Login |  Register




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 43 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: HIV in DC, other things...
PostPosted: 090319 23:14 
Deserter
User avatar
Joined: 090226 22:52
Posts: 103
Scott wrote:
It's not inhibiting their ability to smoke any more than sales tax inhibits your ability to buy goods or income tax inhibits your ability to work.


True, except sales tax does inhibit my ability to buy goods and income tax does inhibit my ability to work. And since cigarettes are so heavily taxed, it does make a serious difference. Money doesn't grow on trees, does it? How am I expected to smoke if I can't afford it? It's like if people were taxed heavily for playing WOW, a lot of people would have to cut back, their ability to play having been inhibited. Or if Z was taxed every time he went nude for longer than 5 minutes. Mightn't he have to cut back on his nude time? I call that inhibiting.

_________________
"If I could take it all back now, I wouldn't. I would have did more shit that people said that I shouldn't." - Marshall Mathers

"I hardly ever leave my house or my neighborhood really, and that's not a sad thing." - Fiona Apple

"It's alright, ma. It's life and life only." - Bob Dylan


Profile  Offline
 
 Post subject: Re: HIV in DC, other things...
PostPosted: 090320 06:55 
Interactive Blogger
Interactive Blogger
User avatar
Joined: 090226 11:31
Posts: 306
Location: Japan
Okay, it doesn't seriously inhibit it.

Honestly, there is a tax on WoW. It's called "monthly fee".

I mean, if you're going to take that strict of a stance, then you might as well go all the way and say that prices inhibit your ability to do something. Yes, they do, but that's not quite in the spirit of my original point.


Profile  Offline
 
 Post subject: Re: HIV in DC, other things...
PostPosted: 090320 21:42 
Deserter
User avatar
Joined: 090226 22:52
Posts: 103
no, WoW has a monthly fee like cigarettes have a market cost. A WoW tax would be the government artificially inflating WoW's monthly fee to heights beyond regular taxes, like what they do with cigarettes. To 'inhibit' can be described as "to discourage from free or spontaneous activity especially through the operation of external social constraints," I consider artificial price inflation to be an external social constraint, and I don't really see how you would consider artificially high prices to not be a discouraging factor; not everybody has an extra few bucks per day they can throw away. There are things that are reasonably priced, and then there are tobacco products which the government inhibits the free use of through price inflation. It's better than them being banned all together but a few extra dollars per pack adds up to thousands of dollars in the long run; the government is basically taking blatant advantage of people''s addiction as well as using gov't power to make a moral judgment on all of us, the populus. It's the same as if the government tomorrow decided to add a couple bucks onto every CD purchase, my ability to purchase new music would be inhibited by the inflated price. Inhibit does not mean to prohibit entirely. I wouldn't feel free to buy as many CDs as I do now.

The point is that people who are a-okay with the goverment hiking up the price of cigarettes better be willing to accept that same fate when the crusty conservatives decide that your favorite passtimes are also a scourge on society. It's all merely about who you ask regarding what activites are dangerous or unnecessary or worthy of unproportionate taxes. I recently read a clinical study that stated WoW was in fact more addictive than cigarettes, shall we start that WoW tax now?

I'd say we should tax people who get together in groups larger than 3, groups are unnecessary and dangerous. For example if you go to the movies with 4 people you have to pay a couple more bucks per person. Or, instead, the safe way to go about it is to not have the government levy moral judgments on us with their taxes and we can have equal tax for all products or situations.

_________________
"If I could take it all back now, I wouldn't. I would have did more shit that people said that I shouldn't." - Marshall Mathers

"I hardly ever leave my house or my neighborhood really, and that's not a sad thing." - Fiona Apple

"It's alright, ma. It's life and life only." - Bob Dylan


Profile  Offline
 
 Post subject: Re: HIV in DC, other things...
PostPosted: 090321 10:06 
Interactive Blogger
Interactive Blogger
User avatar
Joined: 090301 04:38
Posts: 268
Location: Cleveland, OH
You are correct in saying that smoking is a conscious choice that people can make and have the freedom to make. However, just about every other activity that you mentioned poses no health threat to anyone else. If I participate in downhill biking, bungee jumping, or swimming with sharks, I don't bother someone else or endanger them with my activity. Someone smoking in a bar directly influences and impacts anyone around them. Secondhand smoke is demonstrably bothersome and hazardous to one's health, and it gets into your clothes. When it was allowed in restaurants, having a smoke cloud linger in the room wasn't exactly palatable. Besides, I'm not saying to ban smoking, I'm just saying I have zero problem with it costing more.

As for obesity, I'm against it merely because:
1) Our legions of fatasses provide more ammo for the rest of the world to laugh at us
2) It's 110% preventable and curable. Even if one is genetically predisposed for obesity (which I'm still doubtful of), you can "solve" the problem by just eating right and exercising. I'm not saying it'll be easy, but the alternative is to balloon up to the point where even doing simple things becomes a chore. There simply is zero excuse for obesity. It's not like it happens overnight.

PS - Panda, you have to be crazy if you think I'm not aware of the medical advances that you mentioned. Perhaps the intent of what I wrote was not properly projected.

Edited for a slight grammar tweak.

_________________
Bro locks got shoots. U can shoots bro. Drop ya rofl.


Profile  Offline
 
 Post subject: Re: HIV in DC, other things...
PostPosted: 090321 10:23 
Interactive Blogger
Interactive Blogger
User avatar
Joined: 090301 04:38
Posts: 268
Location: Cleveland, OH
IfTheLightTakesUs wrote:
not everybody has an extra few bucks per day they can throw away.

but a few extra dollars per pack adds up to thousands of dollars in the long run


If a smoker were to use this argument to prevent a price increase, they are wholeheartedly out of their league. Like, to hear that coming from the mouth of a smoker is to hear the soft bubbling brook of pure irony flowing from the mouth of irony mountain. Smokers do have an extra few bucks per day they can throw away. It's called buying a pack of cigarettes, and they've been throwing it away now, per day, for decades. Ignoring government taxes on cigs, they are still extremely expensive, people are still buying them, and thus telling everyone else that they do have a couple extra bucks per day to spend.

As for the long run, again, ignoring a govt tax (because they're still expensive even without it), buying cigs every day right now, or every other day, or every week tends to add up to thousands of dollars in the long run. Medical treatments for lung cancer and other smoking-related afflictions also tend to add up to thousand of dollars in the long run as well... Might as well count treatments for those consistently in and around the smoker.

I just don't see how someone already throwing out a few bucks per day on cigs can try to complain about wasted money... >.>

PS - Are you a smoker or just arguing for their side? I thought you just did a bit of weed now and then.

_________________
Bro locks got shoots. U can shoots bro. Drop ya rofl.


Profile  Offline
 
 Post subject: Re: HIV in DC, other things...
PostPosted: 090322 01:31 
Deserter
User avatar
Joined: 090226 22:52
Posts: 103
Kashi wrote:
You are correct in saying that smoking is a conscious choice that people can make and have the freedom to make. However, just about every other activity that you mentioned poses no health threat to anyone else. If I participate in downhill biking, bungee jumping, or swimming with sharks, I don't bother someone else or endanger them with my activity. Someone smoking in a bar directly influences and impacts anyone around them. Secondhand smoke is demonstrably bothersome and hazardous to one's health, and it gets into your clothes. When it was allowed in restaurants, having a smoke cloud linger in the room wasn't exactly palatable. Besides, I'm not saying to ban smoking, I'm just saying I have zero problem with it costing more.


You're sort of speaking on two seperate issues. Cigarette taxes have nothing to do with second hand smoke -- there's no reason we should take money from the people who smoke alone in their house just because OTHER people smoke at bars. Smoking doesn't have to occur in public. Second hand smoke is a seperate issue; if we want to curb that, then tax isn't going to help much, instead the issue is about banning smoking in bars or resteraunts or public places like many states are now doing. Personally I disagree with it, because establishments should be free to make their own rules (I mean, no smoking in BARS, that doesn't sound at all silly to you?), ideally the free market will give seperate options for people who want smoke-free environments and people who want to smoke, such as having smoking and non-smoking bars.

Quote:
As for obesity, I'm against it merely because:
1) Our legions of fatasses provide more ammo for the rest of the world to laugh at us
2) It's 110% preventable and curable. Even if one is genetically predisposed for obesity (which I'm still doubtful of), you can "solve" the problem by just eating right and exercising. I'm not saying it'll be easy, but the alternative is to balloon up to the point where even doing simple things becomes a chore. There simply is zero excuse for obesity. It's not like it happens overnight.


I don't have strong feelings one way or another... All I know is that if I chose to be fat than George Washington himself would not be able to stop me, it's my choice. The rest of the world can lick my hair, if they want to laugh at me, let 'em. I find fat people absolutely repulsive, totally deplorable. But we live in a great country where nobody HAS to please everyone with their looks -- if we didn't, I know some people who would take issue with my appearence right away. I'd pack my bags and get the hell out of here while loudly cursing the death of freedom the minute that the US decides that all citizens must eat right and exercise so that they don't become fat. It's not about yours or my personal opinion. It's about freedom of choice. You wouldn't want somebody telling you that you can't eat chocolate because it's bad for you, I wouldn't want somebody telling me I have to exercise, people need to be free to make their own decisions.

Kashi wrote:
IfTheLightTakesUs wrote:
not everybody has an extra few bucks per day they can throw away.

but a few extra dollars per pack adds up to thousands of dollars in the long run


If a smoker were to use this argument to prevent a price increase, they are wholeheartedly out of their league. Like, to hear that coming from the mouth of a smoker is to hear the soft bubbling brook of pure irony flowing from the mouth of irony mountain. Smokers do have an extra few bucks per day they can throw away. It's called buying a pack of cigarettes, and they've been throwing it away now, per day, for decades. Ignoring government taxes on cigs, they are still extremely expensive, people are still buying them, and thus telling everyone else that they do have a couple extra bucks per day to spend.

As for the long run, again, ignoring a govt tax (because they're still expensive even without it), buying cigs every day right now, or every other day, or every week tends to add up to thousands of dollars in the long run. Medical treatments for lung cancer and other smoking-related afflictions also tend to add up to thousand of dollars in the long run as well... Might as well count treatments for those consistently in and around the smoker.

I just don't see how someone already throwing out a few bucks per day on cigs can try to complain about wasted money... >.>

PS - Are you a smoker or just arguing for their side? I thought you just did a bit of weed now and then.


Roll out the RED carpet for Mr. Stalin because you've entered communist country my friend. ;) The thing about that stuff is that your same argument can be used for anything. "Those WOW players are tossing their money right out the window! Wasting dollars on an addictive, lazy, unproductive repetition game. If they can afford to spend money on the monthly fee then we should charge them a few extra dollars because they can afford that as well." That couldbe Tipper Gore's next crusade. Would you support it?

I'm not a smoker, I find those things disgusting. But I do feel a bit of 'stake' in cigarette freedom since if the gov't won't even let people smoke freely then what hope is there that superior chemical passtimes will ever be allowed? I'm basically just playing devil's advocate but what I believe in is freedom. People should not be allowed to force their personal opinions on everyone else, be it about smoking cigs, playing WoW, smoking weed or any other passtime activity that does not directly harm others.

peace, bra.

_________________
"If I could take it all back now, I wouldn't. I would have did more shit that people said that I shouldn't." - Marshall Mathers

"I hardly ever leave my house or my neighborhood really, and that's not a sad thing." - Fiona Apple

"It's alright, ma. It's life and life only." - Bob Dylan


Profile  Offline
 
 Post subject: Re: HIV in DC, other things...
PostPosted: 090322 07:05 
Interactive Blogger
Interactive Blogger
User avatar
Joined: 090226 11:31
Posts: 306
Location: Japan
IfTheLightTakesUs wrote:
Roll out the RED carpet for Mr. Stalin because you've entered communist country my friend. ;) The thing about that stuff is that your same argument can be used for anything. "Those WOW players are tossing their money right out the window! Wasting dollars on an addictive, lazy, unproductive repetition game. If they can afford to spend money on the monthly fee then we should charge them a few extra dollars because they can afford that as well."


That has nothing to do with communism.


Profile  Offline
 
 Post subject: Re: HIV in DC, other things...
PostPosted: 090322 13:03 
Deserter
User avatar
Joined: 090226 22:52
Posts: 103
Scott wrote:
IfTheLightTakesUs wrote:
Roll out the RED carpet for Mr. Stalin because you've entered communist country my friend. ;) The thing about that stuff is that your same argument can be used for anything. "Those WOW players are tossing their money right out the window! Wasting dollars on an addictive, lazy, unproductive repetition game. If they can afford to spend money on the monthly fee then we should charge them a few extra dollars because they can afford that as well."


That has nothing to do with communism.


I'm aware of communism. It was a joke based on the fascist policies of the good old USSR. Could have used "fascist country" but then I couldn't have used the "red" joke and thus the joke would have left me with a deep sense of longing.

_________________
"If I could take it all back now, I wouldn't. I would have did more shit that people said that I shouldn't." - Marshall Mathers

"I hardly ever leave my house or my neighborhood really, and that's not a sad thing." - Fiona Apple

"It's alright, ma. It's life and life only." - Bob Dylan


Profile  Offline
 
 Post subject: Re: HIV in DC, other things...
PostPosted: 090323 07:14 
Interactive Blogger
Interactive Blogger
User avatar
Joined: 090301 04:38
Posts: 268
Location: Cleveland, OH
IfTheLightTakesUs wrote:
You're sort of speaking on two seperate issues. Cigarette taxes have nothing to do with second hand smoke -- there's no reason we should take money from the people who smoke alone in their house just because OTHER people smoke at bars. Smoking doesn't have to occur in public. Second hand smoke is a seperate issue; if we want to curb that, then tax isn't going to help much, instead the issue is about banning smoking in bars or resteraunts or public places like many states are now doing. Personally I disagree with it, because establishments should be free to make their own rules (I mean, no smoking in BARS, that doesn't sound at all silly to you?), ideally the free market will give seperate options for people who want smoke-free environments and people who want to smoke, such as having smoking and non-smoking bars.


You are correct in saying that they are two separate issues, but there aren't people who just smoke alone in their house and people who smoke in bars. If you're a smoker you're a smoker and you need your fix when you need your fix. Of course it doesn't have to occur in public but of course it does. Their addiction doesn't stop when they leave the home. Still, I agree with you that they are indeed different.

As for the latter half of your comment, yes, establishments should be free to make their own rules...to a limit, and no, I don't find it silly at all to prevent smoking in bars. To the first part of what that sentence, they're not sovereign nations. They're not free to allow murder, rape, or slavery. They're not free to sell illegal drugs. There's a limit there. Recently, smoking has fallen outside of that limit. It wasn't caused by evil fascist government types but instead normal people who got sick of breathing that stuff. The law passed because it was put to a vote. That means that a majority of folks stood up and said "I'm tired of breathing smoke in establishments where I'm there to do another action". This is not an exercise in "the man" keeping us down but instead is actually a triumph of the democratic rights that we have in this nation.

To the second part of that sentence, I go to bars to drink booze, watch sports, and poison my liver, I don't go to bars to smoke and poison my lungs. If I wanted to smoke, I would go to a hookah bar. Or I would smoke in my apartment.

To the last part of your comment, we can easily claim that ideally the free market would spring up a second restaurant beside the first and then all the non-smokers would go there, but ideally is a fairy tale. Ideally, the economic system we had in place would not rape the masses and line the pockets of the corrupt rich, but as we all learned that's not the case. Plus, in all honesty, one cannot make that claim that ideally non-smoking establishments would spring up because there is no way that would happen. The problem is that there are many times more non-smokers than smokers, but all it takes is a couple smokers in a crowded establishment to fill the air. To make separate smoking and non-smoking buildings is a colossal waste of money, space that doesn't exist, and you know it would never happen.

IfTheLightTakesUs wrote:
I don't have strong feelings one way or another... All I know is that if I chose to be fat than George Washington himself would not be able to stop me, it's my choice. The rest of the world can lick my hair, if they want to laugh at me, let 'em. I find fat people absolutely repulsive, totally deplorable. But we live in a great country where nobody HAS to please everyone with their looks -- if we didn't, I know some people who would take issue with my appearence right away. I'd pack my bags and get the hell out of here while loudly cursing the death of freedom the minute that the US decides that all citizens must eat right and exercise so that they don't become fat. It's not about yours or my personal opinion. It's about freedom of choice. You wouldn't want somebody telling you that you can't eat chocolate because it's bad for you, I wouldn't want somebody telling me I have to exercise, people need to be free to make their own decisions.


Perhaps it came off that way, but imo, nowhere in my statements did I imply any sort of conformism. And, neither did the article. It was mostly just looking at a potential way to stop obesity. The topic of obesity (in this particular thread) isn't about forcing someone to be something. I'm pretty sure all involved are just saying it's unbecoming, unnecessary, and more importantly unhealthy. It's also costly. When health complications arise pertaining to obesity, you know damn well that insurance is paying for their treatment. Insurance has to pay for that somehow, so rates go up. Anyway, no one has even hinted at rounding up the fatasses and sending them to "get thin concentration camps" although quite frankly that might not be a bad idea, sans killing...

Anyway, I guess I wanted to say that I thought your comment on obesity kind of came out of nowhere. What exactly prompted that? No one said fat people can't be fat or that they shouldn't have the choice to be fat. At most, we're saying it's recommended to avoid being fat. Fat people cry about being socially ostracized and passed over for jobs, gee, wonder why. You're unattractive and you can't complete simple job tasks. It's your own damn fault. You complain why you're being charged for two plane tickets when your fat is spilling over into the seat next to you, gee, wonder why. Who would want to be in the seat next to them? No way.

You are correct in that no one has to please others with their appearance (unless your overweight status affects your job). However, as much as you don't have to please others with how you look, you equally have no right to complain when others (because they aren't pleased with you) don't want to interact with you. Unfortunately, fat people are like feminists and a large portion of poor black people in this country. They want to have their cake and eat it too. Fat people want the benefits that come to slim people but don't want to (gasp) slim down for it. Feminists want... well frankly I don't know what they want as they're all fucking batshit crazy man-haters. Black people want reparations (lol) and free money but won't work for it, learn for it, or stop having 9 kids to different fathers for it. Ok, getting off topic, moving on.

IfTheLightTakesUs wrote:
Roll out the RED carpet for Mr. Stalin because you've entered communist country my friend. ;) The thing about that stuff is that your same argument can be used for anything. "Those WOW players are tossing their money right out the window! Wasting dollars on an addictive, lazy, unproductive repetition game. If they can afford to spend money on the monthly fee then we should charge them a few extra dollars because they can afford that as well." That couldbe Tipper Gore's next crusade. Would you support it?


I'm not really sure how that's communist in nature. Wouldn't communism, pertaining to what we're discussing, actually lower the cost of cigarettes, since it would be controlled by the state (kind of like how bread was in the Soviet Union)? Even further, wouldn't communism also ration the amount of cigs you were able to get (also kind of like how bread was)? To directly answer your question, I could care less if they taxed WoW players. I don't play it anymore. :D But, assuming I did, if they DID tax it, I would either 1) Stop playing to protest or 2) Suck it up and pay the tax. They "tax" me to take the interstate back to Pittsburgh (aka a toll). However, I like driving a direct, high speed, wide, paved road to get to my destination in a reasonable amount of time, so yes, I'm fine with it. I don't remember but I'm pretty sure I was charged a gas-guzzler tax when I bought my truck (quite frankly I think the bar for defining a "gas guzzler" is a bit too high). Given what you've said, isn't that wrong? Shouldn't I be allowed to drive trucks without being charged more whether someone else doesn't like them or not? Regardless, I accepted the tax because I wanted a damn truck and paid it. Whether it was right or wrong to tax me for buying a gas guzzler, ultimately, I had to choose. Do I like this item enough to pay more for it? Smokers have that decision.

IfTheLightTakesUs wrote:
I'm not a smoker, I find those things disgusting. But I do feel a bit of 'stake' in cigarette freedom since if the gov't won't even let people smoke freely then what hope is there that superior chemical passtimes will ever be allowed? I'm basically just playing devil's advocate but what I believe in is freedom. People should not be allowed to force their personal opinions on everyone else, be it about smoking cigs, playing WoW, smoking weed or any other passtime activity that does not directly harm others.

peace, bra.


I like your desire for freedoms in our daily life. However, and not accusing you of this, but a lot of people like to blindly shout "freedom this and freedom that" when they encounter something that supposedly impinges on one of their "freedoms". Furthermore, I think a whole hell of a lot of people don't realize what our "freedoms" are.

Next, I would like to say that there's a thing called money that a lot of folks forget. As much as it's great to exercise our freedoms and scream bloody murder when we get taxed and say it's keeping us down, shit needs to get paid and sacrifices need to be made. It's kind of like the interstate toll thing I talked about earlier. It kinda sucks to have to pay cash to ride on the road, but the benefit is that I get a nice, wide, smooth road that I can do 70+ on to rapidly get to my destination. If we didn't pay that toll then we probably wouldn't have a nice, newly constructed road. Gotta raise money somehow. If smokers are truly bothered by the tax, then they'll quit smoking. If a WoW tax was put into place and it truly bothered people, they'll quit playing. The other alternatives are to suck it up and pay, or (and this is a true freedom) initiate the process to strike said tax from the books by putting it to a vote. Can't beat that in terms of freedoms.

_________________
Bro locks got shoots. U can shoots bro. Drop ya rofl.


Profile  Offline
 
 Post subject: Re: HIV in DC, other things...
PostPosted: 090323 09:11 
Legendary Overfiend
Legendary Overfiend
User avatar
Joined: 090226 11:19
Posts: 527
Location: Terminal Dogma
Kashi wrote:
or (and this is a true freedom) initiate the process to strike said tax from the books by putting it to a vote

"True" freedom. I like that. By putting the decision into the hands of other people. That's true freedom, alright.

_________________
I see what you did there.
Image


Profile  Offline
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 43 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Panel

Top You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
Search for:
Jump to:  
 cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Dizayn Ercan Koc