wow, so bam bam banned flavored tobacco

[Fatality]

Actually, there are two possible reasons.
1. He hates blacks and wants them to die from lung cancer.
2. He loves blacks and want them to have their preferred cigarettes available.

Where is Charlie Bass? I bet he knows the answer.

and choice two will lead to choice one

3rd possibility, he doesn't want them to collect social security.

now we are starting to get somewhere.

 

[sitarro]

Actually, there are two possible reasons.
1. He hates blacks and wants them to die from lung cancer.
2. He loves blacks and want them to have their preferred cigarettes available.

Where is Charlie Bass? I bet he knows the answer.

and choice two will lead to choice one

3rd possibility, he doesn't want them to collect social security.

4th possibility, he doesn't want to lose his major supporters....... he's already losing a lot of the independents and guilt ridden idiot whites.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

yall do realize, at the end of the day (ya know, after the complaining), that cigarettes are bad for you, eh? yes, not-smoking IS a better life decision. Any doctor in the country will tell you that. Heart, lung, kidneys; all screwed. Got diabetes like millions of other Americans and still smoke? Even more screwed. And there are good therapies out there to help you quit (e.g. welbutrin + patch).

Meanwhile, the government makes more profit on each pack of cigarettes you buy than the tobacco farmer, refiner, distributor, and retailer combined. If you want to talk about jobs and profit lost, you should realize that the government actually takes the biggest hit.

In case it's not already abundantly clear: no one in the FDA cares what smokers think about tobacco use. (Does anyone think it should be otherwise?) Their goal is public health.

Sorry if I upset anyone with this post, I've just seen one too many people with cancer as a result of their bad habits.

 

[Fatality]

yall do realize, at the end of the day (ya know, after the complaining), that cigarettes are bad for you, eh? yes, not-smoking IS a better life decision. Any doctor in the country will tell you that. Heart, lung, kidneys; all screwed. Got diabetes like millions of other Americans and still smoke? Even more screwed. And there are good therapies out there to help you quit (e.g. welbutrin + patch).

Meanwhile, the government makes more profit on each pack of cigarettes you buy than the tobacco farmer, refiner, distributor, and retailer combined. If you want to talk about jobs and profit lost, you should realize that the government actually takes the biggest hit.

In case it's not already abundantly clear: no one in the FDA cares what smokers think about tobacco use. (Does anyone think it should be otherwise?) Their goal is public health.

Sorry if I upset anyone with this post, I've just seen one too many people with cancer as a result of their bad habits.

1. its the persons choice to smoke if they want.

2. what source of tax revenure will take the place of the revenue lost from banning over taxed tobacco products.

3. they choose to smoke, they live or die with the results.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

2. what source of tax revenure will take the place of the revenue lost from banning over taxed tobacco products.

Honestly, don't care.

3. they choose to smoke, they live or die with the results.

Except, they don't. "They" generally put a huge burden on that health care thing that everyone is up in arms about.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Obama thinks Cheerios are a drug too

FDA Warns General Mills: Cheerios Is a Drug

What a fuckin' TWAT you are!

Why do you think that a ruling made by the FDA is what "Obama thinks"?

Do you really think that each federal agency asks the President what they think prior to making decisions?

the Buck stop with Obama, just deal with it

 

[Fatality]

2. what source of tax revenure will take the place of the revenue lost from banning over taxed tobacco products.

Honestly, don't care.

3. they choose to smoke, they live or die with the results.

Except, they don't. "They" generally put a huge burden on that health care thing that everyone is up in arms about.

well you should care, unless you dont care how much youre taxed and have an endless supply of money?


only welfare recipients and their enablers are up in arms about a so-called "burden" on health care that only big daddy government can fix for the poor peons who cant tell the difference between their ass and a hole in the ground.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

well you should care, unless you dont care how much youre taxed and have an endless supply of money?

Sorry, you can't pay me (or in this case, remove taxation) enough to knowingly promote a major health issue that kills >1200 Americans each day. Besides, where do you think all that "lost" tax money winds up now? (back in the pockets of Americans)

only welfare recipients and their enablers are up in arms about a so-called "burden" on health care that only big daddy government can fix for the poor peons who cant tell the difference between their ass and a hole in the ground.

that and, ya know, the doctors who are constantly seeing smokers.

i recommend you keep your money and your health.

 

[sitarro]

well you should care, unless you dont care how much youre taxed and have an endless supply of money?

Sorry, you can't pay me (or in this case, remove taxation) enough to knowingly promote a major health issue that kills >1200 Americans each day. Besides, where do you think all that "lost" tax money winds up now? (back in the pockets of Americans)

only welfare recipients and their enablers are up in arms about a so-called "burden" on health care that only big daddy government can fix for the poor peons who cant tell the difference between their ass and a hole in the ground.

that and, ya know, the doctors who are constantly seeing smokers.

i recommend you keep your money and your health.

What else should we stop doing because it's bad for your health? Driving a car, motorcycle riding, rollerblading, skiing, snow boarding, snowmobiling, soccer, football, hockey, basketball, gymnastics? Mountain climbing, surfing, bungee jumping, hunting, fishing, bicycle riding, sex (especially fag sex), drinking alcohol, working dangerous jobs, prescription drugs, flying private aircraft, sky diving, scuba diving, horseback riding, scientific research???? All of these and many others have a danger to them, how many of these should be banned?

 

[Fatality]

well you should care, unless you dont care how much youre taxed and have an endless supply of money?

Sorry, you can't pay me (or in this case, remove taxation) enough to knowingly promote a major health issue that kills >1200 Americans each day. Besides, where do you think all that "lost" tax money winds up now? (back in the pockets of Americans)

only welfare recipients and their enablers are up in arms about a so-called "burden" on health care that only big daddy government can fix for the poor peons who cant tell the difference between their ass and a hole in the ground.

that and, ya know, the doctors who are constantly seeing smokers.

i recommend you keep your money and your health.

the taxes will be gone when the tobacco is gone, an then they will screw something else over

you can feel bad about smokers health all you want but they brought it on themselves, its their choice

 

[chanel]

NJ is proposing a ban on smoking at the beach. Next up - the skin cancer crusaders. No sunbathing! Its bad for you!

 

[PixieStix]

well you should care, unless you dont care how much youre taxed and have an endless supply of money?

Sorry, you can't pay me (or in this case, remove taxation) enough to knowingly promote a major health issue that kills >1200 Americans each day. Besides, where do you think all that "lost" tax money winds up now? (back in the pockets of Americans)

only welfare recipients and their enablers are up in arms about a so-called "burden" on health care that only big daddy government can fix for the poor peons who cant tell the difference between their ass and a hole in the ground.

that and, ya know, the doctors who are constantly seeing smokers.

i recommend you keep your money and your health.

the taxes will be gone when the tobacco is gone, an then they will screw something else over

you can feel bad about smokers health all you want but they brought it on themselves, its their choice

Some seem to think "choice" applies to killing innocent babies. I think it is indoctrinational

 

[Dis]

How does a thread on smoking wind up in Food & Wine?

 

[REVxERIK]

Obama thinks Cheerios are a drug too

FDA Warns General Mills: Cheerios Is a Drug

By Jacob Goldstein

CheeriosHey, General Mills: If you want to say Cheerios is “clinically proven to lower cholesterol,” you better get your whole-grain Os approved as a new drug by the FDA.

FDA Warns General Mills: Cheerios Is a Drug - Health Blog - WSJ

Get them hooked on Cheerios when they young, next think they'll be robbing liquor stores for money for Frosted Flakes

i love how obama is not mentioned in the article he posted

 

[SmarterThanHick]

What else should we stop doing because it's bad for your health? Driving a car, motorcycle riding, rollerblading, skiing, snow boarding, snowmobiling, soccer, football, hockey, basketball, gymnastics? Mountain climbing, surfing, bungee jumping, hunting, fishing, bicycle riding, sex (especially fag sex), drinking alcohol, working dangerous jobs, prescription drugs, flying private aircraft, sky diving, scuba diving, horseback riding, scientific research???? All of these and many others have a danger to them, how many of these should be banned?

So you're comparing an addictive drug that kills 1200 Americans per day to? fishing? bicycle riding? scientific research?

Really? OK, let's continue your comparison. Remind me. How many deaths occur per day from fishing?

How many children have asthma as a second hand result of their parents bicycle riding?

Great comparison there. I love the logic that if any two things have any similarity whatsoever, no matter how abstract, remote, or stretching it may be, they are clearly equivalent.

the taxes will be gone when the tobacco is gone, an then they will screw something else over

you can feel bad about smokers health all you want but they brought it on themselves, its their choice

and yet, people making bad choices always winds up with the rest of society taking on the burden of their stupidity. But the fact is, the "choice" is pretty skewed. This isn't choosing which brand of laundry detergent you want to use, and changing your mind next week. The "choice" usually comes as a result of teenagers (illegal <18) being pressured into trying it for one reason or another, be it peers, media, what have you (after all, how is it that so many kids who can't legally buy cigarettes manage to smoke?) trying something, and becoming physically unable to stop. Physical dependence refers to LACK of choice. So no, you can't just pass this off as "their choice", nor should you turn a blind eye from an ethical standpoint either.

 

[alan1]

2. what source of tax revenure will take the place of the revenue lost from banning over taxed tobacco products.

Honestly, don't care.

3. they choose to smoke, they live or die with the results.

Except, they don't. "They" generally put a huge burden on that health care thing that everyone is up in arms about.

No they don't.
Study: Fat people cheaper to treat - USATODAY.com

snip,

In a paper published online Monday in the Public Library of Science Medicine journal, Dutch researchers found that the health costs of thin and healthy people in adulthood are more expensive than those of either fat people or smokers.

 

[Thinman]

Cigarettes are not illegal and if congress makes it illegal, they will start the largest smuggling and bootlegging industry since prohibition. Smoking is not illegal, it is a choice.

When I started smoking, I could buy a pack of cigarettes for 18 cents. Now, if I buy them by the carton, they are 5 dollars per pack. I can afford them. I choose to smoke.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

No they don't.
Study: Fat people cheaper to treat - USATODAY.com

so it's saying that if people die when they are younger, it costs society less money because thin healthy people who live long lives need more care in their later years? So, killing people young = good for society. Is that really the stance you want to take? Do you really want to side with the Dutch study? Who trusts the Dutch anyway? I'll tell ya who. Terrorists.

 

[alan1]

No they don't.
Study: Fat people cheaper to treat - USATODAY.com

so it's saying that if people die when they are younger, it costs society less money because thin healthy people who live long lives need more care in their later years? So, killing people young = good for society. Is that really the stance you want to take? Do you really want to side with the Dutch study? Who trusts the Dutch anyway? I'll tell ya who. Terrorists.

You made a false claim.
I provided you with the information to prove that it was false.
What you do with the knowledge I shared is up to you.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

technically you didn't. technically you just showed people dying faster means they spend less money on healthcare than people with twice the lifespan. you didn't show burden, which would be indicated by people taxing the rest of society more because they can't pick up the health care costs themselves. Now, which group skimps out on their bill the most? Compare that group to the group most likely to smoke?

Socio-economic differences in smoking
http://www.americanlegacy.org/PDFPublications/Socio-Economic_Status_and_Smoking_Fact_Sheet.pdf
Working Class Matters: Socioeconomic Disadvantage, Race/Ethnicity, Gender, and Smoking in NHIS 2000