It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Smoking / Quit Smoking . . . Do picture warnings on cigarettes increase quit attempts?

page: 3
2
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 12 2016 @ 06:44 AM
link   
a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

Perhaps those who insist on smoking regardless . . . should be required to post a bond sufficient to pay for their treatment when they develop lung cancer and/or emphysema in order to avoid FORCING taxpayers to pay for their willful destruction of their body.




posted on Jun, 12 2016 @ 06:47 AM
link   
a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

And nonsmoking taxpayers are tired of being forced to help pay for the expensive treatments of dying smokers.

And that doesn't even get into the whole issue of passive smoking that nonsmokers can still be subjected to--even those seriously allergic to such smoke.



posted on Jun, 12 2016 @ 07:13 AM
link   
a reply to: BO XIAN

Who said anything about treatment for anything? I take personal responsibility for my actions including smoking... here I have a dad mid 80s chewing on brand new teeth, new eyes, and over the age of expected life didnt need them all these years yet now im gonna chew on the healtcare system when I was making due just fine right up til the line of death now cling so bad that these new teeth and eyes costing in the 10s of thousands are gonna do a grave any better twith them than without them.

Im just not that kinda bastard.

I lose a finger the blade had to make a point and Im going to keep that wisdom at te cost of a finger... pressure and ice clean it scald it wrap it and it will heal wtf do I need a doctor for its just a finger.

And this is just a point Im not attached to this body or form thinking im going to live forever or want too I accept impermenance as a part of life and embrace it and what I embrace isnt death or morose... its life itself as a passion and something I enjoy in so much awe and beauty of it every day.

Ive made peace not many can say that... im not really here for me though, Ive a son thats why Im here it would be irresponsible of me as a father to leave the world a bastard of it that hasnt tried to make him or it better... hopefully he does and I just want to watch not control nor command him just guide when asked encourage when he falls gift unexpectedly and when tradition calls and kick the crap out of everything wrong in this world crapping all over his generation the same that was crapped onto mine.

I guess some would say hey maybe I care about your health a little more than before with that atittude... but theres an operative word... your health is yours and my health is mine and all I have left to say?

Salut! Which means to yours if you didnt know.



posted on Jun, 12 2016 @ 03:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: BO XIAN
a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

Perhaps those who insist on smoking regardless . . . should be required to post a bond sufficient to pay for their treatment when they develop lung cancer and/or emphysema in order to avoid FORCING taxpayers to pay for their willful destruction of their body.


How about we set up an agency for that? Can we put it right next door to the FAT people agency where people must weigh in and pay a tax for each extra ten pounds they're carrying---and post a bond for the diabetes, joint problems and cancer we're going to be paying for as a result of their inability to control their intake of calories? If shaming smokers has worked so well, why not apply to same technique to fat folks? Since overeating is a choice, just as smoking is a choice, it seems more than fair to me. Smokers pay a lot of extra taxes for their habit, fat people need to pay some extra taxes for all the extra medical care they need as a result of their behavior with food.



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 10:47 AM
link   
a reply to: BO XIAN

(sorry for the late response...and hopefully it doesn't seem to ramble)

Non-smokers shouldn't have to pay for such an optional, selfish problem. Like I think I mentioned, I smoked for 12-13 years and started at age 15--quit cold turkey, without any cost to a non-smoker. I never had smoking-related health issues, so I wasn't a draw on my medical insurance pool, either. It was just a stupid habit in which I got myself caught up and addicted, but had the good sense and self worth to let it go.

IMO, there isn't much "public interest" in cleaning up the results of smoking. Well, let me rephrase: I don't think that it is the responsibility of the public to clean up anything that has to do with smoking, except for maybe the superficial things like the ungodly amount of cigarette butts that smokers toss onto public streets on a daily basis. Other than that, smoking-related issues should rest solely on the shoulders of smokers.

Since we must live under a norm of pooled insurance groups, I wish smokers would all be grouped together, because they should shoulder the cost of the health risks amongst themselves--again, because it's a optional, selfish choice to smoke and cause the cost of health insurance for others to increase due to complications from the habit. Non-smokers should be their own group that at least removes the variable of smoking from the cost of health insurance. I'd be really interested in seeing the difference in health-insurance costs if that were done--I bet it'd be pretty damn impressive.

But we won't do that as a society, because then we'd want those with Type-2 Diabetes in their own group, and drug users in their own group, and adrenaline junkies in their own group, and so on. So, I guess we're stuck with the system that we have now, where we do share a limited monetary liability to pay for such an optional, selfish problem, but that doesn't mean that our tax dollars must ALSO go toward the issue in such ridiculous ways as forcing tobacco companies to try and scare off their own customers with pictures and warning labels. Like I said before, if the government really wanted to stop smoking, they'd outlaw the addictive agent so that it was easier to quit...but they aren't going to do that, either.



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 11:03 AM
link   
a reply to: diggindirt

Its fascism under the guise of public health... lets not forget that one of the first things Hitler did was ban smoking.

Freedom of the individual, self determinationism, existentialism doesnt really factor or get much representation yet it does but everyone is blind to it in their group ideals trying to opress and control everyone else except for themselves into one homogenized standard or mode of being... which removes choice removes ability removes any autonomity someone has.

What kind of life is that? None... but money money money... why? Simle because all that goddamned hate is expensive. Drop that BS and no one would be whinning about the money side.

This isnt rocket science but people want to act like its the most difficult think in the world but thats because of all the ignorant delusions and make believe about life theyve grabbed on to trying to control it and well theres that hate popping up that leads to war and that greed again.

Humanity isnt this stupid of an animal is it? Yes in mass but in the individuals? Not in the slightest.
edit on 14-6-2016 by BigBrotherDarkness because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 11:54 PM
link   
a reply to: BO XIAN

And smokers are tired of paying for "health nuts" who insist on living to 110 with the most expensive years in nursing homes due to dementia (ps smokers don't get dementia, alziemers, parkinsons or MS) while collecting old age security benefits!

Why don't you people pay for your fairs share?

Tired of Control Freaks



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 11:56 PM
link   
a reply to: BO XIAN

Further, smokers fund the Master Settlement Agreement which is supposed to pay for historical health care for smokers and they pay outrageous taxes which is supposed to pay for future health care and they pay the same for health care as everyone else.

How many times are you expecting smokers to pay for their own health care and YOURS?

Tired of Control Freaks



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 12:06 AM
link   
a reply to: BO XIAN

And BTW - do YOU speak for the magority? Do you even know the majority? How many people did you personally ask if they found smoking disgusting??? two?

Whether the "majority" find smoking disgusting or not is beside the question. The real question is "just who the hell are YOU to say so?

As for smoking causing problems in marriages.....look at history....after the second world war, the majority of men smoked and the majority of marriages worked (at least there was less divorce) and now when less then 20 % of the population smokers, marriages have a 50/50 per cent chance of ending in divorce.

Where the hell do YOU get your information from?

Tired of Control Freaks



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join