on the subject, unless they're offering an apology. He made his intentions known long before he was elected, so this should come as no surprise to those of us that don't suck kool-aid for recreational purposes.
Also on the menu: the FDA, once the bill passes that will put them in charge of tobacco regulation, plans on placing a ban on flavoring in cigarettes, as well as reducing nicotine. IS ANYONE REALLY HAVING A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING WHY PHILIP MORRIS SUPPORTS THIS MEASURE???????????? Let's see, the only people that will still be smoking are those that absolutely CAN NOT quit, and on top of it will have to smoke even more to cope with the reduction (by half according to the proposed bill, by 2/3rd's according to the newest draft).
People, you can justify this all you want. As a former smoker, and as an American, I would just like to congratulate the tobacco users who bent over backwards to put this administration in power, and rather than end up with egg on their face are trying to come up with every reason in the book why this is a good measure, but at the end of the day are kicking themselves in the posterior over their shortsightedness. Say what you want about ol' Dubbya, he vetoed this bill several times. I don't know about you, but I just looooove when the Federal Government decides what's right for me and my family.
Oh, and Mr. "My Insurance is too high because I have to pay for all the smokers", do you really think this bill is going to reduce the cost of your premiums? Yes, I would like those tickets to Fantasy land now, sir...
Once again, this is a case of the government telling us what we can or can't do, and I'm sick of it. I would really like to go back to the days long past when the government had about twenty duties we allowed it to have- not vice verca.
"Smokers? F' em. I'm the King, dog."
.jpg)
Quote:
When you overeat or abuse alcohol you are basically hurting yourself.
Then you're not one of the thin whiners about medical costs of the tubby's?
Quote:
When you smoke, you hurt yourself and anybody else in the room with you with your second hand smoke.
There is no place in the USA that requires you to be anywhere near second hand smoke. You don't have to endure it at the work place, and you ALWAYS had the option of NOT going into any place that permitted it.
I want places where no one talks. Their verbal emissions pollute my mind. It's toxic to me. I don't require the world to provide me with a custom configured existence. I can choose NOT to go into places where people talk.
I am willing to giving you an invitation to make $900/min and I'll guarantee a 40hour week.. in my office. No requirements. All you have to do is endure totally vulgar language of a sexual nature ...and cigarette smoke. It's open to people of all genders and creeds ..national origins ....whatever.
Decline the offer? It's your right. Don't walk in the door if you don't accept the "terms of use".
Thank you.
The stupidest example of outright hypocrisy and ignorance is a city/state that bans smoking in bars. "I had no idea that Americans have enjoyed tobacco with their alcohol for centuries!"
Yet, for all the talk of all the people that supposedly die from second hand smoke every year, one fails to hear (mentioned in the same breath) about all the people that die from second-hand drinking every day.
But, back on topic- I don't think anybody on this forum that voted for the person responsible for the biggest tobacco tax increase in history has a right to say a word on the subject, unless they're offering an apology. He made his intentions known long before he was elected, so this should come as no surprise to those of us that don't suck kool-aid for recreational purposes.
Also on the menu: the FDA, once the bill passes that will put them in charge of tobacco regulation, plans on placing a ban on flavoring in cigarettes, as well as reducing nicotine. IS ANYONE REALLY HAVING A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING WHY PHILIP MORRIS SUPPORTS THIS MEASURE???????????? Let's see, the only people that will still be smoking are those that absolutely CAN NOT quit, and on top of it will have to smoke even more to cope with the reduction (by half according to the proposed bill, by 2/3rd's according to the newest draft).
People, you can justify this all you want. As a former smoker, and as an American, I would just like to congratulate the tobacco users who bent over backwards to put this administration in power, and rather than end up with egg on their face are trying to come up with every reason in the book why this is a good measure, but at the end of the day are kicking themselves in the posterior over their shortsightedness. Say what you want about ol' Dubbya, he vetoed this bill several times. I don't know about you, but I just looooove when the Federal Government decides what's right for me and my family.
Oh, and Mr. "My Insurance is too high because I have to pay for all the smokers", do you really think this bill is going to reduce the cost of your premiums? Yes, I would like those tickets to Fantasy land now, sir...
Once again, this is a case of the government telling us what we can or can't do, and I'm sick of it. I would really like to go back to the days long past when the government had about twenty duties we allowed it to have- not vice verca.
"Smokers? F' em. I'm the King, dog."
I always thought that Obama done that. That is PROOF that the government won't ban cigaretts, because half of the government workers probally also smoke (including Obama, of course)
Although, the man does have a lot of stress on him. I'm not suprized.
We better start being careful what we say about this (Obama smoking) because this form says NO politics.
It is getting awful close.
Although, the man does have a lot of stress on him. I'm not suprized.
We better start being careful what we say about this (Obama smoking) because this form says NO politics.
It is getting awful close.
Yeah, it's hard to keep politics out of a political issue. I'm not going to go any further with my argument, because there's no way to go any further without crossing the line.
And unlike a lot of other people, I don't care if "O" smokes a carton a day- I just don't like the hypocrisy involved. It's not OK for us, but it's ok for him? Nah, dog- I don't roll like that.
And unlike a lot of other people, I don't care if "O" smokes a carton a day- I just don't like the hypocrisy involved. It's not OK for us, but it's ok for him? Nah, dog- I don't roll like that.
Originally Posted By: fordboy
We better start being careful what we say about this (Obama smoking) because this form says NO politics.
It is getting awful close.
The Benevolent Overlords usually allow us a good more latitude than this; especially given the thread's title.
We better start being careful what we say about this (Obama smoking) because this form says NO politics.
It is getting awful close.
The Benevolent Overlords usually allow us a good more latitude than this; especially given the thread's title.
Originally Posted By: Beehive_Poker
Yet, for all the talk of all the people that supposedly die from second hand smoke every year, one fails to hear (mentioned in the same breath) about all the people that die from second-hand drinking every day.
I don't have the heart to comment on this, but I think it deserves to be highlighted.
Yet, for all the talk of all the people that supposedly die from second hand smoke every year, one fails to hear (mentioned in the same breath) about all the people that die from second-hand drinking every day.
I don't have the heart to comment on this, but I think it deserves to be highlighted.
Originally Posted By: Tempest
What happened to your post?
First page of the link you provided:
Quote:
Gambling participation and expenditure rates
increased with household income. For example,
58% of households with incomes of less than
$20,000 gambled in 2003 and spent an average
of $312, while equivalent figures for those with
incomes of $80,000 or more were 79% and
$725.
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/studies-etudes/75-001/comm/5018851-eng.pdf
And yes, government allows gambling for the same reason they allow cigarettes, easy tax revenue.
I was posting a couple links from Statistics Canada but end up not having time to finish it. Homework and family issue is more important you know, rather than entertaining an ultra conservative Las Vegan in pointless argument.
I'll take a rain check for another day on this issue.
What happened to your post?
First page of the link you provided:
Quote:
Gambling participation and expenditure rates
increased with household income. For example,
58% of households with incomes of less than
$20,000 gambled in 2003 and spent an average
of $312, while equivalent figures for those with
incomes of $80,000 or more were 79% and
$725.
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/studies-etudes/75-001/comm/5018851-eng.pdf
And yes, government allows gambling for the same reason they allow cigarettes, easy tax revenue.
I was posting a couple links from Statistics Canada but end up not having time to finish it. Homework and family issue is more important you know, rather than entertaining an ultra conservative Las Vegan in pointless argument.
I'll take a rain check for another day on this issue.
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,591
Originally Posted By: PandaBear
an ultra conservative Las Vegan
I could swear Tempest was a meat eater and avid consumer of stolen animal products, and I thought his car had leather seats!
an ultra conservative Las Vegan
I could swear Tempest was a meat eater and avid consumer of stolen animal products, and I thought his car had leather seats!
In the case of pot, second hand smoke is sometimes desirable.
Garbage. Just more big government that dictates our lives. Back in the day, the US government was "the peoples" bit**. Now it's vice versa.
Sometimes in my head I imagine what it would be like if George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and all the signers of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence would have to say if they could testify before (today's) Congress.
I am overwhelmingly sure that they would find today's United States government to be a mockery of what it should be, and demand that reforms be placed immediately. Everything that the founders rebelled against has come back again full circle.
Sometimes in my head I imagine what it would be like if George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and all the signers of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence would have to say if they could testify before (today's) Congress.
I am overwhelmingly sure that they would find today's United States government to be a mockery of what it should be, and demand that reforms be placed immediately. Everything that the founders rebelled against has come back again full circle.
Oh, and to think that our current president was a Constitutional professor is A F****** JOKE, all of the ideals of our founding fathers have been long lost on today's "BIG GOV"
Originally Posted By: AcuraTech
Sometimes in my head I imagine what it would be like if George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and all the signers of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence would have to say if they could testify before (today's) Congress.
They couldn't testify, since they would be detained in a jail on a large Caribbean island.
Sometimes in my head I imagine what it would be like if George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and all the signers of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence would have to say if they could testify before (today's) Congress.
They couldn't testify, since they would be detained in a jail on a large Caribbean island.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: Beehive_Poker
Yet, for all the talk of all the people that supposedly die from second hand smoke every year, one fails to hear (mentioned in the same breath) about all the people that die from second-hand drinking every day.
I don't have the heart to comment on this, but I think it deserves to be highlighted.
What, never heard of a a drunk driver wiping out a family of six? They were, in effect, killed by second hand alcohol abuse. Sorry if it came out worded clumsily, but it sounds just as silly as "second hand smoke" does to me, like you went and purchased it at the thrift store.
Originally Posted By: Beehive_Poker
Yet, for all the talk of all the people that supposedly die from second hand smoke every year, one fails to hear (mentioned in the same breath) about all the people that die from second-hand drinking every day.
I don't have the heart to comment on this, but I think it deserves to be highlighted.
What, never heard of a a drunk driver wiping out a family of six? They were, in effect, killed by second hand alcohol abuse. Sorry if it came out worded clumsily, but it sounds just as silly as "second hand smoke" does to me, like you went and purchased it at the thrift store.
- Status
Similar threads
