Because 4X4s use lots of gas, causin lots mor polution than a smoker - esp. if youre usin it to go what I asume was a short distnce from home to school + back
Smoker haters
- Thread starter Graphic Griffin
- Start date
vslayer
Yes indeed. Here (uk) a pack of twenty costs about £5 (about $8).
Sixty percent at least is tax. Put that on your forty percent income tax and your seventeen point five value tax and you're surely more than most of the way there to meet any possible healthcare costs that you will incure. So when the smoker is already paying tax equal to more than the cost of their treatment, why should they have to pay extra to cover their healthcare?
Last edited:
you know what i've noticed; in delaware you're no longer allowed to smoke in restaurants, bars, etc... so what do people do? they go stand outside the door to smoke. now when you walk by the entrance to the place you get a face full of smoke, at least if you walk into a smoke bar you make the choice to do it. not that i mind, i smoke occasionally, mostly cigars, but i have friends who bitch about it and wave their hand in front of their face and that shit. anyway, i think it shold be up to the owner of the bar.
Tiassa, that's a funny point, but also the Jack Daniel's factory is in a dry county, just another irony like that.
Tiassa, that's a funny point, but also the Jack Daniel's factory is in a dry county, just another irony like that.
W
WildBlueYonder
Guest
the stink, man, get out here, its all over your cloths, its on your fingers, you reekAwake said:
that's because he can now smell the fumes, the reek, eghgggag
not true, most smokers resent people telling them what to do
btimsah said:
There are a few assertions that bring that result. Important for our purposes, though, was an amazing declaration from Henry Waxman, a California congressman, who in the 1990s stated that cigarettes were the #1 cause of air pollution in Los Angeles. That was probably ten years ago. Anecdotally:
• My partner recalls a story her mother told once or twice. In the early 1970s, the family lived in Los Angeles. Public transportation was a mess, and as late as the mid-90s, I was told it remained a mess. My partner's mother tells of walking to work, a matter of six blocks. She would dress at home, leave the house, arrive at work, and promptly remove her nylons and wash them in the bathroom sink. The water coming off them would turn black from the amount of crap accrued in the short walk.
• A close friend went to college in California in the early 1990s, and was for a few years befuddled by the habit of getting into a car in order to go three blocks. Down in L.A., he was flabbergasted when staying at a friend's house. They got a call to hop on over to their dealer's house. They took two cars. One went to a convenience store two blocks away to pick up beer. The other went to the dealer's house. Driving directions? Pull into traffic, drive to the end of the block. Drive through the intersection, find parking. Second house on the right. Yeah. Two blocks and a half a block.
• In about March, 1996, I drove from Salem, Oregon, down to Castaic, California. From the south side of the vine, you could see all the way to Los Angeles. Specifically, you could see a brown dome on the horizon.
• A close friend went to college in California in the early 1990s, and was for a few years befuddled by the habit of getting into a car in order to go three blocks. Down in L.A., he was flabbergasted when staying at a friend's house. They got a call to hop on over to their dealer's house. They took two cars. One went to a convenience store two blocks away to pick up beer. The other went to the dealer's house. Driving directions? Pull into traffic, drive to the end of the block. Drive through the intersection, find parking. Second house on the right. Yeah. Two blocks and a half a block.
• In about March, 1996, I drove from Salem, Oregon, down to Castaic, California. From the south side of the vine, you could see all the way to Los Angeles. Specifically, you could see a brown dome on the horizon.
Waxman's assertion is untenable.
There is the less-damning argument that, standing on the streetcorner, waiting for a bus, huffing all the exhaust that comes from cars waiting for the light to change--you should try 39th and Fremont in Seattle in the morning--the cigarette smoker stationed fifteen feet downwind of the bus stop is the last thing you should be worried about. I believe that's been covered in some form or another in this topic.
But even more absurd is to worry about cigarette smokers if you drive a single-occupancy SUV. If the wind is right, you might catch a whiff of my cigarette from across the street if I'm standing at the curb. However, every morning as the people get ready to leave for work, I can smell their exhaust in my back yard.
And that's where the accusation of hypocrisy comes from. And it's a problem of the politics of personal accountability. What's next? Bacon? Caffeine? It's not so much a slippery-slope worry, but rather the specific question of what are the criteria by which we draw the line between proper and inappropriate detriment to society?
Boxing? Pee-wee football? Mountain-biking? Look at how much trouble silicone breast implants have caused. By what do we measure the harm? Certes, mountain bikes transform the landscape to a small degree, but this is a big country. There's room for them. We ought to have room for single-occupancy vehicles, as well, except that people also complain about traffic and pollution. In a country where a detergent company can buy the rights to and shelve the plans for a detergent-free laundry machine because it would cut into their detergent sales--$3 million, that's all it cost to make that problem go away--we ought to think about our priorities. After all, while they may have invited more pollution with that move, they did protect some jobs.
We climb the mountain because it's there. We leap from bridges with rubber bands strapped to our asses because we can. This is generally treated as an expression of liberty, and not an obligation.
If we have the technology--e.g. cleaner transportation, healthier laundry machine, &c.--should we be obliged to utilize it?
There are better ways to live than most of us are living, regardless of how we define "better". Should we be obliged to them? What is the balance between liberty and obligation?
jennyRater said:
that really depends on the type of 4x4, these new tanks with the huge engines are a problem, but cars like my dads 1980 landrover with a 2L engine get get 30km/litre (driven at 80kmph), if car companies would make better engines ins-tead of larger ones we would be able to run a bus on a 2L engine, the average petrol car harnesses 10% of the energy produced, while old diesels which were more solidly built can get about 30%. car makers are going the worng way.
smoking kills, a little humor.
http://www.killsometime.com/humor/humor.asp?humor=Smoking-Kills
http://www.killsometime.com/humor/humor.asp?humor=Smoking-Kills
Hehe, quite good. 