Marlboro is giving out Juul coupons.

[Puff2K]

I have the large duffel bag & still use it. Easily 30+ years old.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, I got one from my merit menthol ultra lights and I still use it! Not sure when.

Sent from my Nokia 6.1 using Tapatalk

 

[dreamvaper]

Marlboro in Germany had a slightly perfumey taste

a slight hint of Oktoberfest?

Every Marlboro smoker I knew wanted the leather jacket. You'd sort of have to be like the homeless collecting cans only with Marlboro packets to win it though. I think it was a billion points and you had to get the Marlboro man to endorse you like, "Yeah, this smoker is TOUGH ENOUGH."

And to win a Mrlbr Harley you'd have to die of lung cancer I guess.

 

[SP013]

My husband just opened a pack of Marlboros and there was a coupon for $10 off a juul starter kit or device. WTH? I know they own 35% of juul but to give out coupons in the cigarette pack just seems wrong. Anyone else hear of vaping coupons in cigarette packs?

They have to do something to not let the whole vape business die in the US. 35% of JUUL is A LOT, it would be a big loss for marlboro after the money they invested.

 

[Rossum]

35% of JUUL is A LOT,

$12.8 billion, IIRC. IMO, they over-paid and the stock market has punished them for it.

 

[Jman8]

I never understood this argument by anyone, about anything. Parents are hypocritical for trying to prevent their kids from making the same mistakes they did? Honestly, that's the argument you most often hear from the teenagers themselves.

The hypocrisy would come in from the judgments one expresses. Like if you say, "you shouldn't smoke, because smoking could kill you" and yet you're someone that smoked and are still alive many years later, then your hypocrisy would amount to a lie, as in it didn't kill you.

I don't know how any thinking person would criticize me or any parent for not wanting my kids to have lots of unprotected sex, do really dangerous drugs, drink to the point of blackouts and drive, or any of the (long list of) other stupid stuff I did as a teenager. That's actually a big part of what being a parent is - taking the knowledge of learned experiences and wisdom, and helping guide your children's lives to be better than yours. It's not hypocrisy at all.

You had to choose some really dangerous things to make your point. I'd be glad to get back to smoking nicotine, or even vaping nicotine, if you'd like to continue the discussion. Unless, you're saying nicotine is a "really dangerous drug" which would make me laugh for awhile, but then I'd be ready to discuss it with you.

Following that logic, there aren't any adults out there that didn't pee and crap their pants at some point as children. Yet, we hypocritically choose to potty train our own.

Yeah, that's exactly the point, I'm making. Eye roll.

Good parenting would strike me as potty training, training/teaching what makes for good sex, teaching what dangerous drugs will actually do, while not being shy to mention the pros of said drugs, teaching kids how to drive (when they're of legal age) and being clear on how distracted driving (i.e. a blackout) can be detrimental.

Instead, we live in a world where the message is "don't use nicotine, kid, because it's highly addictive and will harm/kill you." I'd say none of that is true/accurate. It's truly not that highly addictive and it surely will not kill you anytime soon. There are people at age 105 years old that still have a smoke a day. If smoking kills, how do you explain that? Asking rhetorically cause I know the answer to it, as I would think any sane person does.

Lying to kids about nicotine use is IMO a surefire way to get them to try nicotine, and then after learning they've been lied to about that, realizing that all the other stuff they were told they shouldn't do was probably a lie as well, by someone who a) pulled some authoritarian BS to try to make their point and b) did all the same things themselves, but are suddenly so woke, they think of themselves as a "good parent."

 

[Brewdawg1181]

The hypocrisy would come in from the judgments one expresses. Like if you say, "you shouldn't smoke, because smoking could kill you" and yet you're someone that smoked and are still alive many years later, then your hypocrisy would amount to a lie, as in it didn't kill you.

Okay, I'll reply, . But calling me (us) that counsel children not to take up behaviors we know to be bad, but continue ourselves out of weakness is the wrong insult. Call us weak if you wish, but not hypocrites.

The difference we have here is in understanding the definition of hypocrisy. Hypocrisy is NOT "saying one thing and doing another," as is commonly believed. That's an assumed, simplistic, incorrect definition. Here are the most common, accepted definititions:

-pretending to be what you are not, or pretending to believe something that you do not (Cambridge)
-a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not (Merriam-Webster)
-a person who pretends to have moral standards or opinions that they do not actually have (Oxford)
-The practice of claiming to have higher standards or more noble beliefs than is the case. (Google Dictionary)

You'll note that all of them have a connotation of pretension. When we tell a child - "Don't smoke. I wish to God I'd never started, because it's incredibly hard to quit." - we're NOT pretending to be something we are not. We are sharing the wisdom of experience. And it's simply not hypocrisy.

Sorry - it may bother you that someone tells others not to do something they do themselves, but you'll need to find other words to describe it, or just continue to be incorrect.

For your other, unrelated points about nicotine, etc. Sure, I'll be glad discuss them, but they really had nothing to do with your post or my response.

 

[Jman8]

Okay, I'll reply, . But calling me (us) that counsel children not to take up behaviors we know to be bad, but continue ourselves out of weakness is the wrong insult. Call us weak if you wish, but not hypocrites.

I'm sticking with hypocrites. I (very much) understand how it comes off as insult, but I also think that's part of the judgment thing. I've contemplated on this concept way more than the average person.

The difference we have here is in understanding the definition of hypocrisy. Hypocrisy is NOT "saying one thing and doing another," as is commonly believed. That's an assumed, simplistic, incorrect definition. Here are the most common, accepted definititions:

Before replying to your (so called) accepted definitions, I would just note that I didn't, technically, introduce the simplistic definition into the discussion. You read that into what I was conveying. Just as one could, if being simplistic, read that 'incorrect definition' into what is being conveyed in the 'accepted definitions.'

-pretending to be what you are not, or pretending to believe something that you do not (Cambridge)
-a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not (Merriam-Webster)
-a person who pretends to have moral standards or opinions that they do not actually have (Oxford)
-The practice of claiming to have higher standards or more noble beliefs than is the case. (Google Dictionary)

Simple = saying one thing, doing another (according to what you conveyed)
Definition one = pretending to be one thing, when you are not, or pretending to believe a thing that you don't do (that last part strikes me as very similar to the simplistic take)
D2 = feigning to be or to believe something that one is not (again similar)
D3 = pretending to have moral standards or opinions that you don't have (which is where judgments would then matter when you are expressing yourself about a topic)
D4 = claiming to have high standards or more noble beliefs than is the case (essentially the same response I had with D3)

IMO, all of these are applicable to the parent who believes smoking nicotine is bad/wrong, while having experience of being a smoker, and then expressing the judgments to really anyone, but in this case it is children

You'll note that all of them have a connotation of pretension. When we tell a child - "Don't smoke. I wish to God I'd never started, because it's incredibly hard to quit." - we're NOT pretending to be something we are not. We are sharing the wisdom of experience. And it's simply not hypocrisy.

I actually think the last assertion you made is plausibly hypocrisy, but that would take awhile to walk through, and as usual with someone who brings their version of 'supreme definitions' into the discussion, it would be a tangent that likely derails the original point.

I would say most hypocrites, when engaging in hypocrisy, would lay claim to "sharing the wisdom of experience." Yet, in a deceitful way, because they don't (actually) have the standard or claimed morality that they are expressing. IOW, telling another that it is incredibly hard for them to quit smoking, is claiming a moral standard that is actually deceitful. It may not be hard for that other person based on their experience, to quit smoking. And in today's world, with vaping in the picture, I fully believe it is actually very easy to quit smoking. So, there's that. Not to mention that I quit cold turkey 3 times prior to vaping. While we could take up a discussion on my experience (I'd welcome that), I found it relatively easy to quit 2 of those 3 times, and also easy to start back up. Again, I'm willing to elaborate on this. But I do recognize other people's claims that it is really hard for them to break the habit (quit), within their experience. Yet, pretending to have knowledge of what another's experience with quitting cigarettes in a hypothetical future, is congruent with the definitions of hypocrisy you've shared.

Furthermore, that isn't the type of judgment I was thinking about when making my point, though it certainly works in terms of the hypocrisy factor at work, as I've demonstrated in the preceding paragraph. I was thinking along lines of claims/judgments that smoking is bad, or smoking will harm you (in a non simplistic way).

Sorry - it may bother you that someone tells others not to do something they do themselves, but you'll need to find other words to describe it, or just continue to be incorrect.

Having thought about this topic in depth, I'll stick to hypocrisy/hypocrite. You're welcome to further persuade me that I'm incorrect. I'll be glad to further point out, as I did in this post, how the hypocrisy factor is alive and well in what you are saying.

For your other, unrelated points about nicotine, etc. Sure, I'll be glad discuss them, but they really had nothing to do with your post or my response.

I think points regarding nicotine benefits, or even smoking benefits, are related to my post, and to the larger point. That being what to tell kids. As in, it would make sense to me for any (formerly smoking) parent to say something like this to a child, "I hope you don't get into smoking. In my experience, I found it really hard to quit, before vaping came along. It very much disrupted my life and everything I was up to during the days or weeks it took me to go from regular user to non-user. I wouldn't wish that experience on anyone, and that for sure is true with you, my child, whom I love dearly. I did find smoking calmed me when I felt stressed, and made me feel more alert/attentive at times when it was beneficial to experience that. It also has benefits that are hard to convey to anyone that is not a smoker. But all those benefits come with a price that could wreak havoc on a person, if their experience is anything like mine." And then if being a really good parent, you'd add. "But now with vaping in the picture, the quitting thing is actually pretty easy, and the benefits are still there. Yet, no one is 100% certain of the long term effects, and so I'd urge you to find other ways to deal with stress or increase attentiveness, than using a drug or external habit to make that work for yourself."

 

[Brewdawg1181]

I'm sticking with hypocrites....

Before replying to your (so called) accepted definitions....

Okay. If you choose to have your own definitions that don't match those that others use, good luck to you. Oxford, Cambridge, Merriam Webster, and I even threw in Google, are "so called" definitions?? Hey, I found them on my "so called" computer.

Once I read that, I saw there was no reason to read the other 2,000 words of your post, because they're likely not to mean what most of us think they mean anyway.

I had a niece who insisted our family dog was a walrus. But she grew out of it, so there's hope for you.

 

[Jman8]

Okay. If you choose to have your own definitions that don't match those that others use, good luck to you. Oxford, Cambridge, Merriam Webster, and I even threw in Google, are "so called" definitions?? Hey, I found them on my "so called" computer.

I actually didn't choose other / own definitions in discussion with you. I addressed the simplistic one, you brought up, and then noted how it is very similar to the 'accepted definitions.'

Defining hypocrisy is so pedantic, I'm not sure what your point is other than a desire to make me be the incorrect one in the discussion we are having.

Once I read that, I saw there was no reason to read the other 2,000 words of your post, because they're likely not to mean what most of us think they mean anyway.

Yay, another hypocrisy!

I had a niece who insisted our family dog was a walrus. But she grew out of it, so there's hope for you.

The walrus grew out of being a family dog? Cool.

 

[AttyPops]

Ding ding ding. Bell rang. Neutral corners!

 

[Jman8]

Ding ding ding. Bell rang. Neutral corners!

You need to define neutral corners. Otherwise, how shall we ever proceed?

 

[AttyPops]

Well, it was an attempt. I'd settle for "opposite corners" and let you two figure it out.

P.S.
And you're both funny (and pretty and whatever). I made sure to "funny" both people's posts.

 

[Brewdawg1181]

And you're both funny (and pretty and whatever). I made sure to "funny" both people's posts.

Don't encourage us!

Nah, no corners needed, I'm out. Pointless to argue against a private language I don't understand.

 

[stols001]

Holy Crud we cannot be arguing over MARLBORO plus JUUL.

C'mon that Dartboard (no I will not define it) was one of my true happy smoker memories. Don't be all ruining it.

I am sure Marlboro wants to hook the young SMOKERS then convert them to the Juul, then build a Death Star (again, NOT defining THAT) and sort of kill us all slowly by sucking the oxygen millimeter by millimeter out of the planet. Milliliter actually I think I'm pretty sure on that one.

Dude I am supposed to be doing YOGA not praying for PEACE.

That's on me I guess. I could do both. OKAY!!! COMPUTER OFF FOR NOW!

Anna

 

[muth]

Sigh, I wanted that leather jacket. I got 2 leather backpacks instead. Plus every zippo, tshirt or bag they put out. And can't forget the double hammock, 2 smokers and 2 dart boards. My DH and I smoked a lot of Marlboros!
Now I just want to vape in peace. Is that too much to ask for?

And look, you're still alive!