Personal responsibility??

Originally posted by no1marauder
Letting people die of causes that are treatable is not in our nature.

Here's another line you need to stop relying on, it dosen't matter how much you tax people to pay for their health care all treatable diseases will not be cured.

Politely, you're exagerating, more accurately, you're lying.

Originally posted by TerrierJack
Nothing in your post makes sense. Seriously? Have you ever been a smoker? The nicotine monkey can gaze at pictures all day and all night and still keep puffing. If you trust anyone to quit any addictive substance then you are delusional.

The pictures are obviously meant to discourage children from starting to smoke. If it works for one kid out of a mi ...[text shortened]... no one's rights and merely provides information to those who need it then WTF is wrong with it?

Like some many control freaks you get the concept of 'rights' ass backwards.

You are very welcome to provide 'information', but it is an entirely different situation when someone makes you provide information, and not your information, but prescribed information.

Do you see the difference?

This is a freedom of expression issue, a concept that was once held in high regard in the US.

Originally posted by TerrierJack
Because you would understand that the pictures (even if they were twice as horrible as the ones they showed me in driver's ed) would have ZERO impact on a smoker. People that smoke for 20 years know that it is harming them! They get up every morning and light up a Chesterfield and cough their lungs out after that first draw. It is not a secret! Nicoti ...[text shortened]... o use a construction crane to extract people's heads from their "underground" hiding places.

The idea is mainly to minimize the likelihood that people who currently do not smoke (especially children) will never start. If it also persuades a few existing smokers to try harder to quit, so much the better.

Originally posted by Wajoma
Like some many control freaks you get the concept of 'rights' ass backwards.

You are very welcome to provide 'information', but it is an entirely different situation when someone makes you provide information, and not your information, but prescribed information.

Do you see the difference?

This is a freedom of expression issue, a concept that was once held in high regard in the US.

Smoke harms me. Especially when people use their right inside or near the entrance/window.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
What is the relationship between jobs and taxes?

The higher the taxes the fewer the jobs.

Originally posted by Thomaster
Smoke harms me. Especially when people use their right inside or near the entrance/window.

No problem, that is an entirely different matter, if someone is blowing smoke in a window and that window belongs to you, yes you have a right to defend, dosen't mean you have a right to deface their product.

Now there's an idea Thomaster, you can buy the cigarettes, put a warning on them, then sell them again.

You're onto it.

Originally posted by Wajoma
No problem, that is an entirely different matter, if someone is blowing smoke in a window and that window belongs to you, yes you have a right to defend, dosen't mean you have a right to deface their product.

Now there's an idea Thomaster, you can buy the cigarettes, put a warning on them, then sell them again.

You're onto it.

Welcome to Australia

Originally posted by quackquack
It is inconceivable that pictures would have zero impact.
(1) The idea that everyone who is dumb enough to smoke has been sufficiently educated on the dangers is probably untrue. Furthermore, the idea that no one would change their opinion from a visual image instead of a text image is probably also untrue. Cigarette companies spend millions creatin ...[text shortened]... rous addictive habit. The government has an interest in discouraging new people from smoking.

So, you've never smoked.

Originally posted by Eladar
The higher the taxes the fewer the jobs.

So how do you explain that countries with relatively high taxes (e.g. Netherlands, Norway, Denmark, Sweden) also have relatively high employment rates? Do you have any empirical evidence that would support your assertion?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_employment_rate

Originally posted by kmax87
Welcome to Australia

Yeah cheers, I like the way the Aussie women call you 'doll' or 'hun' or 'luv' things like that, complete strangers, don't you try it though.

Originally posted by Wajoma
Politely, you're exagerating, more accurately, you're lying.

Politely you're annoying, more accurately you're a pain in the butt.

Originally posted by Wajoma
Yeah cheers, I like the way the Aussie women call you 'doll' or 'hun' or 'luv' things like that, complete strangers, don't you try it though.

they allow blokes to call them pet and or luv. its a tone and confidence thing. pull up short and it gives them the creeps for sure.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Shouldn't people be taught in schools that smoking is bad m'kay? Then they can decide for themselves if they want to take those risks.

why stop at tobacco? why not allow pot, meth, oxytocin, and gladiatorial contests to the death?

did Al Gore really turn on his former masters, or just stop supporting them in public?

i.e., tobacco lobbies.

The tax revenue generated at the state and federal levels by smokers is necessary for the continued operation of the government. Look at the numbers. Also look and see that the majority of US smokers live below the poverty level. Smoking is highly addictive and adding warnings does little to change the behavior of most smokers. I have been a smoker for almost 43 years and keep trying to quit and will quit one day. I guess that growing my own tobacco is an option I might examine,lol.