Politicians and smoking ...

[Member2019]

I am not singling out Obama, but he's just the latest in a string of hypocritical politicians and, in general, Americans. Blame others instead of yourself. Waste time and legislation on others to prevent yourself from doing something. In general, involve other people into a problem caused by ... gasp ... individual choice.

I'm an American Libertarian. If you want to drink, smoke, etc... fine by me. Just make sure you're not involving me, especially with any irresponsibility. I'm not against smoking in restaurants, I'm just for enforcing the statues and requirements that non-smoking sections not be smoking at all. I'm for choice.

Unfortunately, it seems people are all about not only banning in this country, but blaming others. There's no accountability. From the people who won't point the finger at themselves to the establishments that try to fit in more tables, instead of putting in fans and plants to ensure smoking and non-smoking really are separate. No one is accountable.

And now we just have another politician who exemplifies the issue. It's ironic because I've never drank, never smoked, never done drugs and never held a firearm, and yet I'm one of the few people that am fighting for everyone's right to do what they want?

Why can't people see it like I do? Stop putting "everyone" into the same group and labelling them, and just separate out the few that make it a problem? The few that are irresponsible. The few that don't care. Oh the irony!

Related story:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090622/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_tobacco

 

[titsrock]

In short, your beliefs are as dangerous as the cigarettes you want to protect. You should be against cigarettes for these reasons, which I've copied/pasted from the American Cancer Society

Secondhand smoke causes other kinds of diseases and deaths

Secondhand smoke can cause harm in many ways. In the United States alone, each year it is responsible for:

* an estimated 46,000 deaths from heart disease in non-smokers who live with smokers
* about 3,400 lung cancer deaths in non-smoking adults
* other breathing problems in non-smokers, including coughing, mucus, chest discomfort, and reduced lung function
* 150,000 to 300,000 lung infections (such as pneumonia and bronchitis) in children younger than 18 months of age, which result in 7,500 to 15,000 hospitalizations annually
* increases in the number and severity of asthma attacks in about 200,000 to 1 million children who have asthma
* more than 750,000 middle ear infections in children

Pregnant women exposed to secondhand smoke are also at increased risk of having low birth weight babies.

America is not the same country it was in 1770. We have roughly 349.5 million more Americans today than what the Founding Fathers envisioned given life expectancies of people in the 1770s versus where they are today.

Libertarian values make sense in some ways, but also make no sense in other ways. Libertarian values allow for people to actually behave dumber and crazier and more reckless and harmful than they do now...:dunno:

Regulations, Protections, Government = Safe Society:thumbsup:

 

[Legzman]

Nice post Prof :thumbsup:

 

[Mr. Daystar]

Part of what help me quit, was the knowledge that I wasn't giving anymore tax dollars, to a political structure, that at the time, was denying me a basic right I deserved. Health was a primary reason of course, but it helped get me through the hard times.

 

[titsrock]

Part of the tax dollars collected from cigs pay for an anti-smoking/educational campaign, of course. But, of course, everyone knows how detrimental to his/her health smoking is all along, right? Our education system is the best in the world, Americans are the smartest people on the planet...etc.

 

[Member2019]

Did you read my post and understand my principles?

In short, your beliefs are as dangerous as the cigarettes you want to protect.

Sigh, it is not cigarettes I want to protect. Again, sigh ...

You should be against cigarettes for these reasons, which I've copied/pasted from the American Cancer Society
Secondhand smoke causes other kinds of diseases and deaths
Secondhand smoke can cause harm in many ways ...

STOP THE MADNESS!!!

If you would stop to understand my point, it would be that it is the irresponsibility of smokers that cause second hand smoke. Smokers who actually care will keep it to themselves.

Irresponsible smokers are why gas stations blow up which is only second to serious mechanical failure. It's that type of responsibility that I do NOT excuse!

Please, understand my point!

Side note, and just more argumentative: Even if I was going to given into your "second hand smoke" statistics, this only proves further how much of a hypocrite a politician like, say, Obama is (again, I wasn't trying to single him out). He didn't even keep his promise to his wife, who -- based on your statements -- is a "victim" of second hand smoke. Again, even that argument is petty, but an example of where I could go.

America is not the same country it was in 1770 ...

That statement is getting old. Too bad people like Ben Franklin didn't find a way to preserve himself. He'd be ripping many people a new one. Ironically Ben understood nature, physics and humankind better than a great majority of Americans today do. Very sad.

Libertarian values make sense in some ways, but also make no sense in other ways. Libertarian values allow for people to actually behave dumber and crazier and more reckless and harmful than they do now...:dunno:
Regulations, Protections, Government = Safe Society:thumbsup:

Government telling you individual can and cannot do individually = totalitarian

Government enforcing rules to protect individuals from the actions of other, irresponsible individuals = regulation/protection

Get it right! Do NOT equate one with the other!

Otherwise, everyone had better stop drinking while they are at it. Or do we need to revisit the statistics on alcohol abuse by even the most law abiding citizens? You start tearing one down, more come down with it.

 

[member979979]

But if people stop smoking, then the states make no money.

 

[Member2019]

But if people stop smoking, then the states make no money.

On those taxes, correct. Although it's still a good export crop for the US.

As I often joke with my foreign colleagues, "keep that smoking up, it's our one, long-term export that you guys seem to never to give up, unlike ourselves."

 

[Roughneck]

The two basic premises of libertarianism are:
* The initiation of force or fraud is immoral.
* Individuals have the right to do whatever they want, so long as it doesn't interfere with the equal rights of other individuals.

Libertarian values allow for people to actually behave dumber and crazier and more reckless and harmful than they do now...

As long as the actions of those other dumber/crazier/reckless/harmful others don't harm you or affect you in any way, why do you care?

Why do you guys have this constant need, nay! Desire! - to control your fellow man, especially if what he does does you no injury? For all your avowed faith in progressivism and pride in being "liberal", y'all are no different than a bunch of Puritans ("Puritanism - the haunting fear that someone, somewhere is happy" - H L Mencken)!


cheers,

 

[Roughneck]

The two basic premises of libertarianism are:
* The initiation of force or fraud is immoral.
* Individuals have the right to do whatever they want, so long as it doesn't interfere with the equal rights of other individuals.

No libertarian society so construed can survive if people aren't held responsible for their thoughts, words and deeds. In fact, one of the fundamental corner-stones of libertarian law stems from property rights and the enforcement of contract.

Libertarian values allow for people to actually behave dumber and crazier and more reckless and harmful than they do now...

As long as the actions of those other dumber/crazier/reckless/harmful others don't harm you or affect you in any way, why do you care?

Why do you guys have this constant need, nay! Desire! - to control your fellow man, especially if what he does does you no injury?

For all your avowed faith in progressivism and pride in being "liberal", y'all are no different than a bunch of Puritans ("Puritanism - the haunting fear that someone, somewhere is happy" - H L Mencken)!


cheers,

 

[power-san]

Anything that causes Cancer gets pulled from the shelves. Why not smokes?

 

[Dawn]

In short, your beliefs are as dangerous as the cigarettes you want to protect. You should be against cigarettes for these reasons, which I've copied/pasted from the American Cancer Society

Secondhand smoke causes other kinds of diseases and deaths

Secondhand smoke can cause harm in many ways. In the United States alone, each year it is responsible for:

* an estimated 46,000 deaths from heart disease in non-smokers who live with smokers
* about 3,400 lung cancer deaths in non-smoking adults
* other breathing problems in non-smokers, including coughing, mucus, chest discomfort, and reduced lung function
* 150,000 to 300,000 lung infections (such as pneumonia and bronchitis) in children younger than 18 months of age, which result in 7,500 to 15,000 hospitalizations annually
* increases in the number and severity of asthma attacks in about 200,000 to 1 million children who have asthma
* more than 750,000 middle ear infections in children

Pregnant women exposed to secondhand smoke are also at increased risk of having low birth weight babies.

America is not the same country it was in 1770. We have roughly 349.5 million more Americans today than what the Founding Fathers envisioned given life expectancies of people in the 1770s versus where they are today.

Libertarian values make sense in some ways, but also make no sense in other ways. Libertarian values allow for people to actually behave dumber and crazier and more reckless and harmful than they do now...:dunno:

Regulations, Protections, Government = Safe Society:thumbsup:

If there was as much research done on other consumables than there is on tobacco, there would be a lot of things banned. And i'm thinking mostly about petroleum and coal.

But usually, people don't think of those consumables as badly as the tobacco mainly because our economy and industry requires them (as if we are dumb enough to not found other ways...).

There is so many things around us that amplifies the risks of cancer or other disease that i found very ironic the way that tobacco is blamed, demonized and -almost- nothing else is.

I'm all in favor of regulations, protections and governement interventionism (to some extent tho - i'm canadian after all and it works pretty well the way things works over here, not perfect but eh) but... why demonising tobacco and stay blind on all other things?

I wonder if there was as much propaganda to demonize petroleum and coal, as much dollars invested in research on how those consumables are toxic, if the tobacco industry would be the (irrational) scapegoat of people-who-are-worried-about-social-health.

:2 cents:

 

[Member2019]

In fact, one of the fundamental corner-stones of libertarian law stems from property rights and the enforcement of contract.

Tongue-in-cheek
"No, no, that's a classic, extremist right-winger!
That's why Libertarians are just Republicans without the sex issues!"
sigh ...

For all your avowed faith in progressivism and pride in being "liberal", y'all are no different than a bunch of Puritans ("Puritanism - the haunting fear that someone, somewhere is happy" - H L Mencken)!

Damn ... no, really, damn. That's the best way I've heard it put!

There are Democrats, Liberals and Puritans. As much as they deny it, Puritans are the intolerant zealots of the left that have found their own Religion -- pridefully opposing traditional religion -- based on beliefs that knows no individual rights and property and is as far removed from Libertarianism as you can get.

After all, weren't Puritans claiming to escape religious persecution? And they were claiming not to be ruled by religion, but of a greater set of beliefs for the common good? Damn, that quote hits it! And damn if it doesn't fit Obama like a glove!

From gay marriage ("although my religion doesn't allow me ...") to now smoking, and all the other things ... damn! People are looking for a "puritan" type leader. They are looking for a "puritan" way. And we're all guilty of letting it happen. Damn, wow ... epiphany!

If there was as much research done on other consumables than there is on tobacco, there would be a lot of things banned. And i'm thinking mostly about petroleum and coal.

Indeed! I start talking about sulfur (SOx) and radioactive (U23x) content in coal and how you're far more likely to have health issues from it than any nuclear power plant and people give me dumb stares. Reminds me of the classic dumb stares with Reagan's "trees create smog" (when taking out of the context it was used in).

The point is that people get so narrow-minded and blindly-aligned on right/wrong that they utterly miss the greater realities, contexts and issues involved. "X is bad" -- as Mr. Mackey in South Park puts so effectively. If I wanted a simplistic answer, I'd attend 4th grade (or lower).

 

[Dawn]

Reminds me of the classic dumb stares with Reagan's "trees create smog" (when taking out of the context it was used in).

Funnily enough, the biggest element responsible for smog over Montreal is... wood burned in chimneys for recreative purpose and not cars or industries as many would like to think it is.

 

[nothingandless]

well, when everybody quits and the politicians are successful in keeping us safe and healthy we'll have another thing to bitch about: the unjust taxes put on other stuff to ake up for the loss of revenue created by tobacco. hurrah!

 

[titsrock]

The two basic premises of libertarianism are:
* The initiation of force or fraud is immoral.
* Individuals have the right to do whatever they want, so long as it doesn't interfere with the equal rights of other individuals.

As long as the actions of those other dumber/crazier/reckless/harmful others don't harm you or affect you in any way, why do you care?

Because the entire record of human history points to HARM! That's the point! Man is not able to simply "let alone."

Why do you guys have this constant need, nay! Desire! - to control your fellow man, especially if what he does does you no injury? For all your avowed faith in progressivism and pride in being "liberal", y'all are no different than a bunch of Puritans ("Puritanism - the haunting fear that someone, somewhere is happy" - H L Mencken)!

Puritans look for their guidance in a completely fabricated place--religion. Government is man made and exists "in reality" not "in imagination" and can be regulated to serve the interests of every man/women/child. There's the difference.

 

[Member2019]

Not so coincidentally ...

Funnily enough, the biggest element responsible for smog over Montreal is... wood burned in chimneys for recreative purpose and not cars or industries as many would like to think it is.

Not so coincidentally I had this argument with several people I worked with on Wall Street who lived on Long Island.

They were against wind farms, nuclear power and what not -- several (making 2.5-3x as much money as I), actively funded PACs and other lobbyists to prevent their building on Long Island. But then complained about the cost of heating fuel, so they fired off their wood in their chimney to "save money." All while bitching about the cost of heating fuel and the "evil oil companies."

In the case of one guy, I just finally had to say it ... "you're the poster child of why the environmental policies are so fucked up in this country." Even more ironically is the law in the state of the New York that preserves his individual, home owner right to burn wood. Sometimes I just want to shoot myself in the head and get it over with.

 

[titsrock]

Re: Did you read my post and understand my principles?

Sigh, it is not cigarettes I want to protect. Again, sigh ...

You don't seem to understand this, so let's try a different approach.

Bad things that harm people--are not good. People create bad things all the time--for profit, for glory, or by mistake. Just because something BAD exists doesn't mean it should.

While this bill doesn't remove smoking--it takes a lot of the "oversight" away from Big Tobacco, which is a helpful start.

That statement is getting old. Too bad people like Ben Franklin didn't find a way to preserve himself. He'd be ripping many people a new one. Ironically Ben understood nature, physics and humankind better than a great majority of Americans today do. Very sad.

Ben Franklin certainly wouldn't be a Libertarian. He argued for the Turkey as the National Bird and Symbol of the U.S. Perhaps that fact blows away any illusion to Founding Father Libertarianism.:dunno:

The basic structure of our Gov't--3 branches --is great. Nobody wants to change that. But there is too much population and too much technological progress for a lot of the "freedoms" that originally existed. We are not under threat from Indian attacks, we don't use muskets and cannon anymore, etc.

Government telling you individual can and cannot do individually = totalitarian

Government enforcing rules to protect individuals from the actions of other, irresponsible individuals = regulation/protection

Get it right! Do NOT equate one with the other!

Otherwise, everyone had better stop drinking while they are at it. Or do we need to revisit the statistics on alcohol abuse by even the most law abiding citizens? You start tearing one down, more come down with it.

I think your use of Totalitarism is limited. Totalitarian gov't "make it up as they go along." Our Gov't is Representative Democracy--we elect people to make decisions and carry out the functions of gov't.

Maybe our positions can be comprised by the elimination of all Political Parties and all forms of Lobbying.

Surely those two things conform to Libertarianism, right?:thumbsup:

 

[Dawn]

Re: Did you read my post and understand my principles?

Maybe our positions can be comprised by the elimination of (...) all forms of Lobbying.

With that, you get my vote

 

[Member2019]

Sorry, I must be stupid, but all this seems "subjective," not "objective" ...

Because the entire record of human history points to HARM! That's the point! Man is not able to simply "let alone."

And in that case, Libertarians believe in prosecuting people, regardless of their "excuse" for that "HARM."

E.g., alcohol consumption is not an excuse that gets you a reduced charge when someone dies as a result of your actions when inebriated.

Puritans look for their guidance in a completely fabricated place--religion.

Oh you didn't just say that! Could you open that door for me any better?! Seriously!

You just made my point!

Puritans claimed prosecution by established religions they were trying to escape. What are leftists claiming of righties? Yeah, you didn't think that through now did you?

All Puritans did was end up creating a new set of "rules" that were very "subjective" and they impressed them on everyone else and, worse yet, judged others who did not follow them.

Government is man made and exists "in reality" not "in imagination" and can be regulated to serve the interests of every man/women/child. There's the difference.

I see people with "rules" that they "believe" they "must follow" or "else."

Hmmm, can you take me through this "religion but not religion but made up religion" stuff again? I'm sorry, I must be stupid, but all this seems "subjective" and not "objective."

Or maybe, just maybe, the only way we can be "objective" is by ...
- Protecting individual rights, and
- Prosecuting those individuals who do not respect the rights of others

Everything else is "subjective."

Here's my "religion" ...
- Stop blaming others for your problems
- Start blaming yourself
- Do what you want
- But don't let that affect others

That means ...
- Individual choice of assembly, press, speech, etc...
- Individual choice of defense (including guns), property, etc...
- Etc...

I guess I'm a "right-winger."