• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Smoking insanity

#101
Duuuuuuuuuude said:
Feel free to name me one amateur or professional athlete who has never had an injury. Sprained ankle, torn muscle, broken finger, tendonitis... doctors don't treat those for free. Sports are burden on the healthcare system! Let's put giant warning labels showing gruesome sports injuries on all sneaker boxes and tax the 400%!

I'm obviously being absurd. We shouldn't tax sports. I'm just illustrating that if you draw the line on smokers, there's lots of other places you'd need to draw the line. Surfers go in the ocean with sharks, skydivers jump out of planes, people climb El Capiton with just a rope, skiers fly down the hill at 30mph. I don't hear anyone saying they should be taxed because of their choices.

Should we tax bass playing because it causes carpal tunnel syndrome?
Click to expand...

We tax Basses.
We tax skis.
We tax climbing equipment.
We tax planes.
We tax surfboards.
We tax parachutes.

We don't tax this stuff at the federal level, but one way or another it all gets taxed.
 
#105
No offence here, and I'm not trying to start a flame war, but if the people in charge went after every other vice as harsh as they're going after smokers, there would be no reason to bother living, other than being a card carrying teetotaler. Smoking has been legal for years, and, as I found out earlier, tobacco has been taxed since the 1700's in America.

Booze has been around longer. It's use/abuse has been the cause of more death and destruction than smoking, and many times destroys more lives the the user. Now there's a burden on the health system.
Granted, it's also taxed up the ying-yang, and isn't quite as easy to get as smokes, but I digress.

As I was discussing vaping with my N.P., we got to talking about methadone clinics. She said they were to help reduce crime, as most crackheads will do anything for their next fix, legal or not. I told her that smokes were going the same way as well, with the res smokes, and the overly high taxes causing the price of a pack to be so ridiculous.
Now some will say that tobacco is not the same as meth/crack, it's not. it's WORSE! Tobacco products are easily acquired at any corner store or gas station. Nicotine is a highly addictive drug. Some are lucky enough to get off it cold turkey ("just quit!") others need a lot of help. Same with booze.
I started smoking for the same reason as many others before me, peer pressure. I know, I know, we should be able to resist, but how many here can say they were that wise when they were teenagers?
As far as athletes being a drain on the health care system, IMO, it's not that different. If you chose to take up a rough sport, you're asking for problems, and it was your choice to do so.

All in all, living is the leading cause of death.
 
#107
spade2you said:
Most sporting events also have their own additional insurance.
Click to expand...

Yep.


Hey, that's it. If you're a smoker, you have sign up for smokers insurance, which is a separate insurance policy, completely privately funded by smokers and taxes on cigarettes. All medical expenses incurred as a result of smoking is paid for from this fund, while other medical expenses are handled by your normal medical health insurance.

There, we've got all our problems with smokers and their medical expenses sorted.
 
#109
sloasdaylight said:
No, but they're all still taxed.

Frankly, I'm fine with the government taxing cigarettes. I quit smoking years ago, and it's the best decision I ever made. If every cigarette smoker paid for their own medical expenses and was not on medicare/caid, I would be upset at the taxation, but as it stands, they're not, and I'm not.
Click to expand...

I don't smoke either, but it's none of my business if someone chooses. To me the smoking issue is just another example of loudmouths telling other people how to live their lives. I find most of the anti-smoking rhetoric irritatingly illogical and their statistics flagrantly false/misleading. To quote Doug Stanhope "You're not free. You need a diploma in this country to cut hair."
 
#110
Duuuuuuuuuude said:
I don't smoke either, but I find most of the anti-smoking rhetoric irritatingly illogical and their statistics flagrantly false/misleading. To me the smoking issue is just another example of a-holes telling other people how to live their lives. I choose not to smoke but it's none of my business if someone else does. To quote Doug Stanhope "You're not free. You need a diploma in this country to cut hair."
Click to expand...

Until it becomes your business with higher insurance premiums, and increased medicare medicaid costs incurred by smokers that have to be paid for by American tax payers as a whole. I also think it's a good idea that people can't smoke in public buildings like malls or restaurants anymore. You may not smoke, and some one may not smoke in doors as a courtesy, but some one else might think it would be appropriate to light up at the table right next to you. So now, some one else's business and personal choice is directly impacting you and your personal choice to go to a restaurant and enjoy your dinner.
 
#111
sloasdaylight said:
Until it becomes your business with higher insurance premiums, and increased medicare medicaid costs incurred by smokers that have to be paid for by American tax payers as a whole. I also think it's a good idea that people can't smoke in public buildings like malls or restaurants anymore. You may not smoke, and some one may not smoke in doors as a courtesy, but some one else might think it would be appropriate to light up at the table right next to you. So now, some one else's business and personal choice is directly impacting you and your personal choice to go to a restaurant and enjoy your dinner.
Click to expand...
Or airplanes--yeah, that smoke magically stayed in the smoking section.:rolleyes: Or hospitals--yes, people used to be able to smoke in ****ing hospitals.
 
#112
Bob Lee (QSC) said:
Instead of discouraging smoking through taxation and regulations, individuals should be allowed to make their own decisions but also should assume all risks that may result.
Click to expand...

Upholding this would require you and me and everyone else to stand by and do nothing while smokers and ex-smokers who can't afford treatment for lung cancer die from it. Are you prepared to accept that risk?
 
#116
Duuuuuuuuuude said:
Okay, I'm obviously being absurd. We shouldn't tax sports. I'm just illustrating that if you draw the line on smokers, there's lots of other places you'd need to draw the line. Surfers go in the ocean with sharks, skydivers jump out of planes, people climb El Capiton with just a rope, skiers fly down the hill at 30mph. I don't hear anyone saying they should be taxed because of their choices.
Click to expand...

The people who do those things generally take measures to ensure they are not injured or killed. And in the wake of a mishap where someone does get killed or injured, the rest of the participants in that activity will generally examine the incident to see if there is anything to be learned that will make the sport or activity safer in the future. Government might even get involved and produce laws regulating the activity in some way. Inspections. Certifications. Safety standards.

If a smoker dies from lung cancer, do other smokers examine that death to see if there is anything to be learned to mitigate the chances they will die from smoking? Science and years of experience already tell us the best way to reduce the chances of dying from smoking-related illness is to quit smoking.
 
#117
sloasdaylight said:
Until it becomes your business with higher insurance premiums, and increased medicare medicaid costs incurred by smokers that have to be paid for by American tax payers as a whole. I also think it's a good idea that people can't smoke in public buildings like malls or restaurants anymore. You may not smoke, and some one may not smoke in doors as a courtesy, but some one else might think it would be appropriate to light up at the table right next to you. So now, some one else's business and personal choice is directly impacting you and your personal choice to go to a restaurant and enjoy your dinner.
Click to expand...

Every single lawsuit involving secondhand smoke has been thrown out of court due to lack of evidence. The statistics just aren't there. In 2013 a U.S. District Court judge ruled that secondhand some does not violate constitutional rights. As for smokers burdening the tax system, I have to go right back to sports being a burden. Tax both or don't tax either.

Another great Stanhope quote "They say if you give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. But if you teach a man to fish...then he has to get a fishing license. But he doesn't have any money, so he has to get a job and get into the social security system. And he has to file taxes, and you're gonna audit the poor son of a b*** because he's not really good at math. You pull the IRS van up to his house and take everything. You take his velvet Elvis and his batman toothbrush and his penis pump and that all goes up for auction with the burden of proof on you because you forgot to carry the 1 because you were just worried about eating a f***ing fish. And you couldn't even cook the fish because you need a permit for an open flame. And then the health department is gonna wanna ask you a bunch of questions about where you're going to dispose of the scales and the guts. This is not a sanitary environment. And ladies and gentleman, if you get sick and tired of it at the end of the day, it's not even legal to kill yourself in this country."
 
#118
CrewsControl said:
The people who do those things generally take measures to ensure they are not injured or killed. And in the wake of a mishap where someone does get killed or injured, the rest of the participants in that activity will generally examine the incident to see if there is anything to be learned that will make the sport or activity safer in the future. Government might even get involved and produce laws regulating the activity in some way. Inspections. Certifications. Safety standards.

If a smoker dies from lung cancer, do other smokers examine that death to see if there is anything to be learned to mitigate the chances they will die from smoking? Science and years of experience already tell us the best way to reduce the chances of dying from smoking-related illness is to quit smoking.
Click to expand...

The best way to reduce the chance of injury from sports is to quit playing sports. And when has the government ever done inspections, required certifications or set safety standards for joggers, tennis players, golfers, surfers, mountain climbers, bicycle riders, or weightlifters?
 
#119
Smoking and sports are both a menace. Trying simply to sit back and relax in the park and not be bothered the other day, I was nevertheless bothered by some second-hand softball playing. It was terribly annoying, and the players themselves were so obnoxious and inconsiderate I had to pick up and get out of the infield.
 
#120
Duuuuuuuuuude said:
The best way to reduce the chance of injury from sports is to quit playing sports.
Click to expand...

Yes, but then you wouldn't get the benefits of participating in sports, such as better cardiovascular health, improved stamina, the social skills that come from learning to play as a member of a team, and yes, even resistance to injury that comes from proper sports training.

What health and social benefits would you miss out on if you quit smoking?
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back