Good going anti smokers
- Thread starter Evil Dave
- Start date
funnymouth
Active member
big brother indeed. regulation of soda is far from a concern of mine, however. im more worried about my civil rights being violated and my privacy being invaded by our \"1984\"-esque oligarchy of a government. i can thank you, evil dave, for that 
.
the taxes thing i can understand - we are a nation of .... erm.... large prople. soda consumption is closely linked to childhood obesity and serious helth risks which my income tax supports. i dont drink soda, and i dont want to pay for other peoples unhealthy choices. perhaps some of that money can be used to fund \"health\" classes in public schools.
still, as far as im concerened self protection laws are crap. the government shouldnt babysit its people from themselves (though they should protect its people and the environment from OTHER people). in santa cruz smoking in bars happens all the time, so dont be worried about meaningless attempts to control our behavior. if you live in a community that doesnt care, laws will not be enforced.
.the taxes thing i can understand - we are a nation of .... erm.... large prople. soda consumption is closely linked to childhood obesity and serious helth risks which my income tax supports. i dont drink soda, and i dont want to pay for other peoples unhealthy choices. perhaps some of that money can be used to fund \"health\" classes in public schools.
still, as far as im concerened self protection laws are crap. the government shouldnt babysit its people from themselves (though they should protect its people and the environment from OTHER people). in santa cruz smoking in bars happens all the time, so dont be worried about meaningless attempts to control our behavior. if you live in a community that doesnt care, laws will not be enforced.
Shawn R. L.
New member
Big Brother?? I\'d call it Big Mother. \'They\' are going to make the world perfectly safe for everyone and we will all die from boredom...................no thanks, I\'ll live with some risks, thank you very much.
Ridiculous, absolutely ridiculous. Over-consumption of sugar is linked with obesity, so tax anything that has sugar in it! Over-consumption of food of almost any sort is linked with obesity. Yay, tax food! In fact, over tax anything where too much of it is bad for our health! Too much oxygen can burn our lungs, so tax the shit! Next thing you know, they\'ll be wanting to tax sex.
F\'in\' ridiculous.
F\'in\' ridiculous.
That has to be the biggest leap of illogic I\'ve seen!
This is stupid ... squared.
In one sense the logic doesn\'t work. If you want to argue the sugar aspect you have to tax far more things than soda. Fruit juices can be just as vile sugar wise. (In fact any liquid product with a high sugar content is technically \"bad\" because the body doesn\'t process liquid food in the same manner as it does solid food. The latter will give the feeling that you are full faster than the former.)
But the second dimension of the stupidity is even more insane. It took literally decades for the cigarette tax to really work in places like New York. Just like in prohibition people used to run cigarettes over the borders; go to Indian reservations where there was no tax; purchase them over the internet. It was only recently that New York managed to shut down the internet sales, for example.
This is stupid ... squared.
In one sense the logic doesn\'t work. If you want to argue the sugar aspect you have to tax far more things than soda. Fruit juices can be just as vile sugar wise. (In fact any liquid product with a high sugar content is technically \"bad\" because the body doesn\'t process liquid food in the same manner as it does solid food. The latter will give the feeling that you are full faster than the former.)
But the second dimension of the stupidity is even more insane. It took literally decades for the cigarette tax to really work in places like New York. Just like in prohibition people used to run cigarettes over the borders; go to Indian reservations where there was no tax; purchase them over the internet. It was only recently that New York managed to shut down the internet sales, for example.
Ebonbuddha
Active member
Yeah. It is pretty silly. But not as silly as the girls who wanted to sue McDonalds because they got fat. They needed a stern kick in the a$$.
When is someone going to say,
Ok. You guys are just being silly\" and stop the nonsense.
But then again, I am dibetic. I guess I am pretty safe. My sodas don\'t have sugar.:flip::bouncy::flip:
Now watch someone buy into the urban myth about aspartame and then I am screwed. I wonder what Foamy would have to say about this.
When is someone going to say,
Ok. You guys are just being silly\" and stop the nonsense.
But then again, I am dibetic. I guess I am pretty safe. My sodas don\'t have sugar.:flip::bouncy::flip:
Now watch someone buy into the urban myth about aspartame and then I am screwed. I wonder what Foamy would have to say about this.
No Such Agency
New member
Unfortunately, the North American sedentary lifestyle is also to blame for obesity - will the gov\'t fine employers who make their workers sit in a cubicle all day? I somehow doubt it.
I don\'t think smoking should be allowed in public buildings simply because you are subjecting others to the health hazards. So no smoking in restaurants, bars etc. It\'s just gross and waitresses and bartenders can\'t wear respirators on the job. Wanna smoke in your own home? Fine, but don\'t subject your kids to it either - my dad quit smoking after my baby brother turned out to have a serious smoke allergy.
And funnymouth is right, you want to talk \"Big Brother\", don\'t look at some soda tax. Look at your newly-renewed PATRIOT Act and stuff like that. I don\'t want to start a political debate here but that stuff is much more intrusive than a tax on carbonated hummingbird food
I don\'t think smoking should be allowed in public buildings simply because you are subjecting others to the health hazards. So no smoking in restaurants, bars etc. It\'s just gross and waitresses and bartenders can\'t wear respirators on the job. Wanna smoke in your own home? Fine, but don\'t subject your kids to it either - my dad quit smoking after my baby brother turned out to have a serious smoke allergy.
And funnymouth is right, you want to talk \"Big Brother\", don\'t look at some soda tax. Look at your newly-renewed PATRIOT Act and stuff like that. I don\'t want to start a political debate here but that stuff is much more intrusive than a tax on carbonated hummingbird food
airhead
Coffin Dodger / Keymaster
Dave, I thought the Republican party (me too) was supposed to be the party of LESS govenment. Lieing bastards all of them.
I\'ve always been a closet Libertarian, but don\'t agree with their stand on drugs - and I think they need to work more from the bottom up to be a viable third party. Until they get there, like any other third party, they are a wasted vote.
Then there are the bureaucrats and agencies (pick any 3 letters) that can create \'codes\' that are equal to law without any legislative approval. They are going to choke this country if we let them.
I\'ve always been a closet Libertarian, but don\'t agree with their stand on drugs - and I think they need to work more from the bottom up to be a viable third party. Until they get there, like any other third party, they are a wasted vote.
Then there are the bureaucrats and agencies (pick any 3 letters) that can create \'codes\' that are equal to law without any legislative approval. They are going to choke this country if we let them.
freakinacage
Well-known member
this is utter crap. they are going to stop king size mars bars too. crazy! i am avereage weight for my height (although i reckon i look underweight) and if i want to have a king size i should be allowed one. one soda does not make you obese.
as for the anti smoking - i stick with what i said before - do whatever you want as long as it doesn\'t affect me
as for the anti smoking - i stick with what i said before - do whatever you want as long as it doesn\'t affect me
Sorry, dude, the Patriot act bothers me not one bit.Originally posted by funnymouth
big brother indeed. regulation of soda is far from a concern of mine, however. im more worried about my civil rights being violated and my privacy being invaded by our \"1984\"-esque oligarchy of a government. i can thank you, evil dave, for that
Everything Bush has done has been done before by other Presidents, Carter did wire taps, Clinton did them and allowed secret searches of a persons home and office.
I\'ve had this same discussion on another forum, and people tend to forget the civil rights that our government has broken before Bush.
- The very nation itself was based on the civil right violation, murder andtheft of land from the indeginous people.
- The slave trade.
- The interment of Japanese/Americans during WWII.
- Dropping an atomic bomb on a heavily populated civilian area.
Is your privacy worth thousands of lives?
Is it worth one?
darthfoley
Active member
Depends on what you mean by \'less government\'. I heard some yapping head on one of the news channels basically put it as the Demos want to tax you at 50% and the Repubs want to tax you at 48%. Technically less, yes, but still....
And I\'m going to take issue with the \'wasted vote\' comment. There\'s no way any \'third\' party will ever reach any sort of level of success with that kind of thinking. Voting for the \'lesser of two evils\' is part of the problem.
As for the topic of conversation...silly, of course, but not surprising.
And I\'m going to take issue with the \'wasted vote\' comment. There\'s no way any \'third\' party will ever reach any sort of level of success with that kind of thinking. Voting for the \'lesser of two evils\' is part of the problem.
As for the topic of conversation...silly, of course, but not surprising.
darthfoley
Active member
I thought *all* our rights were well worth the lives of those who died in war to protect them.
And I\'ve seen the \'well other presidents have done similar things\' argument before...and sorry, but just because somebody else did something f\'d up doesn\'t make it right for the current administration to do so, too.
freakinacage
Well-known member
my privacy bothers me very little. the government can know everything about me as far as i care. as long as they don\'t shout it from the roof tops or come up to me and laugh in my face, i don\'t give a damn what they know. i still feel that people who don\'t like being watched have something to hide.
Sure, they are to those that fought for them, but then there\'s a thing called reality and practicality.
You want to be safe from people bombing you, but you want everyone\'s privacy upheld.
That doesn\'t allow prevention, that only allows for the government agencies to figure out what happened after the fact.
Similar to our police, do they actually prevent crimes? They just solve them.
Legacy Account
Active member
Trouble is, it\'s the thin end of the wedge.
How long before there are DNA databases and the like? I certainly don\'t like the idea of companies using that sort of information for marketing and selling stuff to me. Or not in the case of insurance.
Anyone seen Gattaca?
How long before there are DNA databases and the like? I certainly don\'t like the idea of companies using that sort of information for marketing and selling stuff to me. Or not in the case of insurance.
Anyone seen Gattaca?
darthfoley
Active member
I have to admit, Evil Dave, you have me confused. You somehow went from a thread about government taxation on cigarettes/soda being Orwellian to defending the government illegally spying on its own citizens.
So...are you pro- or anti- Big Brother here?
So...are you pro- or anti- Big Brother here?
I don\'t care if the government knows what I\'m doing, I do care, however, if the government forces me do something that others think is in my best interests.
Government Knowledge without interferance = still Free
Government interferance with choices that only affect myself = Not Free
Every Government is put into place with the intention of protecting it\'s citizens in some fashion, so some Big Brotherism is necesary.
How a citizen chooses to live, without violating others rights, is up to the citizen and should never be forgotten by those that follow a completly different set of rules in DC.
