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.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

U.S. to ban smoking in Public Housing

page: 2
13
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 01:45 PM
link   
im more interested in how they can afford 6-8 bucks a pack but have a problem with the rent. priorities i guess

i got laid off a couple weeks ago and i tell you that immediately we went through our finances and cut out all spending that was not necessary for us to live. no more going out to eat. no more anything that does not involve rent, bills, or groceries.
i start delivering pizza tomorrow to pick up the slack.

i have no sympathy for people that say they can not afford rent or groceries or clothes etc but can afford to #in keep smoking.




posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 01:47 PM
link   
They can't keep illegal guns out and they think they can keep smokers out! Our government, the ultimate fail!!



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 01:47 PM
link   
I hate second hand smoke. It stinks!
Have you ever opened your windows on a beautiful morning to let in some fresh air, only to have the neighbors cigarette smoke wafte in. Yuck!
They ought to ban smoking in cars too. I was at a stop light, and the guy next to me let out a giant puff of smoke. It blew right into my truck. I quickly rolled up the windows then immediatly rolled them back down. The cloud of skunk butt smelling smoke was trapped in my truck and I was trying to hold my breath.



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 01:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: chiefsmom
a reply to: AlphaIron

Oh, and thanks for calling me trash. Real nice.

I get that all people that live in these housing units aren't great.

But I had to, until I got on my feet.

Some of us just really needed a hand up, not a hand out.


Like most things there's exceptions to every rule. But you are on the internet during working hours and the HUD people I know of are pros at the woe is me alligator tears.



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 02:05 PM
link   
a reply to: AlphaIron

LOL Because I am at work, and talented enough to do two things at once.


As I stated, I know there are some bad. But you painted with a broad brush. I just wanted to correct you. sorry.


Actually a lot of people here are being pretty harsh. I get it. I don't know how I feel about this issue. Being able to see both sides. There are lots of Non government apartment complexes that are non smoking now.

But, you can live in the low income gov housing, while working, as I did. And I smoked at the time. Sometimes, when you don't drink, and things are bad, that smoke is all you have.

Now, if the government would give people cheap or free quitting smoking aids? Then I'm 100% behind it.



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 02:07 PM
link   
a reply to: chiefsmom

its cool to have a vice if you can afford it you know

so youre only behind it if the gov gives out free # to help?
strange

i guess i just dont understand. i would think cigarettes would be one of the first things to go if youre down and out and trying to support your family.
edit on 1-12-2016 by TinySickTears because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 02:28 PM
link   
I'm fine with this--I fully understand the lasting effects that smoking indoors can have on a building, and if you're living in housing that is subsidized by or fully paid by taxpayer dollars, I don't see any reason why this shouldn't be in effect.

This just goes back to the whole cliché that if you live under someone else's roof, you must obey their rules.



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 02:33 PM
link   
Need to start mandating birth control too...



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 02:47 PM
link   


The use of any lit tobacco product — including cigars, cigarettes and pipes — would be prohibited in all apartments, indoor common areas, offices and outdoor areas within 25 feet of entrances.


So If you don't live next to the entrance you can just stick your cig an inch out of the window and you're good to go.



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 02:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: DigitalVigilante420

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: underwerks

If ever there was a definition of unenforceable that would be it.
What a silly man.


That was my first thought too...then a lightbulb went off above my oddly shaped head...

If there were fines in place for violating these laws, just employ a few bylaw enforcers who have a scheduled route whether it be daily, weekly and even monthly, the proceeds from these fines would far outweigh the cost of the enforcers.

Another way to suck the poor out of their money.

Wall Street Joe will be smoking his fat cubans without a care in the world.

This was my thinking as well. I'm sure people in the public housing offices will see a new stream of income from the violations.

In the end I don't think it will help people's health as much as separate them from more of there money.



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 03:00 PM
link   
I never understood how we allow people on public assistance to be able to purchase luxury's like smokes and alcohol. I mean I know there is no real way to stop them from doing it but if you need assistance from the American taxpayer just to be able to afford the necessities in life why do we allow them to purchase luxury's.

Its like your buddy borrowing money to pay the rent then he goes out for a steak dinner with his girl. Like WTF!!!!!

If you need assistance just to keep a roof over your head then parts of your life need to be regulated a little more to ensure your making the proper choices to get your life back on track. You don't want people in your life telling you want you can and cannot buy? Then pay for your own damn housing and food. I feel like im taking crazy pills here.
edit on 1-12-2016 by PraetorianAZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 03:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: PraetorianAZ
I never understood how we allow people on public assistance to be able to purchase luxury's like smokes and alcohol. I mean I know there is no real way to stop them from doing it but if you need assistance from the American taxpayer just to be able to afford the necessities in life why do we allow them to purchase luxury's.

Its like your buddy borrowing money to pay the rent then he goes out for a steak dinner with his girl. Like WTF!!!!!

If you need assistance just to keep a roof over your head then parts of your life need to be regulated a little more to ensure your making the proper choices. You don't want people in your life telling you want you can and cannot buy? Then pay for your own damn housing and food. I feel like im taking crazy pills here.

At the same time, you can't paint everyone in public housing or on public assistance with the same brush as people who are abusing it. That wouldn't be right either.

Depends too on what you consider luxuries. A pack of Pall Malls and a Colt 45 aren't exactly luxuries.



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 03:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: PraetorianAZ
I never understood how we allow people on public assistance to be able to purchase luxury's like smokes and alcohol. I mean I know there is no real way to stop them from doing it but if you need assistance from the American taxpayer just to be able to afford the necessities in life why do we allow them to purchase luxury's.

Its like your buddy borrowing money to pay the rent then he goes out for a steak dinner with his girl. Like WTF!!!!!

If you need assistance just to keep a roof over your head then parts of your life need to be regulated a little more to ensure your making the proper choices. You don't want people in your life telling you want you can and cannot buy? Then pay for your own damn housing and food. I feel like im taking crazy pills here.

At the same time, you can't paint everyone in public housing or on public assistance with the same brush as people who are abusing it. That wouldn't be right either.

Depends too on what you consider luxuries. A pack of Pall Malls and a Colt 45 aren't exactly luxuries.


Anything that you don't need to survive is a luxury.

-cars
-cellphones
-smokes
-Alcohol

The list can go on and on but these are some of the basics. Anything the Gov can apply a luxury tax to should be on this list. Like someone said before you want to live under someones else's roof you abide by their rules. You don't want to abide by their rules? Then pay for your own necessities.

Look up the luxury tax and you will have your list of everything the government deems a non-essential for survival. So if you need help just to survive you shouldn't be allowed to purchase what you don't need to survive.
edit on 1-12-2016 by PraetorianAZ because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-12-2016 by PraetorianAZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 03:21 PM
link   
a reply to: TinySickTears

No, I'm 100% behind it, if they do. But 50/50 with out it. As I've stated, I see both sides, and as a former smoker, know the difficulties.



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 03:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: PraetorianAZ

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: PraetorianAZ
I never understood how we allow people on public assistance to be able to purchase luxury's like smokes and alcohol. I mean I know there is no real way to stop them from doing it but if you need assistance from the American taxpayer just to be able to afford the necessities in life why do we allow them to purchase luxury's.

Its like your buddy borrowing money to pay the rent then he goes out for a steak dinner with his girl. Like WTF!!!!!

If you need assistance just to keep a roof over your head then parts of your life need to be regulated a little more to ensure your making the proper choices. You don't want people in your life telling you want you can and cannot buy? Then pay for your own damn housing and food. I feel like im taking crazy pills here.

At the same time, you can't paint everyone in public housing or on public assistance with the same brush as people who are abusing it. That wouldn't be right either.

Depends too on what you consider luxuries. A pack of Pall Malls and a Colt 45 aren't exactly luxuries.


Anything that you don't need to survive is a luxury.

-cars
-cellphones
-smokes
-Alcohol

The list can go on and on but these are some of the basics. Anything the Gov can apply a luxury tax to should be on this list. Like someone said before you want to live under someones else's roof you abide by their rules. You don't want to abide by their rules? Then pay for your own necessities.

Look up the luxury tax and you will have your list of everything the government deems a non-essential for survival.

Yeah I'm not going to take the governments word on what it takes to "survive". That's worked out so well everywhere else in the past.

Not everyone is abusing the system. What about the people that live in the projects but get up and work everyday? Should they be held to the same standards as people who game the system?

I think it's better to give the same freedom of choice to everyone, and let people make their own decisions and live by them. The other option is more government encroachment in people's lives.

That extra little bit of money that would be saved that no taxpayers would ever really see isn't worth the loss of freedoms to me.



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 03:38 PM
link   
The problem I have is that there are literally second and third generations living it up in the projects. Government policy basic squashes any desire for people to improve their situation. The minute you start making just over whatever the deem to be poor, they yank all the support. For many people, the support is more than what they can get just working everyday so why work?

There are absolutely plenty of people scamming the system. This is why no one is married. Technically, the father isn't even supposed to be living there, but usually they do and also provide support, but off the books. A lot of people also have side hustles that allow them to make money, but not report it. We haven't even gotten into the food stamp scams where people trade them for cash.

Who can forget ODB going to food stamps in a limo with his kids on MTV....




posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 03:50 PM
link   
here they go again with the "it`s for the publics own good" BS, if the lawmakers really did care about the publics health they would outlaw all tobacco products but of course they won`t do that because the tobacco lobby keeps all the lawmakers well paid.

I wonder how much time and money is going to be wasted enforcing this stupid law?
in addition to trying to prevent real crime now the police have to be tobacco use monitors?
just stop with the stupid smoking laws already and just outlaw tobacco,That`s what they really want to do anyway they just don`t want to give up all their tobacco lobby bribes.



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 04:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: PraetorianAZ

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: PraetorianAZ
I never understood how we allow people on public assistance to be able to purchase luxury's like smokes and alcohol. I mean I know there is no real way to stop them from doing it but if you need assistance from the American taxpayer just to be able to afford the necessities in life why do we allow them to purchase luxury's.

Its like your buddy borrowing money to pay the rent then he goes out for a steak dinner with his girl. Like WTF!!!!!

If you need assistance just to keep a roof over your head then parts of your life need to be regulated a little more to ensure your making the proper choices. You don't want people in your life telling you want you can and cannot buy? Then pay for your own damn housing and food. I feel like im taking crazy pills here.

At the same time, you can't paint everyone in public housing or on public assistance with the same brush as people who are abusing it. That wouldn't be right either.

Depends too on what you consider luxuries. A pack of Pall Malls and a Colt 45 aren't exactly luxuries.


Anything that you don't need to survive is a luxury.

-cars
-cellphones
-smokes
-Alcohol

The list can go on and on but these are some of the basics. Anything the Gov can apply a luxury tax to should be on this list. Like someone said before you want to live under someones else's roof you abide by their rules. You don't want to abide by their rules? Then pay for your own necessities.

Look up the luxury tax and you will have your list of everything the government deems a non-essential for survival. So if you need help just to survive you shouldn't be allowed to purchase what you don't need to survive.


Absolute delusional.

You care about these "luxuries," but the real criminals siphon billions from the economy and no one gives a #?

Cars and cell phones are a luxury? WTF?

Uh, I absolutely NEED a vehicle in order to just get to work... it's HARDLY a luxury (and in my day to day drive, there are no public routes but I'm sure you'd judge there, too).

It's amazing. Americans lose their mind over the concept of a dude on welfare buying a pack of cigarettes and a Snickers yet have no quarrel with illegal and high-level activity existing in governments and corporations, te military-industrial complex - it just absolutely blows my mind.



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 04:35 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

HA HA HA...and you thought building a wall was a rediculous idea...good luck..6



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 04:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: RomeByFire

originally posted by: PraetorianAZ

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: PraetorianAZ
I never understood how we allow people on public assistance to be able to purchase luxury's like smokes and alcohol. I mean I know there is no real way to stop them from doing it but if you need assistance from the American taxpayer just to be able to afford the necessities in life why do we allow them to purchase luxury's.

Its like your buddy borrowing money to pay the rent then he goes out for a steak dinner with his girl. Like WTF!!!!!

If you need assistance just to keep a roof over your head then parts of your life need to be regulated a little more to ensure your making the proper choices. You don't want people in your life telling you want you can and cannot buy? Then pay for your own damn housing and food. I feel like im taking crazy pills here.

At the same time, you can't paint everyone in public housing or on public assistance with the same brush as people who are abusing it. That wouldn't be right either.

Depends too on what you consider luxuries. A pack of Pall Malls and a Colt 45 aren't exactly luxuries.


Anything that you don't need to survive is a luxury.

-cars
-cellphones
-smokes
-Alcohol

The list can go on and on but these are some of the basics. Anything the Gov can apply a luxury tax to should be on this list. Like someone said before you want to live under someones else's roof you abide by their rules. You don't want to abide by their rules? Then pay for your own necessities.

Look up the luxury tax and you will have your list of everything the government deems a non-essential for survival. So if you need help just to survive you shouldn't be allowed to purchase what you don't need to survive.


Absolute delusional.

You care about these "luxuries," but the real criminals siphon billions from the economy and no one gives a #?

Cars and cell phones are a luxury? WTF?

Uh, I absolutely NEED a vehicle in order to just get to work... it's HARDLY a luxury (and in my day to day drive, there are no public routes but I'm sure you'd judge there, too).

It's amazing. Americans lose their mind over the concept of a dude on welfare buying a pack of cigarettes and a Snickers yet have no quarrel with illegal and high-level activity existing in governments and corporations, te military-industrial complex - it just absolutely blows my mind.


Now this is an entitlement complex right here. I NEED a car to get to work. Unless your legs are broken you don't need a car. Apparently you have never heard of the city bus, or riding a bicycle, or pushing wood, or just good old fashioned chevro-legs. So don't sit here and say you NEED a car just because there are no bus routes. Human beings have been walking places for eons. So unless your legs don't work then cram it.

Also, I never said I don't have a problem with the crap the government does. I just also happen to have a problem with lazy bums who are to stuck up and entitled to walk someplace so they say a car is a necessity. Buy a fricken bicycle and ride your happy A$$ to work.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join