Nope, both my grandparents on my mums side were heavy smokers. My grandad died in his 60's due to smoking, although it was the 8 years it took as his health seriously deteriorated that had the biggest impact. Was enough to put anyone off smoking :-(
Also cleaning up the house afterwards and realising that the walls, lights, etc were not a yellow/brown colour and infact white/cream and bright gold light fittings.
Sprayed on the cleaning products and the tar dripped off, was pretty grim.
I miss them and I miss the time I didn't get to spend with them due to the billion dollar tabacco industry.
I don't care if u smoke.I just don't want to see full ashtrays everywhere.Or have u blowing smoke in my face.U can go on the porch to smoke at my house!
I'm trying to stop though, although the occasional cigars I smoke and the pipe I have aren't nearly as bad as cigarettes, I want to be in the best shape for this girl I like... well more like love
Irrespectively of whether it i s harmful or not (and the arguments never looked at the additives) Didn't it also give governments the licence to tax everything that was thought wrong?
Given that we are commercialising everything, how long will it be before we have to pay for fresh air?
You apparently haven't taken an economics class... taxes are placed more heavily on certain items (such as cigarettes) to decrease the demand for that good (law of demand). It discourages people from consuming it, and attempts to compensate for the harm it's causing (environmental and health). The tax also covers the cost of health-related components - if you live in a country like Australia where health care is provided, the higher taxes account for those bills to the government (especially because smoking causes a lot of those problems in the first place). Would you rather be taxed more on food, which you can't really live without, or cigarettes, which are harmful and can be foregone?
It depends on whether or not they can find a way to restrict people from breathing without murdering them.
"You apparently haven't taken an economics class" - don't tell the mercantile bank that I was employed as as risk analyst, they might want their money back...
You were employed at a bank as a risk analyst who only makes up to 25k per year? Excuse me while I have a hard time believing you (I will admit there are variables like switching jobs, retiring, and whatnot, but your profile says you work full-time and I doubt you would quit for a job with such a significantly lower salary).
Actually it's not. The U.S. Government pays out much more in subsidies than it collects in taxes. Kinda like gas/petroleum - way more paid out in subsidies than collected in taxes. And they both reap huge profits.
You obviously aren't counting environmental and health components, are you? Tax smoking, discourage people from (legally) purchasing, less smoking-related health issues, higher quality of life for a country.
But I agree - they should make taxes in costs of subsides. The problem there is that there would be a massive uproar with the public because the tax would be too high and the cigarette companies really have a lot of market power.
Also cleaning up the house afterwards and realising that the walls, lights, etc were not a yellow/brown colour and infact white/cream and bright gold light fittings.
Sprayed on the cleaning products and the tar dripped off, was pretty grim.
I miss them and I miss the time I didn't get to spend with them due to the billion dollar tabacco industry.
The air pollution forces us to smoke!
Where does government "step off"
Irrespectively of whether it i s harmful or not (and the arguments never looked at the additives) Didn't it also give governments the licence to tax everything that was thought wrong?
Given that we are commercialising everything, how long will it be before we have to pay for fresh air?
OH that has already happened though didn't it ?
It depends on whether or not they can find a way to restrict people from breathing without murdering them.
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/j...
I hope you are decent enough a person to apologise.
But I agree - they should make taxes in costs of subsides. The problem there is that there would be a massive uproar with the public because the tax would be too high and the cigarette companies really have a lot of market power.