Riddle me this batman. If the US government doesn't want us to use tobacoo...

Two Peas is Closing
Click here to visit our final product sale. Click here to visit our FAQ page regarding the closing of Two Peas.

Posted 2/14/2013 by raindancer in NSBR Board
1 2 >
 

raindancer
Capt. Sparrow's Pirate Wench

PeaNut 217,886
August 2005
Posts: 16,684
Layouts: 44

Posted: 2/14/2013 5:18:14 PM
then why did we spend $173,218,926 more in subsidies than we took in tax revenue in 2010?

I'm just delving into this as a research topic and my cursory google search already has me irritated.

I really hate lobbies and special interests.

*melrose*
PeaFixture

PeaNut 263,952
June 2006
Posts: 3,831
Layouts: 60
Loc: in the land of fruit, nuts, flakes & quakes!

Posted: 2/14/2013 5:26:40 PM
I believe it's the same reason the Gov't bailed out the automobile industry...tobacco employs people.

While I don't agree with either...it does employ people; many beyond the farm gate.

raindancer
Capt. Sparrow's Pirate Wench

PeaNut 217,886
August 2005
Posts: 16,684
Layouts: 44

Posted: 2/14/2013 5:32:18 PM
Oh I know it all comes back to hypocritical reasons. I just find it annoying. I didn't even look into how much it spends on anti-tobacco campaigns and public service announcements.

It just is annoying to me that this stuff goes on right under out noses. So blatant. I feel like I'm pretty politically aware, but almost daily I get smacked upside the head by stuff like this, and I find it maddening.

I suspect a lot of people have no idea.

*melrose*
PeaFixture

PeaNut 263,952
June 2006
Posts: 3,831
Layouts: 60
Loc: in the land of fruit, nuts, flakes & quakes!

Posted: 2/15/2013 2:18:30 PM

I suspect a lot of people have no idea.


Agreed. Nor any interest....

Annabella
Leads a Charmed Life

PeaNut 43,843
July 2002
Posts: 44,159
Layouts: 46
Loc: East Coast

Posted: 2/15/2013 2:19:51 PM
I'm not familiar with these subsidies you're speaking of? What about the high taxes on cigarettes at the store?

sharonmnc
Ancient Ancestor of Pea

PeaNut 39,386
May 2002
Posts: 7,486
Layouts: 28
Loc: Charlotte, NC

Posted: 2/15/2013 2:26:11 PM
I lived in a tobacco producing state and I heard the argument that tobacco produces jobs, but here's a thought. How about paying the farmers to grow something that doesn't kill people?

WannaPea
No Peas for you ! Come back one year!

PeaNut 151,172
June 2004
Posts: 26,982
Layouts: 175
Loc: In my PJ's

Posted: 2/15/2013 2:50:20 PM

How about paying the farmers to grow something that doesn't kill people?
Bear in mind that we still continue to pay farmers NOT to grow certain food crops.

This country is all sorts of crazy.

swim mom
BucketHead

PeaNut 226,253
October 2005
Posts: 959
Layouts: 0

Posted: 2/15/2013 3:19:45 PM
On a similar note, government wants minors not to smoke. Lots of money is spent on no smoking messages aimed at minors. Minors are forbidden by law to buy tobacco products ans adults are forbidden to purchase tobacco for minors. Yet minors are allowed to use tobacco freely. No laws against it. There are only laws about obtaining tobacco, but no laws about possession of or using tobacco by minors. How contradictory and absurd is that? At least alcohol laws are consistent regarding minors. But not tobacco laws.

Compwalla
Pastafarian Pea

PeaNut 11,942
March 2001
Posts: 20,489
Layouts: 39
Loc: Midland, TX

Posted: 2/15/2013 3:22:41 PM
Big tobacco gives a lot of money in political contributions. As does the agro-business industry. That's why we see tax breaks and farm subsidies on commodities that are not good for the health of Americans. The industries we should be discouraging have purchased enough political influence to prevent any real policy change from happening. And this goes for both sides of the aisle. No one's hands are clean; they all take this dirty money whenever they can get it.

~Lindy~
Catty smart aleck

PeaNut 89,450
June 2003
Posts: 17,604
Layouts: 40
Loc: Gone to Chemo with BethAnne.

Posted: 2/15/2013 3:26:10 PM

Yet minors are allowed to use tobacco freely. No laws against it. There are only laws about obtaining tobacco, but no laws about possession of or using tobacco by minors.
Texas has laws on the books for minors in possession of tobacco. The punishment ranges from fines, community service, tobacco education classes and losing your drivers' license. More here: LINK

Blue_Violet
PeaNut

PeaNut 543,767
February 2012
Posts: 157
Layouts: 0

Posted: 2/15/2013 4:00:29 PM

Yet minors are allowed to use tobacco freely. No laws against it. There are only laws about obtaining tobacco, but no laws about possession of or using tobacco by minors.


This is not true in my state either.

leftturnonly
Will trade mosquitoes for cookies.

PeaNut 416,788
March 2009
Posts: 22,257
Layouts: 0
Loc: Living in Kim's Perfect World, again.

Posted: 2/15/2013 5:11:42 PM
Taxes collected on tobacco - in California - are used for: tobacco-related health education programs and disease research, medical & hospital care & treatment of patients who can't afford those services and for whom payment will not be made by any private coverage or federal program, programs for fire prevention, environmental convservation, protection, restoration, enhancement & maintenance of fish, waterfowl & wildlife habitat areas, & enhancement of state and local parks and recreation.


In Oregon, these taxes fund: police & fire services, schools, roads, parks & other public services, The Oregon Health Plan, senior citizens transportation services, & tobacco use reduction.


US Federal Cigarette Tax funds the State Children's Health Insurance Program (S-CHIP)



In other words, there are quite a few programs that depend on the revenue from people purchasing tobacco products.


Crazy, no?



lynlam
Don'tcha wish your girlfriend had spurs like mine?

PeaNut 46,248
August 2002
Posts: 6,800
Layouts: 41
Loc: Ohio

Posted: 2/15/2013 5:30:48 PM
"The industries we should be discouraging have purchased enough political influence to prevent any real policy change from happening. And this goes for both sides of the aisle. No one's hands are clean; they all take this dirty money whenever they can get it."
------------

And those "industries we should be discouraging" employ untold numbers of Americans and support many local and state economies, as well as our national economy.

How about we all butt out (pun intended) and let people eat/smoke/chew/grow/produce/buy/sell what they want to and what the market demands. The government has zero business picking who should win and who should lose. Zero.
Uploaded with iPhone client

Kymberlee
StuckOnPeas

PeaNut 32,544
March 2002
Posts: 2,082
Layouts: 1
Loc: where ever Uncle Sam sends us!

Posted: 2/15/2013 5:32:48 PM
I have asked myself this question before. It is the same way with corn subsidies. Has anyone ever seen the Penn and Teller bit about the way the gov't subsidizes the corn industry. It just makes me crazy! Wannapea is right; our country is all kinds of crazy. We give money to people to grow stuff that is bad for us and turn around and spend more money to pay for public service announcements telling us that the stuff we are paying to grow is bad for us. Makes no sense.

Penn and Teller

Fraidyscrapper
She calls me a Fun Sucker

PeaNut 38,100
May 2002
Posts: 13,565
Layouts: 0
Loc: Jersey Strong

Posted: 2/15/2013 5:44:52 PM

How about we all butt out (pun intended) and let people eat/smoke/chew/grow/produce/buy/sell what they want to and what the market demands. The government has zero business picking who should win and who should lose. Zero.
That would be more palatable to me if this industry in particular didn't have a history of baldly lying about the health impacts of their product, if they didn't have a history of manipulating the narcotic/addicting elements in their product. We also know that few adults make the free choice to use the product, given the history of how this industry has chosen to grow their markets. In addition, we do all bear the medical costs that result from the use of this product, which I think gives us all some skin in the game.

mapchic
Top Tier Pea

PeaNut 31,157
February 2002
Posts: 12,615
Layouts: 55
Loc: Chicagoland

Posted: 2/15/2013 5:44:57 PM
I think the real reason is because tobacco producing states have a strong voice early in the presidential primary process.

It's the same reason that Iowa corn and soy get some ridiculous subsidies and supports.

Every politician thinks in their heart of hearts that they will run for president some day and they don't want to make the mistake of pissing off voters in important primary states. It's worse than being an issue of lobbies and special interests... it's craven self interest on the part of politicians.

Nantini
Ancient Ancestor of Pea

PeaNut 274,935
August 2006
Posts: 5,850
Layouts: 8

Posted: 2/15/2013 6:42:15 PM
I heard yesterday we are starting to export more tobacco to China.
Finally we have something going the other way.


SillyRabbit
PeaFixture

PeaNut 104,457
September 2003
Posts: 3,094
Layouts: 12
Loc: Where The Grass Is Blue

Posted: 2/15/2013 7:18:40 PM
I find that interesting. I live in Ky which was at one time a very big producer of tobacco. It may still be. I know when I was a little girl everybody and their brother raised tobacco around here. It's very hard physical labor because the entire process is manual but there was good money in it and it generally was collected at Christmas time. Now, nobody grows it around here. Seriously, I know dozens who used to grow it and not one of those people still does. I guess only the super large scale farmers are involved with tobacco anymore. And large scale farmers generally have powerful voices in Washington.
Uploaded with iPhone client

maddiesmum
BucketHead

PeaNut 574,034
December 2012
Posts: 975
Layouts: 0
Loc: Obamaland

Posted: 2/15/2013 7:44:10 PM

How about we all butt out (pun intended) and let people eat/smoke/chew/grow/produce/buy/sell what they want to and what the market demands. The government has zero business picking who should win and who should lose. Zero.


Because second-hand smoke kills people. People like my mother who never smoked a day in her life but lived/worked/was in public with smokers. She died a hideous and painful death from lung cancer at age 61.

You don't think much before shooting your stupid mouth off, do you?

lynlam
Don'tcha wish your girlfriend had spurs like mine?

PeaNut 46,248
August 2002
Posts: 6,800
Layouts: 41
Loc: Ohio

Posted: 2/15/2013 8:11:01 PM
"Because second-hand smoke kills people. People like my mother who never smoked a day in her life but lived/worked/was in public with smokers. She died a hideous and painful death from lung cancer at age 61.

You don't think much before shooting your stupid mouth off, do you?"
-----------

I am sorry your mom died of lung cancer. Truly. But that changes nothing I said.

And if being a complete and utter bitch to a total stranger on the Internet helps you cope, go for it.

People are injured and die from things totally out of their control everyday.

My mother died of alcoholism, so should I demand the government take away others right to drink?

Drunk drivers kill people who would never drive drunk, so lets get the government to run car companies out of business, or alcohol companies.

People have nut allergies and sometimes they die from a reaction no matter how careful they are, so lets get the government to run nut growers out of business.

Sometimes people drown in pools even though they are good swimmers, so lets regulate pool makers out of business too.








Uploaded with iPhone client

lynlam
Don'tcha wish your girlfriend had spurs like mine?

PeaNut 46,248
August 2002
Posts: 6,800
Layouts: 41
Loc: Ohio

Posted: 2/15/2013 8:22:15 PM
"That would be more palatable to me if this industry in particular didn't have a history of baldly lying about the health impacts of their product, if they didn't have a history of manipulating the narcotic/addicting elements in their product. We also know that few adults make the free choice to use the product, given the history of how this industry has chosen to grow their markets. In addition, we do all bear the medical costs that result from the use of this product, which I think gives us all some skin in the game."
--------------

I don't disagree with you at all. The tobacco industry has much to be ashamed of. I hope and pray for the day when tobacco is a terrible memory...but I don't want the government to do it. Town by town or state by state, things can change and they have greatly changed in my lifetime. Government can have a hand in changing attitudes, and when approved by voters, enact smoking bans in public places. But using the power of the federal govt and the taxpayers money, to drive entire industries out if business? Hell no.

I am quite bothered by the notion that we all have "skin in the game" because of health care costs. Not saying you are wrong, but that it is wrong that we are in that position at all. My decisions should not have a financial impact on you. That is what is flawed with our healthcare system.

And thank you for a ration discussion, unlike others around here.
Uploaded with iPhone client

lynlam
Don'tcha wish your girlfriend had spurs like mine?

PeaNut 46,248
August 2002
Posts: 6,800
Layouts: 41
Loc: Ohio

Posted: 2/15/2013 8:41:38 PM
Huh...I posted two replies using the twopeas app, but they aren't showing up here on the main site. Strange. Well, hopefully they will pop up.

In the meantime, I want to ask fraidyscrapper something...

In regards to your "we all have skin in the game" train of thought...if we all have the right to police what people choose to do based upon what the behavior costs all of us collectively, then it is perfectly reasonable to demand that the government round up all the illegal immigrants and deport them immediately, because We spend $2 billion annually on illegal immigrants emergency health care.

Yet when those of us who are opposed to illegal immigration cite the monetary costs, we are vilified and ridiculed.

So, what is the difference?

maddiesmum
BucketHead

PeaNut 574,034
December 2012
Posts: 975
Layouts: 0
Loc: Obamaland

Posted: 2/15/2013 11:29:26 PM

My mother died of alcoholism, so should I demand the government take away others right to drink?


Your mother CHOSE to drink. My mother died from second-hand smoke. Big difference, dumb ass.

I don't want any sympathy from you, either. You're a typical head-up-your-ass tea party moron who only thinks things need to be changed when they affect you. Go to hell.

I-95
It's all just nonsense anyway!

PeaNut 97,456
July 2003
Posts: 20,385
Layouts: 0
Loc: California, NY & Orlando

Posted: 2/16/2013 12:01:29 AM

In regards to your "we all have skin in the game" train of thought...if we all have the right to police what people choose to do based upon what the behavior costs all of us collectively, then it is perfectly reasonable to demand that the government round up all the illegal immigrants and deport them immediately, because We spend $2 billion annually on illegal immigrants emergency health care.

Yet when those of us who are opposed to illegal immigration cite the monetary costs, we are vilified and ridiculed.

So, what is the difference?


They may cost us $2B in health care, but they also contribute to society too. They work jobs for less money than Americans will, or do jobs that Americans won't do. We probably save more than $2B in grocery bills because of all the produce that is picked by illegals. A huge number of illegals pay taxes too, and they spend money in our communities,which allows businesses to stay in business, and creates jobs for Americans.

I'm not saying I think that it's right to have a huge number of undocumented workers here, but to say they don't contribute to the economy is simply untrue.

Gia LuPeaA
StuckOnPeas

PeaNut 416,889
March 2009
Posts: 2,918
Layouts: 0
Loc: The right place, at the right time.

Posted: 2/16/2013 12:38:20 AM

Big difference, dumb ass.
You're a typical head-up-your-ass tea party moron who only thinks things need to be changed when they affect you. Go to hell.

Name calling and ridicule doesn't work as well as reasoned arguments and appeal to logic.

maddiesmum
BucketHead

PeaNut 574,034
December 2012
Posts: 975
Layouts: 0
Loc: Obamaland

Posted: 2/16/2013 12:53:21 AM

Name calling and ridicule doesn't work as well as reasoned arguments and appeal to logic.


Right. Reasoned arguments and logic mean nothing to Lynlam; she's too dim to understand anything and too close-minded to see anyone else's view. Go and handslap someone else; I couldn't care less what you think.

Gia LuPeaA
StuckOnPeas

PeaNut 416,889
March 2009
Posts: 2,918
Layouts: 0
Loc: The right place, at the right time.

Posted: 2/16/2013 1:02:16 AM

she's too dim to understand anything
Calling someone dim won't make you any smarter.

gale w
shiny farmwife

PeaNut 40,275
June 2002
Posts: 23,848
Layouts: 52
Loc: Indiana

Posted: 2/16/2013 1:13:46 AM

Bear in mind that we still continue to pay farmers NOT to grow certain food crops.
That's not as nice for farmers as it sounds. Lots of expense and work is still involved.

maddiesmum
BucketHead

PeaNut 574,034
December 2012
Posts: 975
Layouts: 0
Loc: Obamaland

Posted: 2/16/2013 1:24:49 AM

Calling someone dim won't make you any smarter.


And calling someone out for calling someone dim when they don't give a rat's a$$ what you think makes you a dumb $hit who has nothing worthwhile to do in life except handslap other people. Pathetic.

I'm anxiously awaiting your witty response.

Gia LuPeaA
StuckOnPeas

PeaNut 416,889
March 2009
Posts: 2,918
Layouts: 0
Loc: The right place, at the right time.

Posted: 2/16/2013 1:44:02 AM

don't give a rat's a$$ what you think
I see.

Nicole in TX
The Peas did what we do and went insane over it

PeaNut 16,696
June 2001
Posts: 19,213
Layouts: 65
Loc: Not so obvious

Posted: 2/16/2013 5:27:48 AM

This country is all sorts of crazy.



lynlam
Don'tcha wish your girlfriend had spurs like mine?

PeaNut 46,248
August 2002
Posts: 6,800
Layouts: 41
Loc: Ohio

Posted: 2/16/2013 6:48:47 AM

Right. Reasoned arguments and logic mean nothing to Lynlam; she's too dim to understand anything and too close-minded to see anyone else's view. Go and handslap someone else; I couldn't care less what you think.


That's rich, since I have never seen anything even close to resembling a reasoned argument or logic from your filthy mouth.

Now to pivot and talk to a grown up who DOES know how to have a reasonable discussion...



They may cost us $2B in health care, but they also contribute to society too. They work jobs for less money than Americans will, or do jobs that Americans won't do. We probably save more than $2B in grocery bills because of all the produce that is picked by illegals. A huge number of illegals pay taxes too, and they spend money in our communities,which allows businesses to stay in business, and creates jobs for Americans.

I'm not saying I think that it's right to have a huge number of undocumented workers here, but to say they don't contribute to the economy is simply untrue.


Yes, what you say is true to an extent. But I argue that the money "saved" in grocery bills is blood money. These people slave away in the fields, for pittance, no workers comp coverage, no protections, and yes, that saves us money at the end. Is it worth it though? Isn't that condoning a modern form of slavery in a way?

And the original discussion (before foul mouth children rudely interrupted) was about the government/society choosing which industries were "undesireable". These companies - tobacco, fast food, potato chip makers, firearms manufacturers, etc etc - contribute billions upon billions to the economy as well. Your argument that illegals contribute TO society more than they take from it is the exact same thing I was saying about undesireable companies.


lynlam
Don'tcha wish your girlfriend had spurs like mine?

PeaNut 46,248
August 2002
Posts: 6,800
Layouts: 41
Loc: Ohio

Posted: 2/16/2013 6:58:38 AM
My first reply from my iPad has not shown up yet, so I shall resubmit it (and expand upon it). If it pops up twice, forgive me.


Your mother CHOSE to drink. My mother died from second-hand smoke. Big difference, dumb ass.

I don't want any sympathy from you, either. You're a typical head-up-your-ass tea party moron who only thinks things need to be changed when they affect you. Go to hell.


My mother had a DISEASE you MORON. She did not choose it, it was given to her at birth, she fought it, and she lost time after time after time.

So to use YOUR lack of logic - your mother CHOSE to go out into society where people smoked. If she had just stayed home, she'd still be alive today.

But then again, maybe not. People die of lung cancer, even people who have never smoked NOR spent much time around smokers. It happens. Just like people who have always eaten healthy and exercised drop dead of heart attacks in their early 40's. SHIT HAPPENS.

See, we can all make choices that have long term consequences that we can't predict. It's only ignorant asses like yourself who think that the only way to "protect" people is to take away their choices, and destroy the lives of everyone who earns a living from the industry that you abhor.

And with that, Maddiesmum dear. You are going on ignore. I have no stomach for your brand of nasty ignorance.

scrappower
Allons-y Alonso

PeaNut 174,150
October 2004
Posts: 15,754
Layouts: 0

Posted: 2/16/2013 7:04:56 AM

My mother had a DISEASE you MORON. She did not choose it, it was given to her at birth, she fought it, and she lost time after time after time.


Sorry but alcoholism does have a choice involved. It is not the same as somebody dying from second hand smoke, not even close.

lynlam
Don'tcha wish your girlfriend had spurs like mine?

PeaNut 46,248
August 2002
Posts: 6,800
Layouts: 41
Loc: Ohio

Posted: 2/16/2013 7:19:48 AM

Sorry but alcoholism does have a choice involved. It is not the same as somebody dying from second hand smoke, not even close.


yeah, it is, in the context of this discussion. And I'd like to see you battle a disease like alcoholism. Some people can make the choice to beat it. Some people can't. My mother couldn't. So in order to protect others who might develop this disease they may not be able to control, let's have the government use their power to shut down the entire industry and take away the choice of everyone else in the nation to drink.

But then again, we saw how well that worked once before, right?

scrappower
Allons-y Alonso

PeaNut 174,150
October 2004
Posts: 15,754
Layouts: 0

Posted: 2/16/2013 7:58:06 AM
I simply do not agree with you Lynlam at all. And alcohol shouldn't be banned, but tobacco in my mind should. We know that it causes cancer and other diseases for those using it and those subjected to it, there are no redeeming qualities. The same can't be said about alcohol. The argument is not the same.

missbitts
Rampage!

PeaNut 273,938
August 2006
Posts: 5,447
Layouts: 50
Loc: On the right side.

Posted: 2/16/2013 9:55:09 AM

there are no redeeming qualities. The same can't be said about alcohol.


The same can absolutely be said about alcohol. There are no health benefits from drinking that even come close to outweighing the risks. There are some benefits from both alcohol consumption and nicotine uptake, but none that are much better for you than not smoking or drinking to begin with.

Krazyscrapper
StuckOnPeas

PeaNut 131,612
February 2004
Posts: 2,912
Layouts: 0
Loc: Sonoma County

Posted: 2/16/2013 11:12:12 AM

And I'd like to see you battle a disease like alcoholism. Some people can make the choice to beat it. Some people can't. My mother couldn't. So in order to protect others who might develop this disease they may not be able to control, let's have the government use their power to shut down the entire industry and take away the choice of everyone else in the nation to drink.


Actually I have seen the battle with alcoholism. My brother and he lost it. But it was his choice to start drinking and no matter how many times help was offered he didn't take it. All a matter of choice. There are thousands out there who have made the choice to stop drinkng and yes its a daily battle but they are making the choice to fight it everyday.


maddiesmum
BucketHead

PeaNut 574,034
December 2012
Posts: 975
Layouts: 0
Loc: Obamaland

Posted: 2/16/2013 11:23:07 AM

And I'd like to see you battle a disease like alcoholism


And I'd like to see you battle cancer as bravely as my mother did. Her cancer spread to her brain, colon and bones and she never stopped trying to beat it. She was having experimental brain treatments right up until her death. From diagnosis to death she had 13 months.

Don't you ever compare your mother's alcoholism (her choice to start and/or stop drinking) to my mother's cancer. Ever.

scrappower
Allons-y Alonso

PeaNut 174,150
October 2004
Posts: 15,754
Layouts: 0

Posted: 2/16/2013 11:48:53 AM

The same can absolutely be said about alcohol. There are no health benefits from drinking that even come close to outweighing the risks. There are some benefits from both alcohol consumption and nicotine uptake, but none that are much better for you than not smoking or drinking to begin with.


I again disagree. The biggest difference to me is that one smoking, even lightly affects everyone's health around them, even after they have put it out. If someone drinks responsibly the same cannot be said. You don't have to agree with me, but that is my opinion.

maddiesmum
BucketHead

PeaNut 574,034
December 2012
Posts: 975
Layouts: 0
Loc: Obamaland

Posted: 2/16/2013 11:50:21 AM



And with that, Maddiesmum dear. You are going on ignore. I have no stomach for your brand of nasty ignorance.




It's like she's looking in a mirror! No one is nastier or more ignorant than you, Lynlam.

scrappower
Allons-y Alonso

PeaNut 174,150
October 2004
Posts: 15,754
Layouts: 0

Posted: 2/16/2013 11:50:43 AM

I think Scrappower is wrong to think people can simply choose to get better and not drink


Really? You don't think anyone with alcoholism can choose to not drink and get better? I have seen it happen with three people in my life. Two on their own, one with AA, all are sober over 10 years now. So yes, it is a choice. An easy one. Of course not, but still a choice.

I-95
It's all just nonsense anyway!

PeaNut 97,456
July 2003
Posts: 20,385
Layouts: 0
Loc: California, NY & Orlando

Posted: 2/16/2013 12:03:57 PM

I think Scrappower is wrong to think people can simply choose to get better and not drink.


I disagree....somewhat. I don't think it's a 'simple' decision by any means, but it is a decision the alcoholic makes,to turn their lives around. My father made that decision, and although he always referred to himself as a recovering (not recovered) alcoholic, he didn't take another drink from the day he made the decision, until the day he died...26 years.

An alcoholic will always be at risk, and never be free of the disease, but they can stop drinking and lead a healthy life.

scrappower
Allons-y Alonso

PeaNut 174,150
October 2004
Posts: 15,754
Layouts: 0

Posted: 2/16/2013 12:06:13 PM

An alcoholic will always be at risk, and never be free of the disease, but they can stop drinking and lead a healthy life.


That is exactly what I meant.

I-95
It's all just nonsense anyway!

PeaNut 97,456
July 2003
Posts: 20,385
Layouts: 0
Loc: California, NY & Orlando

Posted: 2/16/2013 12:16:20 PM

Now to pivot and talk to a grown up who DOES know how to have a reasonable discussion...





Yes, what you say is true to an extent. But I argue that the money "saved" in grocery bills is blood money. These people slave away in the fields, for pittance, no workers comp coverage, no protections, and yes, that saves us money at the end. Is it worth it though? Isn't that condoning a modern form of slavery in a way?

And the original discussion (before foul mouth children rudely interrupted) was about the government/society choosing which industries were "undesireable". These companies - tobacco, fast food, potato chip makers, firearms manufacturers, etc etc - contribute billions upon billions to the economy as well. Your argument that illegals contribute TO society more than they take from it is the exact same thing I was saying about undesireable companies.


Phrased like that, I agree with both statements. I'm not big on the Feds telling us what's good for us, and what's not. Unfortunately, as a population, we sometimes prove we are not capable of making good decisions for ourselves. However, subsidizing the tobacco industry with Federal $, then subsidizing the those who smoke and have no health insurance when they get sick, is distasteful.

And what did you do to piss off Maddiesmom? Jeez, I almost NEVER agree with you on anything, but we manage to disagree without calling each other morons...oh wait, I forgot, I'm a grown up!!

missbitts
Rampage!

PeaNut 273,938
August 2006
Posts: 5,447
Layouts: 50
Loc: On the right side.

Posted: 2/16/2013 12:32:17 PM
Scrappower, I was commenting on your statement that I quoted about the "redeeming qualities" of alcohol, not about whether smoking or drinking hurt anyone outside the smoker or drinker. There are no redeeming qualities of either activity that outweigh the negative health effects.

Not addressing you, but why is anyone "fighting" about which is worse? Neither one is very good for you, why does there have to be a contest?

As to the topic of the thread, I agree with lynlam and I95 about the gov't not dictating or subsidizing what "it" feels is good/bad for us.

scrappower
Allons-y Alonso

PeaNut 174,150
October 2004
Posts: 15,754
Layouts: 0

Posted: 2/16/2013 12:51:44 PM

There are no redeeming qualities of either activity that outweigh the negative health effects.


And I disagree with this comment, that is what I was stating, that is all. I don't agree with your assessment. Alcohol used sparingly can have positive health impacts as well as be used for things such as preserving foods and other things. I don't find the same to be true with tobacco.

While I would love to see tobacco banned, I do know that it will never happen and that is fine. It really isn't something I get worked up over. Meh.

leftturnonly
Will trade mosquitoes for cookies.

PeaNut 416,788
March 2009
Posts: 22,257
Layouts: 0
Loc: Living in Kim's Perfect World, again.

Posted: 2/16/2013 2:26:53 PM
There most certainly are redeeming qualities to alcohol in moderation! (I'm agreeing with Scrappower, fwiw. )



My grandmother-in-law was given a prescription for cigarettes to help her nerves WAY back in the day. Hard to imagine now, isn't it? Not surprisingly, she died of cancer.

Weird as this is, I know someone who smokes to help her asthma. I have no idea if she's dead wrong or not, but after smoking for the past 4 decades and being responsible for the care of several very ill family members for many years AND having sustained a terrible spinal injury that has left her permanently disabled herself, who's to say it doesn't help her through each day? She's tried quitting and her asthma got much worse. If it's something that would take time to get through before it got better, it's not realistic in her situation. The government should not have a say in this. I HATE that she smokes, but it's not my call either.




nighthawk
PeaFixture

PeaNut 118,730
December 2003
Posts: 3,675
Layouts: 0

Posted: 2/16/2013 2:33:13 PM
I have interest I just can't keep up with it all.

redboots
BucketHead

PeaNut 399,301
November 2008
Posts: 915
Layouts: 0

Posted: 2/16/2013 3:10:35 PM

My mother had a DISEASE you MORON. She did not choose it, it was given to her at birth, she fought it, and she lost time after time after time.



I am not trying to beat you up, Lynlam. I know how painful your mother's passing has been for you and hope you are finding some peace.

However, I disagree greatly with your assertion that alcoholism is a disease and that your mother had no control over her choice to drink.

Cancer is a disease. ALS is a disease. People do not choose to pick up a bottle of cancer and drink it every day. Likewise with people who suffer from a myriad of diseases, many of them terminal and life-threatening.

People with life-threatening and terminal illnesses don't have the option of just stopping the behavior that causes their disease. Addicts always have that choice. They may not be strong enough to make that choice, but that does not discount the fact that the choice exists.

Comparing alcoholism to cancer is apples to oranges, IMO.
1 2 >
Show/Hide Icons . Show/Hide Signatures
Hide
{{ title }}
{{ icon }}
{{ body }}
{{ footer }}