Since smoking kills almost 500,000 people each year, why aren't the democrats banning smoking? (abortion, money)
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.
Obesity kills 2.8 million more. What is Fauci doing about that?
I don't care about people not taking care of their own health. That is their business.
I do care when someone walks into a kindergarten class with an automatic weapon and opens fire on the children with a legally bought weapon of mass destruction.
I don't care about people not taking care of their own health. That is their business.
Wrong. Your taxes are paying for their ER visits. It is your business.
You think fat people are paying their hospital bills every time they show up with shortness of breath? Liberals already assured us that people of color can’t afford $30 IDs.
Status:
"Moldy Tater Gangrene, even before Moscow Marge."
(set 3 days ago)
Location: Dallas, TX
5,790 posts, read 3,600,682 times
Reputation: 5697
The USA tried banning alcohol and marijuana. We all see what that lead to. Sometimes allowing bad stuff is simply the lesser of the two bads.
Besides, people are not just "economic machines". A person's intrinsic value can't be captured by a balance sheet, financial statement, etc. If the person's not deliberately setting out to hurt, harm, or demean others, then I don't care.
Since smoking kills almost 500,000 people each year, why aren't the democrats banning smoking?
Taxes, democrats love the tax money smokers bring in.
You can't really ban a tobacco company, but thankfully with the information campaigns that have gone on since the 60s, at least there is enough education out there for people to understand the real dangers of smoking. From your statement, is it only democratic states that tax cigarettes? Because I hadn't heard that.
You can't really ban a tobacco company, but thankfully with the information campaigns that have gone on since the 60s, at least there is enough education out there for people to understand the real dangers of smoking. From your statement, is it only democratic states that tax cigarettes? Because I hadn't heard that.
When is the last time you heard republicans call for tax increases? Here's a recent story of some republicans blocking the tax increase:
What do the health consequences of smoking cost insurance providers and their customers? That means the rest of us?
Smoking has a curious property: it rarely kills 30-year-olds, but tends to abridge life at the back-end. How many of today's 80-year-olds or 90-year-olds are wasting away in nursing homes - or dying from Covid! - who in an earlier era, would have died at 65 or 70, from decades of chain-smoking?
In the cold calculation of economic value, the ideal is for a worker to be indomitably healthy throughout the working-years, with no cavities and no surgeries and no time-off from work, contributing to Social Security for 40 years...to then drop dead promptly at 65, before collecting a nickel from Medicare or SS. That is the economically-optimum outcome for society. The mass cessation of smoking tilted us away from this optimum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by atltechdude
And I agree that people know they are fat, but not all know how much sooner they will die because of that.
To a certain point, I prefer being [somewhat] fat. It might be different for younger people or for women, but for a middle-aged man, girth and corpulence, if not to excess, lend some amount of prestige and authority. It is more natural and effective to pound the conference room table with thick arms, than with thin ones. It makes more theatrical impression to demonstratively loosen one's tie, after yelling and getting sweaty in a hot room, if you have an 18" neck, than if your neck is 15" in circumference. And so on. To me, such poise and prestige are easily worth more than potentially 20 years of additional life-expectancy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocko20
Wrong. Your taxes are paying for their ER visits. It is your business.
Exactly. We're part of a web of connectivity, that's more subtle than just the transmission of infection by communicable disease. It's easy to focus on Covid, because it is infectious, whereas smoking or drug-abuse or obesity is not. But ultimately what matters is the cumulative costs... be it from the diseases themselves, or the remedies that attempt to forestall them.
Wrong. Your taxes are paying for their ER visits. It is your business.
You think fat people are paying their hospital bills every time they show up with shortness of breath? Liberals already assured us that people of color can’t afford $30 IDs.
Barry did his best to make affordable health care for every American. Of course the GOP fought him tooth and nail every step of the way.
If people can't afford an ID does that mean they should not be able to vote?
Democrats have been the proponents behind smoking bans on planes, restaurants, and bars. Can you imagine going back to how it was before?
Anybody smoking today is unredeemable.
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.
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.
