So you're saying that it's a complete waste of time to tax tobacco and
spend money on warnings and health education? I can't support that
suggestion at all.
The vast majority of smokers would quit immediately if it was easy. No
more bad taste in their mouths. No more sore throats, no more nicotine
stained fingers. No more watching their money go up in smoke. All of
these things made me quit smoking thirtyfive years ago. Smokers and
non-smokers alike know that it's an unhealthy, dirty habit. Education
about smoking has had a huge effect the masses.
The pictures and the ads of smoking caused cancer and other associated
diseases have had an effect on people. If it was otherwise, everybody
would be smoking and they're not. So how do you explain this? How do
you explain people quitting smoking and people hating their smoking
addiction if not for the education and the ads?
Frankly Mike, as far as education is concerned, everybody who is 25 or
older is a
You accept the fact these people are probably going to die of some
lung disease regardless of what is done to get them to stop smoking
on with life.
No the target market is the 10-18 year old group and there is where a
turf war is going on with the tobacco companies.
A war that education forces are SLOWLY gaining ground.
It's going to require a saturation advertising campaign to defeat the
companies and I have no problem at all forcing the tobacco companies
for their own defeat.
As far as your rights to smoke when ever and where ever you chose,
you have those rights as long as they don't foul the air I and other
When that happens, you no longer have the right to spew your tobacco
smoke where ever you choose.
Speaking as an ex-smoker (25+ years), stopping smoking is probably
the most difficult a human being will ever do, at least it was for me.
An ex-smoker who at one point or another in my life had a 2 pack a day
or a box of cigars a week or a pound of pipe tobacco a week habit and
all of which I inhaled, I can appreciate your addiction, but I don't
it any more.
Today, I'm like stink on crap, when it comes to smoking.
I have no problem at all walking up to a complete stranger who is
and saying something like, "Aren't you're old enough to know better".
Very interesting the responses you get.
Everything you've said maybe right. I can only argue my own
experiences with smoking. I started at sixteen and quit when I was
twentyfive as a pack a day smoker.
And to be honest, it was easy for me to quit because of the reasons I
mentioned previously. I realized how tired I was of the sore throat,
the bad taste in my mouth and the nicotine on my fingers. It was as if
I'd just flipped a switch in my mind and that was it. If I could
market that switch I'd become filthy rich overnight.
People have said to me that I wasn't addicted if I was able to quit so
easily. Maybe so, and now I've grown to hate the very act of smoking.
I lost both my parents to smoking related diseases and people like me
may be flailing uselessly against this smoking addiction that people
have. But, whether my actions are effective or not, I'll keep trying
because just accepting the status quo means complete capitulation. I
refuse to accept that.
On 2/6/2014 3:36 PM, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
Nope, that is not what he said. You did not respond to what was said at
all, you responded to what your imagination provided as a justification
for your position. :)
Read again what he said actually said ...
In a nutshell, and as a former smoker of 30 years with a 3 pack at day
habit the last ten ending 23 years ago, when a person continues to smoke
despite knowing the very likely consequences to their health, they are
on their own, and should have to live with the consequences of their
The warnings and health education efforts are all admirable, and have
made a remarkable dent in the number of smokers in this country. I'm all
for continuing those efforts. And I'm fine with a company, like CVS,
deciding to do business as they see fit and putting their money where
their mouth/conscience is.
They are exercising freedom of choice.
But I am totally opposed to treating those who ignore the irrefutable
data as a "social cost"; and who ignore the well known consequences of
smoking because of a pleasurable experience they refuse to overcome
because of an innate personal weakness.
Tough shit, Kemasabe, you want to be a victim, that's fine with me, but
you live with it, and leave me and mine out of it.
I'd be ok with that sentiment if that's where it ended, but it
doesn't. As a society, we all pay for people who can't or won't
change. We all benefit greatly being part of a society, but there's
decided disadvantages too. You and yours are part of it whether you
like it or not.
On 2/6/2014 7:50 PM, email@example.com wrote:
You bet I'm an active participant in society, by serving when called
upon to do so, and paying my way throughout. It is those who are
purposely a parasite feeding on the body of society, and who have done
neither, who deserve no support from those who are.
Here's a thought that has occurred to me before. Don't people who take
"unnecessary chances"--say like people who run lathes, increase the cost
to society in the form of higher insurance premiums for those that
don't? I'm "not Saying Anything", I'm just providing an example, a data
point. I may get a lathe myself someday... if I'm feeling lucky... ; )
MARKETING makes that a tough battle (did you watch the Superbowl?) But
its a battle I have been increasing vigilant in fighting, as least to
some degree (for myself).
I think to do this, one much even take the time and effort to understand
the psychological techniques that marketers use. I don't think
most people are willing to invest even as much energy at this, as
evidently you and I have. By the way, they say "If you tell someone
something 6 times, that they will start to believe it".
Can you think of the dog and the horse scenario without thinking of
Budweiser? They want to be your "friend"! To me, that's sort of
scary. The people who greet you as you enter or leave a casino door,
they want to be your "friend" too, just like the greeter at Walmart. I
think I got interested in this "battle" when one of my junior high
teachers pointing out "hidden images" in the art work of liquor
advertisements in magazines. It's a jungle out there! ; ) Newport,
Alive with ....
A letter to the editor in the Hartford Courant lashed out at the
commercial. She said it glorified puppy mills, showed poor treatment
since the puppy escaped and sent a wrong message to children. I thought
they were selling beer.
On 2/6/2014 10:13 AM, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
He is spot on. I see people going out of their way to circumvent that
taxes. Buying mail order, buying out of state, and it is a hot item for
thieves breaking into stores.
That may be true, but taxation has done very little to reduce the number
of smokers. Some sort of education program may help. Taking away the
"cool factor" for young teenagers would help a lot. I was about 13 when
I started, just like the big kids, but was able to quite in my 20's.
On 2/6/2014 9:13 AM, email@example.com wrote:
No problem, just a drop in the bucket ... still got plenty left. ;)
Saving the life of someone willingly engaging in bad behavior is not my
concern in the least.
> and costs to the
> healthcare system from people smoking.
It is a demand on the healthcare system only because progressive make it so.
Progressive thinking rarely takes into account the unintended
consequences of their policies ... in this case rewarding bad behavior
by providing healthcare for the consequences of same only encourages
further bad behavior, of all types, including crime.
Look no further for the result of years of progressive policies by the
rampant bad behavior exhibited in places like Detroit and Chicago.
Only one thing is absolutely unarguable ... all the above
notwithstanding, a progressive politician can buy votes all the way to
hell by promising to do so.
On Thu, 06 Feb 2014 08:03:38 -0600, Swingman wrote:
Much like Alabama's very high tax on alcohol, some 40% of the total retail
cost, it doesn't seem to put a damper on peoples drinking habits.
It does make for a viable bootleg liquor market, both store bought and
It is a short trip to Kentuckey where the price is low and a pickup
load can net the bootlegger an easy $1000 dollar profit a trip.
(that's a very conservative figure)
The price of cigarettes are even more grossly distorted from NC to the
Nothern states, it's illegal but it is big business too.
None of this takes away from the fact that smoking does in fact kill
millions, however we are Americans and should be able to choose
our poison without much govt. interference.
Goodwill, is that what they are calling it?
It makes good ethical sense but the customers are going to give the
competition $2 Billion worth of extra business.
Sounds like a preemptive move to perhaps dodge any law suits Kalifornia
is cooking up.
Personally, I have frequently found it strange that pharmacies have/had
such huge cigarette displays (I sensed a "conflict of interest").
And crappy prices too! They apparently cater to people who are
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.