"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
k.net...

"Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message
...
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 04:02:38 GMT, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

If you going to smoke, smoke an Altria brand. Filthy habit, but I
enjoy the dividends.

Filthy habits are drinking to excess and endangering innocent lives.

I'd be willing to bet that drinking alcohol kills a hell of a lot more
people than cigars do.
Tom,
As a former smoker I always thought smoking was an enjoyable, filthy,
unhealthy habit. I understood non smokers who did not want to smell or
inhale 2nd hand smoke. Since the mid 80's I only smoked outside and
tried to make sure it was not blowing towards non smokers.

Even if 2nd hand smoke was not proven to unhealthy, the smell alone is
offensive to non cigar smokers, even cigarette smokers.


Even if smoking is deadly, it is a free choice item. I can and do enjoy
it being banned from the workplace and bars and dining establishments
here in California. But this is supposed to be a free country. If you
want to smoke in your house, or car, you should be able to. Ballot
measure this election to put a $2.60 tax per pack of ciggies. F'n do
gooders. They say it will cut smoking, and 80% will go to hospitals for
payment of healthcare costs. It is still some fanatic group enforcing
their mores on another group. Short Wave is a health care basket case
from what I understand, but it is his choice to smoke. I used to race
cars, also can be unhealthy, but it is still an action of free (well
expensive) choice.


Here (NY), when the tax jumped in a big way, the two major manufacturers
apparently had enough room in their margins to whack the price. They're
still about five bucks a pack. Predictions were around seven. Never
happened.


But is not right for the government to decide to control some behaviors via
taxation while favoring others. Where the hell is the freedom of choice?
Some extremist group (like PETA?) gets the majority of congress people
bought and passes a $50 a fish caught tax. You still happy with that? You
are in the grocery business, Carbs are bad for you, so a tax of $0.03 an
ounce is placed on carbs. You going to cut your prices. And why should the
private company have to cut prices to offset a tax?

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 15:52:22 +0000, Calif Bill wrote:


Even if smoking is deadly, it is a free choice item. I can and do enjoy
it
being banned from the workplace and bars and dining establishments here
in
California. But this is supposed to be a free country. If you want to
smoke in your house, or car, you should be able to. Ballot measure this
election to put a $2.60 tax per pack of ciggies. F'n do gooders. They
say
it will cut smoking, and 80% will go to hospitals for payment of
healthcare
costs. It is still some fanatic group enforcing their mores on another
group. Short Wave is a health care basket case from what I understand,
but
it is his choice to smoke. I used to race cars, also can be unhealthy,
but
it is still an action of free (well expensive) choice.

While I agree in principle, there are costs, and they should be bore by
those involved. Disregarding lost productivity, it has been estimated
$3.45 per pack, is spent on smoking related medical costs. Personally,
that ballot measure seems pretty fair.

http://www.cdc.gov/od/oc/Media/pressrel/r020412.htm

Over the life of a smoker, it is estimated that they pay a couple of
hundreds the times the cost of health related care. So where is the tax, on
fat? On Carbs? Those cokes rot teeth and add little nutrition to the diet.
Plus it is lost productivity costs as part of the study. Lets tax the World
Series and Super Bowl. They cost productivity also.

"Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message
. ..
Calif Bill wrote:
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
news
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
.net...
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

On 10/28/2006 10:35 AM, JimH wrote:
When our kids were young and we went out to eat we would hire a
babysitter. It was a nice escape from the kids for us and we did
not subject the folks in the restaurant to a screaming baby or
toddler.

My father expected me to behave properly in a restaurant, so I did.
When you were 2?

Eisboch

What's so odd about that? My son caused no problems in restaurants at
that age. He yacked a lot, but he was rarely loud. No tantrums, no
crying and screaming. But, his nap vs fun schedule was easy to work
around. We knew when he normally got tired & cranky, and tried to
avoid taking him out at those times. Some parents are too dumb to spot
the pattern.

Maybe you just did not notice it. When I am in an upscale restaurant
for a later evening meal that is costing me in the range of a $100 I do
not want someone's child inflicted on me. I paid for babysitters when
they were young and there are appropriate places to take you child to
for dinner, but not at 9 pm and the Carnelian room.

If the kid's sounds are no louder than that of the adults, what is the
issue? You don't want to see babies?


Babies are nice, but their sounds can be much louder and annoying than
adults. Since my kids were not perfect like yours, they got tired and
cranky.

Damn, imagine that. An infant who is not perfect and behaves like an
infant. Must be an indication of bad parents.


Nope, infants cause us to not be perfect. We got tired and cranky.

thunder wrote:
On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 15:52:22 +0000, Calif Bill wrote:


Even if smoking is deadly, it is a free choice item. I can and do enjoy it
being banned from the workplace and bars and dining establishments here in
California. But this is supposed to be a free country. If you want to
smoke in your house, or car, you should be able to. Ballot measure this
election to put a $2.60 tax per pack of ciggies. F'n do gooders. They say
it will cut smoking, and 80% will go to hospitals for payment of healthcare
costs. It is still some fanatic group enforcing their mores on another
group. Short Wave is a health care basket case from what I understand, but
it is his choice to smoke. I used to race cars, also can be unhealthy, but
it is still an action of free (well expensive) choice.

While I agree in principle, there are costs, and they should be bore by
those involved. Disregarding lost productivity, it has been estimated
$3.45 per pack, is spent on smoking related medical costs. Personally,
that ballot measure seems pretty fair.

http://www.cdc.gov/od/oc/Media/pressrel/r020412.htm

Smoking related medical costs?

We need to go back to a pay as you go medical care system. No more
insurance and not more medicaid/medicare.

On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 16:26:48 +0000, Calif Bill wrote:


Babies are nice, but their sounds can be much louder and annoying than
adults.

Those sounds are designed to get an adults attention. There is something
primal about the sound, and it is very difficult to ignore.

On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 16:36:44 +0000, Calif Bill wrote:

Lets tax the World
Series and Super Bowl.

Hey, I'm OK with taxing the World Series, but the Superbowl? Surely you
jest. ;-)

Calif Bill wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 04:02:38 GMT, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

If you going to smoke, smoke an Altria brand. Filthy habit, but I enjoy
the
dividends.

Filthy habits are drinking to excess and endangering innocent lives.

I'd be willing to bet that drinking alcohol kills a hell of a lot more
people than cigars do.
--
I'll bet you're wrong.

By the way, you can't partition off just cigars, unless you do the same
with alcohol, like compare cigar related deaths to, say, gin related
deaths.

http://tiki.oneworld.net/pollution/smoking.html

says that 434,000 people die each year from smoking in the U.S and
60,000 die each year from second hand smoke.

Then this site puts alcohol deaths at 100,000:

http://www.bookmark-manager.com/permalink-41


And I think they are full of it, to claim 60k deaths from second hand smoke.
If that was true, you would have a heck of a lot more than 434k dead from
direct injection. I one of those numbers that activitists can throw out and
feel good, and hard to prove otherwise.

No those figures are pretty accurate. They don't just dream them up, as
you think. Statistics is an interesting field, and if you think that
they just come up with numbers off the top of their head, you are sadly
mistaken.

Calif Bill wrote:
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
k.net...

"Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message
...
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 04:02:38 GMT, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

If you going to smoke, smoke an Altria brand. Filthy habit, but I
enjoy the dividends.

Filthy habits are drinking to excess and endangering innocent lives.

I'd be willing to bet that drinking alcohol kills a hell of a lot more
people than cigars do.
Tom,
As a former smoker I always thought smoking was an enjoyable, filthy,
unhealthy habit. I understood non smokers who did not want to smell or
inhale 2nd hand smoke. Since the mid 80's I only smoked outside and
tried to make sure it was not blowing towards non smokers.

Even if 2nd hand smoke was not proven to unhealthy, the smell alone is
offensive to non cigar smokers, even cigarette smokers.


Even if smoking is deadly, it is a free choice item. I can and do enjoy
it being banned from the workplace and bars and dining establishments
here in California. But this is supposed to be a free country. If you
want to smoke in your house, or car, you should be able to. Ballot
measure this election to put a $2.60 tax per pack of ciggies. F'n do
gooders. They say it will cut smoking, and 80% will go to hospitals for
payment of healthcare costs. It is still some fanatic group enforcing
their mores on another group. Short Wave is a health care basket case
from what I understand, but it is his choice to smoke. I used to race
cars, also can be unhealthy, but it is still an action of free (well
expensive) choice.


Here (NY), when the tax jumped in a big way, the two major manufacturers
apparently had enough room in their margins to whack the price. They're
still about five bucks a pack. Predictions were around seven. Never
happened.


But is not right for the government to decide to control some behaviors via
taxation while favoring others.

Why? Smokers take a huge amount of money from the government when they
get sick and cancerous because many many smokers can not afford
healthcare.

"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...

Calif Bill wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 04:02:38 GMT, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

If you going to smoke, smoke an Altria brand. Filthy habit, but I
enjoy
the
dividends.

Filthy habits are drinking to excess and endangering innocent lives.

I'd be willing to bet that drinking alcohol kills a hell of a lot more
people than cigars do.
--
I'll bet you're wrong.

By the way, you can't partition off just cigars, unless you do the same
with alcohol, like compare cigar related deaths to, say, gin related
deaths.

http://tiki.oneworld.net/pollution/smoking.html

says that 434,000 people die each year from smoking in the U.S and
60,000 die each year from second hand smoke.

Then this site puts alcohol deaths at 100,000:

http://www.bookmark-manager.com/permalink-41


And I think they are full of it, to claim 60k deaths from second hand
smoke.
If that was true, you would have a heck of a lot more than 434k dead from
direct injection. I one of those numbers that activitists can throw out
and
feel good, and hard to prove otherwise.

No those figures are pretty accurate. They don't just dream them up, as
you think. Statistics is an interesting field, and if you think that
they just come up with numbers off the top of their head, you are sadly
mistaken.


There is so much controversy on 2nd hand illnesses. My buddy smoked, he is
healthy but his wife got breast cancer. Is that a 2nd hand effect?

"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

Calif Bill wrote:
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
k.net...

"Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message
...
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 04:02:38 GMT, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

If you going to smoke, smoke an Altria brand. Filthy habit, but I
enjoy the dividends.

Filthy habits are drinking to excess and endangering innocent lives.

I'd be willing to bet that drinking alcohol kills a hell of a lot
more
people than cigars do.
Tom,
As a former smoker I always thought smoking was an enjoyable, filthy,
unhealthy habit. I understood non smokers who did not want to smell
or
inhale 2nd hand smoke. Since the mid 80's I only smoked outside and
tried to make sure it was not blowing towards non smokers.

Even if 2nd hand smoke was not proven to unhealthy, the smell alone
is
offensive to non cigar smokers, even cigarette smokers.


Even if smoking is deadly, it is a free choice item. I can and do
enjoy
it being banned from the workplace and bars and dining establishments
here in California. But this is supposed to be a free country. If
you
want to smoke in your house, or car, you should be able to. Ballot
measure this election to put a $2.60 tax per pack of ciggies. F'n do
gooders. They say it will cut smoking, and 80% will go to hospitals
for
payment of healthcare costs. It is still some fanatic group enforcing
their mores on another group. Short Wave is a health care basket case
from what I understand, but it is his choice to smoke. I used to race
cars, also can be unhealthy, but it is still an action of free (well
expensive) choice.


Here (NY), when the tax jumped in a big way, the two major
manufacturers
apparently had enough room in their margins to whack the price. They're
still about five bucks a pack. Predictions were around seven. Never
happened.


But is not right for the government to decide to control some behaviors
via
taxation while favoring others.

Why? Smokers take a huge amount of money from the government when they
get sick and cancerous because many many smokers can not afford
healthcare.


And lots of smokers are fully employed. And have insurance, which factors
in smoking in rates. Lots of poor, uninsured, unemployed are morbidly obese
(only in America) should we tax fat?