Taxpayers should fund bids to quit smoking

[Petrodus]

B.C. taxpayers will soon be picking up the tab for nicotine patches and Nicorette gum
to help smokers .... out, if the Canadian Cancer Society has its way.

Article: Click Here

 

[xg4bx]

no, politicians aren't directly in bed with pharmacutical companies, that's crazy talk....

 

[Kevin Freeheart]

Oh God no.

Vermont already does this. I think it's bad enough that their radio advertisements can be heard in NH, let alone the program.

 

[Exylos]

actually I think this is a great Idea, we have to become the spin doctors guys... You don't want to pay for us to quit, then leave us alone, it's that simple. if you are so worried about what we are doing to our health, then you have to pay to fix it. Instead of demanding that we pay to make you happy, you have to pay to make you happy.

Maybe when these fools start see that the danger to ourselves, is not worth the money coming from their pockets, maybe we will get a tiny bit more breathing room. Is it a perfect solution no, but nothing ever is.

 

[throatkick]

I think it is called a public service announcement. They used to play them for free.

Privatize gains and socialize losses. Nothing new.

 

[Petrodus]

Ever wake up in the middle of the night and have what you
think is a "Brilliant" idea... just to realize after the sun comes up
the thought was just a SLIMSBID

Seems Like It Makes sense But It Doesn't

The tobacco industry could decide to "take it on the chin"
and voluntarily stop production and sales of cigarettes... knowing
all levels of governments around the world depend on tobacco tax
revenues.

It wouldn't take long for governments to beg the tobacco industry
to resume production. The tobacco industry then would agree
IF smoking bans were repealed.

Tobacco companies “Strike” wouldn't take long to bring governments
to the negotiating table.

 

[Kevin Freeheart]

You don't want to pay for us to quit, then leave us alone, it's that simple. if you are so worried about what we are doing to our health, then you have to pay to fix it. Instead of demanding that we pay to make you happy, you have to pay to make you happy.

I've got two sides to that...

First, what if I DON'T really care if you smoke or not? I STILL have to pay for you to quit - else they put me in jail. I kinda think jail cells are worse than the possibily of second hand smoke. You can avoid second hand smoke if you want, it's kind of hard to avoid jail cells.

Secondly...

I DON'T care what people do. I'm not in the business of behavior modification. When I don't like the actions of others, I avoid those people rather than demanding the government fix the problem because they always do a piss poor job if it.

This program won't really fix anything. People who want to smoke still will and the "smoking epidemic" will still affect everybody who let the government make that THEIR expense. Now, they'll just be funding smokers and non-smokers. Kinda dumb.

 

[Exylos]

First, what if I DON'T really care if you smoke or not? I STILL have to pay for you to quit - else they put me in jail. I kinda think jail cells are worse than the possibily of second hand smoke. You can avoid second hand smoke if you want, it's kind of hard to avoid jail cells.

But that kind is the point, The problem right now is that allot of the general population accepts the bans right now, because what does it honestly cost THEM? the answer is nothing. They don't smoke, So it doesn't effect them, so even if they do not care what people do, why get involved? why stand up and say no? Because it might effect them later, when the government moves on yea right ok.

The sad fact is that the "normal people" Are only moved to action when it deals with them directly. There was an episode of a tv show house where they talked about normal human behavior. Most people are creatures of habit, and as long as their habits are not effected they do not care if yours are. That is why things like, my smoking is bad for you, or Vaping is bad for those around them, while at best these are half truths. The point is my habit effects your habits, but if you side with us and ban it, it wont anymore. So even if you don't want personal freedom taken away you side with the one with a sales pitch that matters.

My point is we need a sales pitch that matters, people will hate that they have to pay for us to quit smoking, they will want to stand up against it, We need to be smarter and use that, show them our side of it. Get them involved and maybe even change their minds, to bring them to our side.

 

[Kevin Freeheart]

I agree with you, but I disagree with tactic.

I guess my point originally was more that we shouldn't take their "your smoking is my problem" crap. Convincing them to stay the hell out of my business, rather than trying to fix the problem they created by getting involved in it in the first place, does far more in my eyes towards the goals you speak of than showing the absurdity of their stop-gap measure.

Edit: Part of my issue was that when you said "spin doctor", I interpreted that as the band. I think I get your point more clearly now.

 

[Exylos]

Chuckles... about the band name confusion.

Well I agree I think actually there is a place for both tactics. Yours and mine, that seems to be one of the issues that we have had, because they come at us from like 5 different directions with several tactics. Now (This is just my Opinion.) But it feels like alot of the time we are all gathered in this small little ball, and we defend ourselves like we are undersiege. But I am having to wonder, like someone else said, if we go on attack, we turn what they are saying and their own tactics against them. Could we honestly maybe have a better chance at winning.

Our problem seems to be the long hall. I am not getting any younger(would be great if i was.) and niether is anyone else, so we need to stop trying to win 40 years from now, we should be aiming to win now. When I was in the military my DI's favorite saying was aim higher, so that way if you fail you have still gained.

But then again I am also a big one for not understanding why we have cut our selves off from the legalize weed people. Because they have tests that prove what they say as well, and in some cases more than we do. They have proof that the government is saying it only because they can't make money on it. Hence some states starting to legalize even with the federal Government trying to stop it.

So we should be acting like the government does, we should be joining forces, and showing that we are all about the personal freedom, yes what they want that freedom for is different than ours, but the rights that would guaranteeing both what we want is the same. The right to use something that has been proven is not as dangerous as the government claims, for ourselves because it doesn't harm you, If is vape, or I get stoned in my own home.

Gets off his soap box..lol... sorry been a long day chuckles.

 

[Petrodus]

So we should be acting like the government does, we should be joining forces,
and showing that we are all about the personal freedom, yes what they want that freedom for is different than ours, but the rights that would guaranteeing both what we want is the same.

Outstanding observation... All Health Freedom Fighters United
opposing tyranny would make a difference.
Whispers of Revolution