Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Should Smokers Pay Extra Taxes For Universal Healthcare?

page: 11
10
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 05:15 AM
link   
Well, Im a smoker, and first of all I already pay extra taxes on every pack I buy. Also, buy your logic, pregnant women should also pay extra, it cost A LOT to have a baby. So should old people, because they get sick ALL the time. And dont forget the parents of disabled children, that costs a lot too. And kids with asthma. Mental health problems. Fat people. Diabetics both type 1 and type 2. People with Parkinson's. Males over 40 who may have prostate cancer. AND females over 30 who may have breast cancer.What about all the people out there who are anorexic, that's gotta be taking a toll. And you know what, people who work in the construction, restaurant, fishing, law enforcement, health care and corrections industries get hurt a lot, so lets tax them more too. Oh, and anyone who like to play recreational sports, I shouldn't have to pay for their sprained ankles. If you live in a second story apartment, well you could fall, thats not my fault. Tax them too. Do yo cook at home? Well what if your pan fried chicken burns you. That should be taxed. Oh, and lets not forget people who drive cars, there are a lot of people out there who don't drive. why should they pay for your injuries? And before you say that Im being ridiculous, realize that 1) smokers pay a ton in taxes every time they buy a pack. 2) Almost every single incident I described is a result of people's choices, just like smoking is a choice.




posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 05:21 AM
link   
OH WOW! WOW WOW WOW! I just saw the post about smokers not persuing excellence in their lives. LET ME TELL YOU SOMETHING BROTHER! I smoke a pack a day. I also run two miles every day. I also lift weights 4 days a week. I am also going to school for my 3RD degree while taking care of two kids, working full time and a 2nd part time job. WHAT DO YOU DO with YOUR DAY??? You know what, after reading your ignorant post, I need a smoke.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 06:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by jeantherapy
"Given the lack of evidence that smoking in the presence of children causes harm - please explain to me - who the hell are you to decide that it is your place to tell others how to raise their children? "

I do not require numbers to support my position that smoking cigarettes (or anything) in a closed up vehicle (which was the scenario I originally mentioned, no other) is indefensibly rotten - the proof I require is the look on a kid's face after they get their first whiff of mommy's necessary nerve tonic. (Did I mention nicotine is actually a poison? en.wikipedia.org... www.ehow.com...)

I just can't believe anyone can take the position that forcing children to breathe this when it's just as easy to do it away from them could ever be acceptable. Again, I haven't instructed you to do anything or made any attempt to abscond with your rights or threaten your fragile existence.



Back in the sixties, when i was a kid.
We had chimneys billowing out smoke from coal fires.
When it was foggy, we had smog.
When we went the doctors, most grow-ups would be smoking in the waiting room.
The doctor would be smoking a pipe or ciggy while he examined you.

Everywhere you went, people smoked.
I don`t know anyone that was affected from this.
I`ve smoked for 42 years....with a break of five years when i packed in.

My lungs are perfect, i don`t have a cough.
It`s never affected me and i`m certain no-one has been affected by my smoking.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 07:06 AM
link   
reply to post by jeantherapy
 


Jeantherapy

I have asked you repeatedly and will ask you again. Where do you get off thinking YOU can confront smokers in front of their children?

Do you confront people who lit a fireplace in their home - that discharges sufficient cancer causing particulates with the very same chemicals (hydrogen cyanide, formaldehyde, polyaromatic hydrocarbons etc) as cigarette smoke but not only contaminates the entire home but the whole neighbourhood for two blocks)

Do you confront mothers walking their babies in a stroller on the sidewalk of a busy street, with the little one's tiny trusting face right level with the exhaust from cars?

What do you say to people who heat their homes with wood burning stoves. Or those who like to light candles in children's presence?

What do you know about what other people's children are feeling? Do you now consider yourself a god?

There is a very strong reason for the social convention of minding your own business!

As for your assertion that I am ignorant for refusing to fall for your "its for the children" bull#...I have read all 114 studies on second hand smoke. I have followed the increase in childhood asthma rates since the 60s. My "opinion" was formed after 6 years of reading and researching.

And your opinion is based on????????? what was that!

Tired of Control Freaks



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 07:11 AM
link   
reply to post by TiredofControlFreaks
 


JeanTherapy

as for nicotene being a poison????

Well, water is good for you in sufficient quantities to slake your thirst but drink too much and you will most certainly die. And aspirin will ease your headache, 100 aspirin will kill you.

There is insufficient nicotene in tobacco smoke to act as a poison. So despite your wiki reference....why aren't smokers showing up in emerg with nicotene poisoning????

The poison is in the dose, not the substance.

Funny how the baby boomers grew up in an age when everyone smoked and somehow still became the healthiest, longest-lived generation that ever existed in Canada or the States. Funny - how the anti-smokers banned smoking first in workplaces and bars, where children rarely go, all while using the "its for the children" line that you continue using.


Tired of Control Freaks



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 07:13 AM
link   
How about the people who are selling it and the governments that are profiting off the sales pay for smoker's healthcare?

Drug dealing is considered a worse crime than using, so why not?



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 11:37 AM
link   
Back in High School, right before graduation day, some company would send out their people to hand out free packs of cigarettes to all Seniors and under class men.
I kept my packs for months never smoked them, yet I'm sure many got hooked and still smoke to this day.

Ques: How can smoke of any kind be good for you?



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 11:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Alxandro
 


How can any smoke of any kind be good for you? Alxandro - smoking has been around for millenia. And for very very good reasons.

www.livescience.com...

Including decreased risk of alzeimers and multiple sclerosis in the benefits of smoking

en.wikipedia.org...

Smoking is also good for people suffering from mental illnesses like schizophrenia, manic-depression etc. and seems to control their symptoms almost as well as pharmaceuticals.

Add in also that smoke in a room clears the room of infectous bacteria and viruses. Smoke has been used as a fumicant for centuries.

Asthma control, irritible bowel control, stress relief, pleasure, social activities, increased focus and ability to concentrate.

Tired of Control Freaks



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 12:01 PM
link   
It's not exactly good for you to breath in any kind of smoke but is it really that bad? Smoking cigarettes is nowhere near as horribly evil as some people make it out to be. Why does one guy who's only smoked a pack a day for a few years get lung cancer and die but another one who's smoked 2+ packs a day all his life not die of any disease? My husband's grandfather smoked hand-rolled tobacco and drank daily most of his adult life and died in his sleep, no disease found, at the age of 97. I'm 100% convinced it's not the tobacco but what all the extra chemicals put into them during the manufacturing process.

Fact is, any air pollutant from vehicle exhaust, factory emissions, smoking, fireplaces--none are healthy to breath in directly, so why the gang-up on smokers? Tax everyone who drives, as driving a car will produce more pollutants (by far!) than a smoker will and is probably a huge cause of many illnesses.

Look around! Unless you're living on a farm you built by hand with the resources on your land in some remote part of the world, grow all your own food, don't drink,don't smoke, don't drive, don't use plastic products, don't consume anything containing chemicals, pesticides or preservatives and use an energy source like the sun or water, you're contributing to the health problems the world is facing.

edit on 20-9-2012 by CoherentlyConfused because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks
reply to post by TiredofControlFreaks
 


JeanTherapy

as for nicotene being a poison????

Well, water is good for you in sufficient quantities to slake your thirst but drink too much and you will most certainly die. And aspirin will ease your headache, 100 aspirin will kill you.

Tired of Control Freaks


Water or aspirin based pesticides aren't killing off the Earth's supply of precious honeybees.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 12:17 PM
link   
reply to post by lambros56
 


I've made no remarks about impact on health or lungs or cancer or anything of that nature. What I've said numerous times, and once more here for your benefit is this: I (me, not you, not anybody else, ME) believe that smokers should keep it to themselves because many non smokers are offended by the very noxious odor, first off, and second that your cigarette litter should not be strewn over the streets. I haven't lectured anybody on their health. I also haven't mentioned the c word once previous to this post, and don't plan to, either. But I will say this, since I know it will inflame you overly sensitive frazzle nerved cigarette smokers - anybody that can't make it a half hour without suppressing the urge to have a fag is no different or better than a crackhead. At least nobody can legally force you to breathe crack smoke, or reasonably expect you to want to.
edit on 20-9-2012 by jeantherapy because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 12:18 PM
link   
People who live in wooded, forested, and or mountainous areas
should pay higher.
Because of the increase of lightening strike risk, nuts/pine cones/acorn injury, and higher probability
of a tree falling on you, only makes sense.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 12:24 PM
link   
reply to post by jeantherapy
 


And that has to do with....what, exactly? So smoking is bad because a chemical related to nicotine is being used as a pesticide and is killing bees? I agree--do away with the pesticides that are harming our environment.

Smokers are not killing bees. .Unless they swat one while outside taking a smoke break.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by jeantherapy
 


Jeantherapy

Neither is nicotene - what is your point?

Tired of control freaks



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 12:28 PM
link   
No, Should car drivers pay extra for the people they pollute?
edit on 20-9-2012 by ThePeopleParty because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by CoherentlyConfused
 




I wasn't talking about smokers at all in the post you are referencing. I was addressing the single claim that nicotine as a poison is not something to be concerned about. I am saying that it is. Where does nicotine come from? Is it possible that the nicotine in the nicotine based pesticides are a by product of the big tobacco industry? If I made that claim you would have a point.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks
reply to post by jeantherapy
 


Jeantherapy

Neither is nicotene - what is your point?

Tired of control freaks


www.whiteoutpress.com...

Do some research, there is strong evidence which it seems you are ingnoring.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 12:31 PM
link   
Jeantherapy

You should really do just a little preliminary research before you offer your "opinions"

Here is what is killing bees

queenbeejan.com...

Its mites!

And what is used to kill the mites - why tobacco smoke with nicotene, of all things

This is just like when people accused pesticides of killing frogs. Then real scientists found out it was a fungus.

Tired of Control Freaks



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by TiredofControlFreaks
 


The latest copyright on your obviously antiquated website is 2003. The year is now 2012

Have a look at some modern research www.cell.com...

mafwa.iafwa.org...


Care to join us in the present, or do you wish to keep living in 2003?
edit on 20-9-2012 by jeantherapy because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by jeantherapy
 


Jeantherapy

I have done a little research (very little to be honest) - it appears that you might have stumbled onto the same type of propaganda done by the same type of people who do anti-tobacco.

The fact is that tobacco smoke has been used to calm bees and kill mites for centuries. And the bees didn't die. And further - what is your point with this post.

We were talking about smoking and how smokers don't end up with nicotene poisoning of any kind regardless of the fact that in higher doses then what is typical for smokers, nicotene is a poison.

So is arsenic - but you will die if you don't have trace amounts of it in your body - its essential for bodily function.

So are heavy metals but again, you will die if you don't have trace amounts of it in your body - they are essential for bodily function.

My point is that the poison is in the dose - not the substance.

So again - what the hell has nicotene based pesticides got to do with smoking?

Tired of Control Freaks





new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join