wrote:
On Thu, 06 Feb 2014 11:20:29 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
Granted cigarette smoking is harmful to your health but if warning
labels and ads on TV and health education at the doctors office and
in schools is not enough then adding taxes is not going to do any
thing but prompt smokers to obtain their tobacco in another way, and
that is typically is illegal.

So you're saying that it's a complete waste of time to tax tobacco and
spend money on warnings and health education? I can't support that
suggestion at all.

The vast majority of smokers would quit immediately if it was easy. No
more bad taste in their mouths. No more sore throats, no more nicotine
stained fingers. No more watching their money go up in smoke. All of
these things made me quit smoking thirtyfive years ago. Smokers and
non-smokers alike know that it's an unhealthy, dirty habit. Education
about smoking has had a huge effect the masses.

The pictures and the ads of smoking caused cancer and other associated
diseases have had an effect on people. If it was otherwise, everybody
would be smoking and they're not. So how do you explain this? How do
you explain people quitting smoking and people hating their smoking
addiction if not for the education and the ads?

Well - to answer that just from one perspective - they have had no effect
The ads to me serve only to satisfy the people who want to believe they will
have an effect - no other real effect on smokers. But if it makes
non-smokers feel better then at least they get to feel good about them.
Education - yes, it has probably had some effect on a percentage of smokers
and that is good. Social movement - yes that too has had some effect on
some percentage of the smokers. But - I believe those benefts are done.
The ads - don't fool yourself - they only make people like you feel good.
They don't have an effect on the remaining population of smokers. Or even
future smokers. By this time we all know well enough the health hazards and
those ads are useless.

Not to argue a defense of smoking, because as I am a smoker, I think the act
is defensless. But - to fool yourself into thinking that taxes and
"education" and ads are going to have any great effect now is kind of silly
in my opinion. Education can have its place (IMHO) in keeping younger
people from starting but that's about as far as I seeing it have any benefit
these days.

Think about it Dave - who in this day and age does not know the hazards of
smoking? Those things won't work on that crop of smokers. Will something
else work? I don't know. I'd like to hope so, but hanging on to tactics
that had a marginal benefit at best (the ads), is kind of pointless.

--

-Mike-

"Mike Marlow" wrote:

Well - to answer that just from one perspective - they have had no
effect The ads to me serve only to satisfy the people who want to
believe they will have an effect - no other real effect on smokers.
But if it makes non-smokers feel better then at least they get to
feel good about them. Education - yes, it has probably had some
effect on a percentage of smokers and that is good. Social
movement - yes that too has had some effect on some percentage of
the smokers. But - I believe those benefts are done. The ads -
don't fool yourself - they only make people like you feel good. They
don't have an effect on the remaining population of smokers. Or
even future smokers. By this time we all know well enough the
health hazards and those ads are useless.

Not to argue a defense of smoking, because as I am a smoker, I think
the act is defensless. But - to fool yourself into thinking that
taxes and "education" and ads are going to have any great effect now
is kind of silly in my opinion. Education can have its place (IMHO)
in keeping younger people from starting but that's about as far as I
seeing it have any benefit these days.

Think about it Dave - who in this day and age does not know the
hazards of smoking? Those things won't work on that crop of
smokers. Will something else work? I don't know. I'd like to hope
so, but hanging on to tactics that had a marginal benefit at best
(the ads), is kind of pointless.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Frankly Mike, as far as education is concerned, everybody who is 25 or
older is a
write off.

You accept the fact these people are probably going to die of some
form of
lung disease regardless of what is done to get them to stop smoking
and get
on with life.

No the target market is the 10-18 year old group and there is where a
real
turf war is going on with the tobacco companies.

A war that education forces are SLOWLY gaining ground.

It's going to require a saturation advertising campaign to defeat the
tobacco
companies and I have no problem at all forcing the tobacco companies
to pay
for their own defeat.

As far as your rights to smoke when ever and where ever you chose,
you have those rights as long as they don't foul the air I and other
non
smokers breathe.

When that happens, you no longer have the right to spew your tobacco
smoke where ever you choose.

Speaking as an ex-smoker (25+ years), stopping smoking is probably
the most difficult a human being will ever do, at least it was for me.

An ex-smoker who at one point or another in my life had a 2 pack a day
or a box of cigars a week or a pound of pipe tobacco a week habit and
all of which I inhaled, I can appreciate your addiction, but I don't
tolerate
it any more.

Today, I'm like stink on crap, when it comes to smoking.

I have no problem at all walking up to a complete stranger who is
smoking
and saying something like, "Aren't you're old enough to know better".

Very interesting the responses you get.

Lew

On Thu, 6 Feb 2014 16:55:40 -0500, "Mike Marlow"
Think about it Dave - who in this day and age does not know the hazards of
smoking? Those things won't work on that crop of smokers. Will something
else work? I don't know. I'd like to hope so, but hanging on to tactics
that had a marginal benefit at best (the ads), is kind of pointless.

Everything you've said maybe right. I can only argue my own
experiences with smoking. I started at sixteen and quit when I was
twentyfive as a pack a day smoker.

And to be honest, it was easy for me to quit because of the reasons I
mentioned previously. I realized how tired I was of the sore throat,
the bad taste in my mouth and the nicotine on my fingers. It was as if
I'd just flipped a switch in my mind and that was it. If I could
market that switch I'd become filthy rich overnight.

People have said to me that I wasn't addicted if I was able to quit so
easily. Maybe so, and now I've grown to hate the very act of smoking.
I lost both my parents to smoking related diseases and people like me
may be flailing uselessly against this smoking addiction that people
have. But, whether my actions are effective or not, I'll keep trying
because just accepting the status quo means complete capitulation. I
refuse to accept that.

wrote:
On Thu, 6 Feb 2014 16:55:40 -0500, "Mike Marlow"
Think about it Dave - who in this day and age does not know the
hazards of smoking? Those things won't work on that crop of
smokers. Will something else work? I don't know. I'd like to hope
so, but hanging on to tactics that had a marginal benefit at best
(the ads), is kind of pointless.

Everything you've said maybe right. I can only argue my own
experiences with smoking. I started at sixteen and quit when I was
twentyfive as a pack a day smoker.

And to be honest, it was easy for me to quit because of the reasons I
mentioned previously. I realized how tired I was of the sore throat,
the bad taste in my mouth and the nicotine on my fingers. It was as if
I'd just flipped a switch in my mind and that was it. If I could
market that switch I'd become filthy rich overnight.

People have said to me that I wasn't addicted if I was able to quit so
easily. Maybe so, and now I've grown to hate the very act of smoking.
I lost both my parents to smoking related diseases and people like me
may be flailing uselessly against this smoking addiction that people
have. But, whether my actions are effective or not, I'll keep trying
because just accepting the status quo means complete capitulation. I
refuse to accept that.

For what it's worth Dave - I really wasn't trying to suggest capitulation.
Not sure if that may have come across or not. I do think new dialog is in
order for anything like this that has bumped up against a wall and needs new
approaches.

--

-Mike-

On 2/6/2014 3:36 PM, wrote:

On Thu, 06 Feb 2014 11:20:29 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet

Granted cigarette smoking is harmful to your health but if warning
labels and ads on TV and health education at the doctors office and in
schools is not enough then adding taxes is not going to do any thing but
prompt smokers to obtain their tobacco in another way, and that is
typically is illegal.

So you're saying that it's a complete waste of time to tax tobacco and
spend money on warnings and health education? I can't support that
suggestion at all.

Nope, that is not what he said. You did not respond to what was said at
all, you responded to what your imagination provided as a justification
for your position.

Read again what he said actually said ...

In a nutshell, and as a former smoker of 30 years with a 3 pack at day
habit the last ten ending 23 years ago, when a person continues to smoke
despite knowing the very likely consequences to their health, they are
on their own, and should have to live with the consequences of their
actions.

The warnings and health education efforts are all admirable, and have
made a remarkable dent in the number of smokers in this country. I'm all
for continuing those efforts. And I'm fine with a company, like CVS,
deciding to do business as they see fit and putting their money where
their mouth/conscience is.

They are exercising freedom of choice.

But I am totally opposed to treating those who ignore the irrefutable
data as a "social cost"; and who ignore the well known consequences of
smoking because of a pleasurable experience they refuse to overcome
because of an innate personal weakness.

Tough ****, Kemasabe, you want to be a victim, that's fine with me, but
you live with it, and leave me and mine out of it.

--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://www.google.com/+eWoodShop
https://plus.google.com/+KarlCaillouet/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

On 2/6/2014 6:58 PM, Swingman wrote:

Tough ****, Kemasabe, you want to be a victim, that's fine with me, but
you live with it, and leave me and mine out of it.

Rhetorical, for arguments sake "you", Dave, not you personally.

--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://www.google.com/+eWoodShop
https://plus.google.com/+KarlCaillouet/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

On Thu, 06 Feb 2014 18:58:56 -0600, Swingman wrote:
Tough ****, Kemasabe, you want to be a victim, that's fine with me, but
you live with it, and leave me and mine out of it.

I'd be ok with that sentiment if that's where it ended, but it
doesn't. As a society, we all pay for people who can't or won't
change. We all benefit greatly being part of a society, but there's
decided disadvantages too. You and yours are part of it whether you
like it or not.

On 2/6/2014 7:50 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 06 Feb 2014 18:58:56 -0600, Swingman wrote:
Tough ****, Kemasabe, you want to be a victim, that's fine with me, but
you live with it, and leave me and mine out of it.

I'd be ok with that sentiment if that's where it ended, but it
doesn't. As a society, we all pay for people who can't or won't
change. We all benefit greatly being part of a society, but there's
decided disadvantages too. You and yours are part of it whether you
like it or not.

You bet I'm an active participant in society, by serving when called
upon to do so, and paying my way throughout. It is those who are
purposely a parasite feeding on the body of society, and who have done
neither, who deserve no support from those who are.

--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://www.google.com/+eWoodShop
https://plus.google.com/+KarlCaillouet/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

Swingman wrote:
On 2/6/2014 7:50 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 06 Feb 2014 18:58:56 -0600, Swingman wrote:
Tough ****, Kemasabe, you want to be a victim, that's fine with me, but
you live with it, and leave me and mine out of it.

I'd be ok with that sentiment if that's where it ended, but it
doesn't. As a society, we all pay for people who can't or won't
change. We all benefit greatly being part of a society, but there's
decided disadvantages too. You and yours are part of it whether you
like it or not.

You bet I'm an active participant in society, by serving when called
upon to do so, and paying my way throughout. It is those who are
purposely a parasite feeding on the body of society, and who have done
neither, who deserve no support from those who are.


Here's a thought that has occurred to me before. Don't people who take
"unnecessary chances"--say like people who run lathes, increase the cost
to society in the form of higher insurance premiums for those that
don't? I'm "not Saying Anything", I'm just providing an example, a data
point. I may get a lathe myself someday... if I'm feeling lucky... ; )

Bill wrote:
Swingman wrote:
On 2/6/2014 7:50 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 06 Feb 2014 18:58:56 -0600, Swingman wrote:
Tough ****, Kemasabe, you want to be a victim, that's fine with me, but
you live with it, and leave me and mine out of it.

I'd be ok with that sentiment if that's where it ended, but it
doesn't. As a society, we all pay for people who can't or won't
change. We all benefit greatly being part of a society, but there's
decided disadvantages too. You and yours are part of it whether you
like it or not.

You bet I'm an active participant in society, by serving when called
upon to do so, and paying my way throughout. It is those who are
purposely a parasite feeding on the body of society, and who have done
neither, who deserve no support from those who are.


Here's a thought that has occurred to me before. Don't people who take
"unnecessary chances"--say like people who run lathes, increase the cost
to society in the form of higher insurance premiums for those that don't?
I'm "not Saying Anything", I'm just providing an example, a data point.
I may get a lathe myself someday... if I'm feeling lucky... ; )

Here's a better thought ... only the apathetic and stupid allow
corporations to dictate their choices in life.
--
www.ewoodshop.com (Mobile)

Swingman wrote:
Bill wrote:
Swingman wrote:
On 2/6/2014 7:50 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 06 Feb 2014 18:58:56 -0600, Swingman wrote:
Tough ****, Kemasabe, you want to be a victim, that's fine with me, but
you live with it, and leave me and mine out of it.
I'd be ok with that sentiment if that's where it ended, but it
doesn't. As a society, we all pay for people who can't or won't
change. We all benefit greatly being part of a society, but there's
decided disadvantages too. You and yours are part of it whether you
like it or not.
You bet I'm an active participant in society, by serving when called
upon to do so, and paying my way throughout. It is those who are
purposely a parasite feeding on the body of society, and who have done
neither, who deserve no support from those who are.

Here's a thought that has occurred to me before. Don't people who take
"unnecessary chances"--say like people who run lathes, increase the cost
to society in the form of higher insurance premiums for those that don't?
I'm "not Saying Anything", I'm just providing an example, a data point.
I may get a lathe myself someday... if I'm feeling lucky... ; )
Here's a better thought ... only the apathetic and stupid allow
corporations to dictate their choices in life.

MARKETING makes that a tough battle (did you watch the Superbowl?) But
its a battle I have been increasing vigilant in fighting, as least to
some degree (for myself).
I think to do this, one much even take the time and effort to understand
the psychological techniques that marketers use. I don't think
most people are willing to invest even as much energy at this, as
evidently you and I have. By the way, they say "If you tell someone
something 6 times, that they will start to believe it".

Can you think of the dog and the horse scenario without thinking of
Budweiser? They want to be your "friend"! To me, that's sort of
scary. The people who greet you as you enter or leave a casino door,
they want to be your "friend" too, just like the greeter at Walmart. I
think I got interested in this "battle" when one of my junior high
teachers pointing out "hidden images" in the art work of liquor
advertisements in magazines. It's a jungle out there! ; ) Newport,
Alive with ....

Bill

On 2/7/2014 3:15 PM, Bill wrote:

Can you think of the dog and the horse scenario without thinking of
Budweiser?

A letter to the editor in the Hartford Courant lashed out at the
commercial. She said it glorified puppy mills, showed poor treatment
since the puppy escaped and sent a wrong message to children. I thought
they were selling beer.

On Fri, 07 Feb 2014 07:49:44 -0600, Swingman wrote:

Bill wrote:
Swingman wrote:
On 2/6/2014 7:50 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 06 Feb 2014 18:58:56 -0600, Swingman wrote:
Tough ****, Kemasabe, you want to be a victim, that's fine with me, but
you live with it, and leave me and mine out of it.

I'd be ok with that sentiment if that's where it ended, but it
doesn't. As a society, we all pay for people who can't or won't
change. We all benefit greatly being part of a society, but there's
decided disadvantages too. You and yours are part of it whether you
like it or not.

You bet I'm an active participant in society, by serving when called
upon to do so, and paying my way throughout. It is those who are
purposely a parasite feeding on the body of society, and who have done
neither, who deserve no support from those who are.


Here's a thought that has occurred to me before. Don't people who take
"unnecessary chances"--say like people who run lathes, increase the cost
to society in the form of higher insurance premiums for those that don't?
I'm "not Saying Anything", I'm just providing an example, a data point.
I may get a lathe myself someday... if I'm feeling lucky... ; )

Here's a better thought ... only the apathetic and stupid allow
corporations to dictate their choices in life.

What do you call someone who allows government to dictate their
choices in life?







A: subject

On 2/7/2014 5:45 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 2/7/2014 3:15 PM, Bill wrote:

Can you think of the dog and the horse scenario without thinking of
Budweiser?

A letter to the editor in the Hartford Courant lashed out at the
commercial. She said it glorified puppy mills, showed poor treatment
since the puppy escaped and sent a wrong message to children. I thought
they were selling beer.



I thought last years ad was better.

On 2/7/2014 5:48 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 07 Feb 2014 07:49:44 -0600, Swingman wrote:

Here's a better thought ... only the apathetic and stupid allow
corporations to dictate their choices in life.

What do you call someone who allows government to dictate their
choices in life?

A: subject

Close ... serf

--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://www.google.com/+eWoodShop
https://plus.google.com/+KarlCaillouet/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)