The true cost of smoking

Originally posted by WeAreAWAKE
You said..."OK, why not make smokers pay for their own health care by paying extra for their insurance?"

I have a better idea...tax cigarettes and put that tax toward the perils and costs of smoking. Simple huh??? However, the state alone instead taxes a carton (20 packs, 400 cigarettes) at about $13.50. Where does that money that every smoker pays go??? In PA, it goes to insuring children who don't have insurance. While that is a wonderful cause...it isn't what taxes were meant for. If you tax something under the premise that using it costs others money...then use the darn money to cover those expenses.

That is part of the problem today. A wonderful example (which I don't have the link for) was that town that put up cameras at a four-way stop light, only to remove them later cause people started stopping at the light...therefore costing the county a few million in traffic tickets.

That is the mentality now. They tax us for one reason and then line their pockets (or pay their salary...same thing) with the income. And now, that the income is relied upon...if everyone were to quit smoking (for example) where does that money come from. Knock-knock-knock...got some extra cash???

The blame for those abuse of tax dollars on smokes are not the smokers fault, it is the fault of the politicians and people who those funds are allocated to.

I would say that barking up the right tree would probably help solve the problem. And the correct tree to bark at is not the smokers.

We do pay a high tax rate on each pack of cigs, and everyone who drinks pays a tax on their beer or liquor. So ask the question..where does those tax dollars end up????

It certianly is not being directed by us smokers...nor the drinkers.

See that tree over there?....the one in that office building called "City Council" and "State Legislature"???

That is the tree to bark at.



Cheers!!!!

Originally posted by Wildbob77
reply to post by LeTan

 

My apologies to anyone that I've offended.

Yes, I've lost family members to smoking.

My brother is a smoker and I'm afraid that I'll lose him as well.

I guess that I'm a bit touchy on this subject.

No offense taken, WB. I can understand that this is an emotional issue.

As to the conspiracy angle... It's the true cost of smoking on society vs the actual price that you pay at a store. You've got growers that profit, manufacturers that profit all on an addictive substance. A substance that to my knowledge is the only one that is legal that when used according to directions produces terrible health issues on the users. Yet we as a society help to subsidize the cost to smoke.

Prohibition is not the answer, of course. Alcohol showed us that prohibition causes a black market, a rise in crime, a creation of "criminals" (users) at the stroke of a pen, adulterated product, police corruption, turf wars, and so on. So we repealed the legal prohibition of alcohol.

Drug prohibition - surprise, surprise - causes the exact same things! We are still trying to rid ourselves of THAT evil.

So surely we do not want to add tobacco to the list of things prohibited that cause such immense social ills as we see in the prohibition of other substances.

My advice...if I may presume... Let go of it and accept that you cannot control others. Speak to those you care about, but let them choose how they live and die. Out of respect for them.

As a poster above points out, we smokers are already paying through the nose in taxes that are supposed to be paying these higher costs, but that are misappropriated.

Get mad at those who take those funds away from their appointed purpose.

reply to post by Wildbob77


I smoke, I have had health insurance, and there's been many times when I haven't....
tell ya what, when I had broken my ankle, was calling around asking for help because the danged doctor wanted an outrageous down payment that we didn't have and so, was refusing treatment to me...well....
I am not delusional enough to believe that there would be any help if I was dying of cancer, not from a society that wouldn't help me when the problem was something that I still say was a direct result from an injury from work and quite frankly, well.... if it wasn't for a kind state senator hearing about me and personally calling the doctor, well, I think I wouldn't even be walking now, let alone be able to work...and even then....
society still wouldn't be offering me any help!

jump in the lake, walk off a clift, whatever.
what gives the government the right to take from working americans who are struggling to pay for their own medical expanses the right to take their money from them so they can pay for the neighbor girl down the street to have another kid, ya know the one with two kids with no daddy anywhere to be found. and what gives them the right to pick one little small group (has to be a small group, if it was a big group, well, there'd be enough to revolt) to take and take from, demonize and scapegoat.

try to take more from me (all the while pointing at the outrageous expense of medicaid), I guarentee ya, you will end up with less from me!

reply to post by Amaterasu


This may come as a surprise to you but I favor the legalization of all drugs.

Why? Because the only thing that making them illegal does is hold up the price.Then the junkie down the street has to whack you over the head to steal your wallet to fund his/her habit.

If you made drugs legal, I think that initially you may have more people using but in the long run no one wants to be a junkie. Take the money out of it and you'll have less crime. You could even take some of the money that your wouldn't need to spend on law enforcement and spend it on helping people get clean.

Originally posted by Wildbob77
reply to post by Daniem

 

You have the freedom to do what you want.

I shouldn't have to pay for your choice to smoke.

That's my opinion.

If you want to smoke then pay the true cost, don't expect me to subsidize your habit.

Well, i live in Norway, and here healthcare is free. All Norwegians are insured by the National Insurance Scheme. This is a universal, tax-funded, single-payer health system.. This means that i must pay for EVERYONE, no matter whats wrong with them, and whatever their reason for beeing sick is. But that also means that im allowed to recieve healthcare if I need it. Thats the compromise i make.

If i want change, i vote, demonstrate or get a career in politics.

reply to post by ravenshadow13


why, in heaven's name, has the number of kids with asthmatic problems increased so much in the past 30 to 40 years, when the number of smokers has dwindled just as drasticallly....
because it ain't the smoking, as much as it's all the cars running up and down the road, all the crap they are putting into your food, your shampoos, cleaner, soaps, laundry detergents, ect. ect.....

scapegoating.....ya know what that is, right....
find a nice small group of people to blame all of society's ills on, and maybe the people will buy into it, and start hanging the small group and not notice what you are doing?

Originally posted by Wildbob77
reply to post by Amaterasu

 

This may come as a surprise to you but I favor the legalization of all drugs.

Why? Because the only thing that making them illegal does is hold up the price.Then the junkie down the street has to whack you over the head to steal your wallet to fund his/her habit.

If you made drugs legal, I think that initially you may have more people using but in the long run no one wants to be a junkie. Take the money out of it and you'll have less crime. You could even take some of the money that your wouldn't need to spend on law enforcement and spend it on helping people get clean.

Not so surprised. [smile]

I agree fully. I think marijuana would increase - but then all honest studies have shown zero issues and many benefits. But on the others...if we offered information honestly and let our children make their own choices, they would seldom choose so poorly.

Interestingly...I started smoking because I couldn't afford the "herb" and the tobacco gave me a high. That seldom occurs now, but I am addicted now. If the "herb" was readily available...I never would have started smoking tobacco.

reply to post by Daniem


I also vote in every election that I'm able to vote in.

I don't think that this will make it into any elections in my state or country in the near future.

A few cigarette ingredients:

These are the cigarette ingredients you inhale that can lead to cancer:

Aminobiphenyl
Aminobiphenyl is a human carcinogen that induced bladder papillomas and carcinomas in rabbits and dogs.

Arsenic
Breathing high levels of inorganic arsenic can cause you to experience a sore throat and irritated lungs. Lower levels of arsenic can cause nausea and vomiting, decreased production of red and white blood cells, abnormal heart rhythm, damage to blood vessels and a sensation of pins and needles in hands and feet. Inorganic arsenic can increase the risk of cancer in the lungs, skin, bladder, liver, kidney and prostate.


Benzene
Breathing extreme high levels of benzene can cause death. Breathing high levels of benzene can cause drowsiness, dizziness, rapid heart rate, headaches, tremors, confusion and unconsciousness. The predominant threat of benzene is blood-related in that it can cause ill health effects to the bone marrow and cause a decrease in the production of red blood cells that leads to anemia. Benzene can also cause extreme bleeding and problems with your immune system thus increasing your chance for infection. Studies performed on animals show that high levels of Benzene can cause low birth weights, delayed bone formation and bone marrow damage.

Chromium
Chromium can lead to lung cancer. The World Health Organization has determined that Chromium is a human carcinogen. Chromium can cause birth defects and other developmental problems in people. IF you saw the movie Erin Brockovich, you will understand the ramifications of breathing Chromium.

2-Naphthylamine – can cause bladder cancer.

Nickel
The most common ill health effect in humans to nickel has been allergic reactions or skin rash. Some people sensitive to nickel can suffer asthma attacks, chronic bronchitis, and reduced lung function. Cancers of the lung and nasal sinus have been witnessed in people breathing dust containing high levels of nickel.

Vinyl chloride
Breathing high levels of vinyl chloride can cause you to feel dizzy and sleepy. Breathing high levels of vinyl chloride can cause you to pass out and extremely high levels can cause death. Some people that work with vinyl chloride have developed severe nerve damage and immune reactions. The World Health Organization has determined that vinyl chloride is a human carcinogen.

N-Nitrosodiethylamine
N-nitrosodiethylamine can induce benign and malignant tumors in the liver, respiratory and upper digestive tracts and kidneys.

N-Nitrosopyrrolidine
N-nitrosopyrrolidine can produce hepatocellular carcinomas, a liver cancer that is rare in the US. However, hepatocellular carcinoma is the #1 or #2 leading cancer death type worldwide.

N-Nitrosodiethanolamine
N-nitrosodiethanolamine is connected to esophageal cancer.

Cadmium
Breathing high levels of cadmium severely damages the lungs, kidneys and can even cause death. Cadmium is considered to possibly be a carcinogen.

Benzo[a]pyrene
Benzo[a]pyrene can cause damage to red blood cells which leads to anemia and damage to the immune system leading to increased risk of infection. Typically, Benzo[a]pyrene is part of the exhaust fumes from a motor vehicle, emissions from coal, oil and wood burning stoves and furnaces.

Source: www.quitsmokinghub.com...

Anyone need a light?

regards...kk

P.S. I have lost 1 sister to smoking (emphysema) and 1 currently that has cancer.
( Non-Hodgkins Lymphoma) so yeah I gotta gripe with smokers.

Your rights end at my nose.



[edit on 29-1-2009 by kinda kurious]

Originally posted by kinda kurious
A few cigarette ingredients:

These are the cigarette ingredients you inhale that can lead to cancer:

Aminobiphenyl

Arsenic

Benzene

Chromium

2-Naphthylamine – can cause bladder cancer.

Nickel

Vinyl chloride

N-Nitrosodiethylamine

N-Nitrosopyrrolidine

N-Nitrosodiethanolamine

Cadmium

Benzo[a]pyrene

Anyone need a light?

If us smokers were breathing in that much of those ingredients, none of us would be alive for 5 minutes much less 50 + years.

Yes.. dont mind if I do. (lights up)

Originally posted by kinda kurious
P.S. I have lost 1 sister to smoking (emphysema) and 1 currently that has cancer. (Non Hodgkins Lymphoma).

Sorry to hear that..but that was their choice, not yours or has anything to do with other smokers or anyone else.

Originally posted by kinda kurious
so yeah I gotta gripe with smokers. Your rights end at my nose.

And your rant reach ends at the length of your arm. Now if you want to gripe about toxins from us smokers, put as much blame on smog, toxic exausts from your vehicle I sit behind in traffic, your pet's poop smell emenating from your yard, your bad breath, your bodily smells, your 'hot' air blasted out loudly in a movie theatre.

Wanna gripe, well put it where it really belongs...on yourself. And if you dont mind the smell of toxic fumes from internal combustion enegines which contains 1000 times more toxic gasses that any amount of 2nd hand smoke could ever produce, then wear an air filter.



Cheers!!!!

[edit on 29-1-2009 by RFBurns]

Originally posted by Wildbob77
Eating at McDonalds to my knowledge is not an addictive habit.

It is true that the obese have additional health care issues.

Perhaps you should have to pay more for health insurance if your BMI exceeds a certain number.

Apparently, you never saw the 30 days the documentary by Morgan Spurlock. It should how addicting McDonald's was and how bad even the salad choice was as well.

Perhaps, you should also have to pay extra if you are a certain race because that particular race is susceptible to more disease than others.

Perhaps, homosexuals should pay extra because they are more susceptible to certain diseases than heterosexuals are.

Perhaps, you should pay extra if you work the graveyard shift because it's known that it creates havoc on your body more than normal shift works.

Do you see where I'm going here. The list can go on and on and on.

I understand you don't like smokers, and you don't feel obligated to pay their insurance costs.
Well what about all the other diseases you left out. I'll bet you don't have MS, should you pay for their insurance. Or Huntington's disease, do you want to pay for that?
If you don't like the system change it. But remember karma is a 2 way street. You may change things so much that you are now 1 of the many that aren't insurable due to the changes you start.

reply to post by RFBurns


I will respond with one of my favorite quotes by Napoleon.

"Never interrupt your enemy while he is making a mistake." - Puff away dude.

Find solace in the fact that they now have portable oxygen tanks that will easily fit ito the cup holder of your walker.

Enjoy...kk



[edit on 29-1-2009 by kinda kurious]

reply to post by gonzo610


Actually, heterosexuals can get the same STIs that homosexuals can get.
The chances of a non-smoker getting emphysema are really small, and it only results from exposure to other pollutants.

Originally posted by Wildbob77
Everyone, by now, is aware that second had smoke can cause disease that can lead to death.

LOL

Dude.

I'm sure if second hand carcinogens can cause cancer than SMOG CAN DO JUST THE SAME!

So if you're driving a car, not only are you killing the O-zone which keeps us all safe from UV rays, and also melts the polar ice caps, you're more than likely infecting someones lungs with carcinogens.

I hate it when people say this kind of stuff, it's ignorance. The chance of getting cancer by second hand smoke is like 1 in a million, and you're more likely to get hit by a car and die instantly than to die from second hand smoke.

God....... this is a ridiculous post.

OK, who decided to start the great smoking debate again?

I started smoking at age 10. I stole one of my Daddy's Camel unfiltereds and sneaked it out behind our garage. I walked around for three days feeling like my face was still green. To this day I will get a bad headache if I smoke Camels.

So I smoked Marlboro's instead!

The problem with the anti-smoker's (as opposed to non-smokers, who I have absolutely no beef with) arguments is that they are all about ME, ME, ME. THEIR right to 'clean air', THEIR right to health, THEIR right to not smell the smoke... never a thought or a concern for anyone else's rights. I'll demonstrate with a few select excuses, which may or may not have been covered already. That's right, I gave up reading the idiocy after a few pages. Sue me.

Second-hand smoke causes cancer
The truth is that doctors are not sure what causes cancer. Cancer is an uncontrolled growth of cells within the body. There are theories based on empirical data that cancer itself is caused by a chemical imbalance between growth hormones (saw this in Scientific American a few issues back; feel free to look it up) that seem to have the greatest probability of truth.

IF smoking causes cancer, then it would follow that all smokers get cancer eventually. This is not true. It would also follow that non-smokers would not get cancer. This is also not true. The best explanation so far is that certain individuals are pre-disposed to cancer and the cancer tends to manifest in the weakest section of the body. In other words, if you are pre-disposed and smoke, chances are that the lungs will be the area affected first; but if you did not smoke, then other forms of cancer would manifest instead. This explains how the (grossly simplified) tests conducted on smoking show a link to lung cancer. Sure, if you smoke, the cancer will probably attack your lungs, but if you don't, you might get leukemia or bone cancer or thyroid cancer, or just have a watermelon-sized growth on your left elbow.

I have a 'right' to clean air
In the first place, no you don't. That's a fancy way of saying you want to have fresh air, regardless of how that luxury affects anyone else.

But even more applicable is the fact that cigarette smoke is far less of a pollution problem and the chemicals therein are far less noxious than the typical automobile exhaust (sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, assorted nitrates, assorted chlorides, etc.), the average factory exhaust (hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid, more nitrates and chlorides), or a myriad of other pollution sources. Not only are the proportions of the toxins in cigarette smoke lower, but there is far,far, far, FAR less cigarette smoke around than there is car exhaust or factory exhaust.

Want my cigarette to stop polluting your air? Fine, just as soon as you clean up the pollutants you WANT to spew into the air.

I don't like the smell
OK, fine. I can actually understand and sympathize with this one. But I don't like the sound of your voice screaming at me about my smoking. I don't like paying taxes to support your new city project. I don't like having to put up with your idiotic driving when I have to get supplies. I don't like you standing in my way arguing over a 10-cent coupon when I'm trying to check out at the store. I don't like your perfume. I don't like a lot of things.

It's called 'life'. It contains things you don't like. Try to shut up crying long enough and you might actually be able to find a few things you do like.

I'm allergic to cigarette smoke
I used to take this one quite seriously. I mean, it's common sense to try NOT to affect an allergy, right? That is, it used to be common sense before allergies to cigarette smoke became the illness du jour.

On average, about 0.1% of people have some allergy to cigarette smoke. Of those, less than 10% have severe allergies to it (this info was given me by an allergist I had the privilege of doing business with a while back). That means that when one out of four people around me are complaining about being severely allergic to cigarette smoke, I begin ignoring them.

You're not allergic, you're conceited.

(If I were allergic, I would be up in arms over people minimalizing my allergy by claiming it exists in numbers it obviously does not, just to try and control others' behavior. Those are your true enemies.)

You're polluting the air
Sure am. But for every ounce of toxins I release by smoking, there are tons of worse toxins being produced by the traffic next to me (since I am supposed to stand outside now).

Get some facts and find a real culprit.

Second-hand smoke is worse than first-hand smoke
OK, let's use something called 'logic' here. Let's say I am a smoker smoking, and you are a non-smoker standing next to me. We are breathing the same air. I am breathing the air just as much as you are, and in addition I am sucking that smoke, concentrated, directly into my lungs through a simple cotton filter (not a catalytic converter ). So, when you state that second-hand smoke to a non-smoker is more harmful than first- and second-hand smoke for a smoker, that can only mean one thing: the non-smoker is weaker physically than the smoker!

A cigarette a day keeps the doctor away?

People who smoked before the warnings didn't know the dangers
Oh, right. Like when I was green for three days, I still thought it was health food.

Do you guys seriously hear yourself when you are arguing? Never once in my life have I ever been told by anyone that smoking is good for you! Of course, no one ever told me (until the lawsuit) that coffee was hot. I sort of gathered that from the steam rising off of it. Some things are just plain obvious. Some things do not require a warning. Some things don't need you explaining them. Sorry if that bursts your bubble.

I bet you didn't know to shut your motor off before changing the fan belt.

Smoking places a burden on the health care system
Really? Let's look at some facts.... the health care crisis has become pronounced in the last thirty years. In that same time period the number of smokers has decreased. Now, I'm no rocket scientist, but it seems to me that if something is a problem, reducing that something would reduce the problem, not increase it.

The burden on the health care system is from too much regulation in some areas,not enough in others, and a rash of lawsuits from people who seem to think doctors have the power to give life itself and are super-human. Not to mention the greed in the system.

Try looking at the engine. The paint job isn't keeping the car from running.

The tobacco companies lied to promote their deadly product
No! You mean to tell me someone actually lied to make money! Why that never happened before big tobacco!

Get a freakin' grip! Capitalism is a dog-eat-dog world, especially when you're talking about big business! Do you expect a used car salesman to come right out and tell you "Oh, she's a beauty. After the fire, we had her re-painted by a drug addict who lives a block down from me. As long as the paint doesn't peel, you'll be fine."? What about "I hope you buy this car. We're getting tired of replacing the transmission every 5000 miles."?

Here's a tip: WalMart lies. The grocery store lies. The pet store lies. The local hairdresser lies. You'll get more truth if you listen to people who don't want your money. Some of us figured that out at age 7 or 8.

Caveat Emptor... Let the Buyer Beware.

Why should I have to pay for a smoker's health care?
You shouldn't. That's why socialized medicine won't work. Ironically, I find that most of those who complain about this are the same ones who want socialized health care. Translation: I want you to pay for me, but I don't want to pay for you. What did I open this post with? Oh, yes, ME, ME, ME!

I think I can rest my case against anti-smokers here. Besides, I need a smoke in my house! with heat! with a comfortable place to sit! and I have trouble typing with one hand. Actually, I could just hold it in my mouth, but hey, smokers need a flimsy excuse for being lazy too.

TheRedneck

Originally posted by Wildbob77
I don't really care if you smoke or not.

It's your right.

But I shouldn't have to pay for your health care.

Let's be fair. It's your choice to smoke. It should be my choice to not have to pay for your habit.

personally i feel i shouldn't have to pay for anyone's healthcare other than my own. but what can you do...

*applauds the redneck*

reply to post by TheRedneck


Redneck, I don't think it can be put any better.


I'd say with that post, you completely demolished any credibility in this thread.

Star for you, friend.

reply to post by kinda kurious


Are you trying to make a point, or simply insult me because you can't find a flaw with what I said. I think CIVILITY & DECORUM are required on threads in this forum, especially ones like these. So, unless you have something intelligent to say, that isn't a one-sided insult with no claims to back up anything to do with my post being wrong, I suggest you grab your stuff, pack it up and get out of this thread, unless you wan't to debate me on how this thread has no factual data.