Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Are you also okay with separate insurance pools for people who are overweight, have genetic tendencies towards certain diseases, drink more than average, drive too fast, etc? Sounds like a slippery slope.
As for why it's still legal, I think prohibition (of alcohol) proves why that's a bad idea... it only opens up the black market, and eliminates regulations on the product. You think smokers will stop just because it's banned? Not a chance. Also, people like you don't realize how much revenue the tobacco industry brings. It might be "dirty money," but you'd notice and probably whine if all those tax dollars suddenly vanished. Smokers are loved when their taxes are paying for stuff, but hated when you pass one in the street.
So they are OK with a criminal black market when it comes to illegal drugs (drug prohibition), but not when it comes to tobacco..??
If they learned their lesson from alcohol prohibition, why would they do the exact same thing with drugs, and starting to do the same thing with opioid prescription drugs?
It just doesnt make sense they would be OK with a black market for drugs, but not for tobacco?
Plus, if so many less people are smoking and starting to smoke nowadays as we are led to believe, the tobacco companies should be a shell of what they used to be...but that doesnt seem to be the case, they seem to be as powerful and wealthy as ever???
Increasing the tax on any product to prevent the consumption of that product IS prohibition. Government did it to cigarettes, they can do it to anything. Maybe candy and coffee will be next. We all know it wont be alcohol, and government is already working on legalizing marijuana.
Increasing the tax on any product to prevent the consumption of that product IS prohibition. Government did it to cigarettes, they can do it to anything. Maybe candy and coffee will be next. We all know it wont be alcohol, and government is already working on legalizing marijuana.
Oh.. they're already working on that one. Remember the oreo fiasco? ... that was testing the waters. It's only a matter of time.
Oh.. they're already working on that one. Remember the oreo fiasco? ... that was testing the waters. It's only a matter of time.
Where are the manufacturers in this though, even if its candy, soda, etc, I doubt many companies would just sit back and let Govt enact a special tax for their product, in an attempt to stop people from buying it...?? I would expect the companies to wage a long legal battle over this kind of thing.
Where are the manufacturers in this though, even if its candy, soda, etc, I doubt many companies would just sit back and let Govt enact a special tax for their product, in an attempt to stop people from buying it...?? I would expect the companies to wage a long legal battle over this kind of thing.
I doubt they are just sitting back. I'm sure there's all kinds of lobbying on both sides going on behind closed doors. The way it usually happens.
I mentioned in an earlier post that I recalled reading an article about 5 or 6 yrs ago by a bunch of talking heads and those Ivy league professors (where most of this begins) stating that they would be attacking junk foods the exact same way they used to fight smoking because it was so effective.
(frequently the emotional zinger is... "it's for the children")
So rather than the FDA forcing companies to use healthy ingredients, they'll let the average Joe pay higher taxes and insurance, etc., to reach their end. It all depends on who has the most money to lobby and bribe and threaten.
I doubt they are just sitting back. I'm sure there's all kinds of lobbying on both sides going on behind closed doors. The way it usually happens.
I mentioned in an earlier post that I recalled reading an article about 5 or 6 yrs ago by a bunch of talking heads and those Ivy league professors (where most of this begins) stating that they would be attacking junk foods the exact same way they used to fight smoking because it was so effective.
(frequently the emotional zinger is... "it's for the children")
So rather than the FDA forcing companies to use healthy ingredients, they'll let the average Joe pay higher taxes and insurance, etc., to reach their end. It all depends on who has the most money to lobby and bribe and threaten.
Im not sure I agree the effort to lessen the number of people who smoke was effective at all. I deal with tobacco reps frequently, all of the tobacco companies are doing extremely well, they still have a lot of influence/ power in govt too, if the smoking figures have really gone down that much like we are told, wouldnt these companies barely be hanging on?
Im not sure I agree the effort to lessen the number of people who smoke was effective at all. I deal with tobacco reps frequently, all of the tobacco companies are doing extremely well, they still have a lot of influence/ power in govt too, if the smoking figures have really gone down that much like we are told, wouldnt these companies barely be hanging on?
That's something I really don't understand. I do know that most of the people I knew that smoked forever it seemed.. have quit (including myself). Most places that we ever go to, there are very few smokers present anymore. My husband is quite a heavy smoker and he is the pariah almost everywhere we go.
So in my circles and travels, I definitely do see fewer and fewer smokers so...I really don't get it unless it's more of a regional thing (?).
I remember when I was a kid... it was considered politeness to offer a smoke to someone. Every home just about had ashtrays and table lighters. We smoked in the grocery and dept stores, etc. Even the very few that we knew that didn't smoke.. still kept them around for visitors.
Im not sure I agree the effort to lessen the number of people who smoke was effective at all. I deal with tobacco reps frequently, all of the tobacco companies are doing extremely well, they still have a lot of influence/ power in govt too, if the smoking figures have really gone down that much like we are told, wouldnt these companies barely be hanging on?
Oh, it was very effective. We don't see too many smokers anymore. We don't smell them either, or see them huddled in doorways. We don't see cigarettes butts littering public sidewalks and roadways. Thousands of tobacco farms have closed down in Kentucky alone.
That's something I really don't understand. I do know that most of the people I knew that smoked forever it seemed.. have quit (including myself). Most places that we ever go to, there are very few smokers present anymore. My husband is quite a heavy smoker and he is the pariah almost everywhere we go.
So in my circles and travels, I definitely do see fewer and fewer smokers so...I really don't get it unless it's more of a regional thing (?).
I remember when I was a kid... it was considered politeness to offer a smoke to someone. Every home just about had ashtrays and table lighters. We smoked in the grocery and dept stores, etc. Even the very few that we knew that didn't smoke.. still kept them around for visitors.
Back when I was a kid many years ago, it was common for a boy's dad to buy him a carton of cigarettes for his 14th birthday.
Oh, it was very effective. We don't see too many smokers anymore. We don't smell them either, or see them huddled in doorways. We don't see cigarettes butts littering public sidewalks and roadways. Thousands of tobacco farms have closed down in Kentucky alone.
Government loves the power it has over us.
They're all in Hollywood.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.