• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

New Smoking Ban Good or Bad?

What of the New Ban.

  • Good

    Votes: 19 27.1%
  • Too far

    Votes: 49 70.0%
  • Other

    Votes: 2 2.9%

  • Total voters
    70
I don't know where you live but in my world 96 year olds are just made as comfortable as possible in their last few months. Expensive surgery, treatments or live saving measures are not performed on 96 year olds.

Yeah, cause old people totally never have cancer, or Alzheimer, or any ailment which requires expensive treatments, extended hospital visits, large amounts of medication, etc.

How is the Garden of Eden this time of year, BTW?
 
Yeah, cause old people totally never have cancer, or Alzheimer, or any ailment which requires expensive treatments, extended hospital visits, large amounts of medication, etc.

How is the Garden of Eden this time of year, BTW?
No. Thats not what I said. They don't do expensive surgery or treatments on 96 year olds unless they are trying to screw medicare.
 
Yeah, they just let those jerks die, don't they? No long term hospitalization or usage of services which require massive amounts of money or any of it. You're so right. We also don't spend massive amounts of money trying to find cures for aliments for the old. No sir! I should call up my adviser's father (who is a PhD medical researcher specializing in Alzheimers) to tell him he's out of a job cause we don't spend lots of money on health care for the old.
 
No. Thats not what I said. They don't do expensive surgery or treatments on 96 year olds unless they are trying to screw medicare.

my great uncle had a heart condition. he was 93. they sent him home to die. after 6 months, hospice left. said he had lived too long and that they couldn't stay any longer. he lived for another couple of years after that.
 
my great uncle had a heart condition. he was 93. they sent him home to die. after 6 months, hospice left. said he had lived too long and that they couldn't stay any longer. he lived for another couple of years after that.

Yeah, major organ transplants aren't going to be done on the really old, you have to be slightly younger. But it's not to say that we don't spend massive amounts of money on treating the old.
 
Yeah, major organ transplants aren't going to be done on the really old, you have to be slightly younger. But it's not to say that we don't spend massive amounts of money on treating the old.

my mom died from Alzheimers related complications. the insurance company spent a ton-o-dough on assisted living facility/nursing home expenses alone.
 
Yeah, major organ transplants aren't going to be done on the really old, you have to be slightly younger. But it's not to say that we don't spend massive amounts of money on treating the old.

Of course we do and new treatments are extending the lives of smokers and non smokers alike. In their later years smokers have more medical problems than non smokers. Old smokers are expensive to treat.
 
my mom died from Alzheimers related complications. the insurance company spent a ton-o-dough on assisted living facility/nursing home expenses alone.

Was she too young for medicare?
 
Of course we do and new treatments are extending the lives of smokers and non smokers alike. In their later years smokers have more medical problems than non smokers. Old smokers are expensive to treat.

But most people who would have been taken out by smoking don't make it to quite that age. There are smokers who can make it to really old age, but they're going to be in the same group of really old people and share common ailments.
 
Of course we do and new treatments are extending the lives of smokers and non smokers alike. In their later years smokers have more medical problems than non smokers. Old smokers are expensive to treat.

meh, anecdotal evidence from my personal experience...smokers are either going to die young of cancer and/or related problems or they are going to live forever with few problems. at least that's how it's been in my family

one aunt died at 39 of lung cancer, one uncle died at 45 of a heart attack. grandfather never sick a day, died of heart attack in his 90s. uncle died of a stroke at 75. aunt still smoking strong at 73, no cancer or other problems.
 
meh, anecdotal evidence from my personal experience...smokers are either going to die young of cancer and/or related problems or they are going to live forever with few problems. at least that's how it's been in my family

one aunt died at 39 of lung cancer, one uncle died at 45 of a heart attack. grandfather never sick a day, died of heart attack in his 90s. uncle died of a stroke at 75. aunt still smoking strong at 73, no cancer or other problems.

I know a lot of smokers that lived past 70 and some into their 90s. They had smoking related medical problems as soon as they hit 60. Smoking is a slow death in most cases.
 
I completely support it. Public parks and beaches are there for EVERYONE to enjoy and not for smokers to take the joy away from the MAJORITY of people who DO NOT SMOKE those cancer sticks. With the number of children also assumed to be enjoying such public spaces, that places MORE of an imperative on banning those cancer sticks from such public spaces. You want to poison yourself with that pernicious weed, fine with me. But your rights end at my nose and you have no right to subject me with your cancer sticks on public spaces. Good on New York on this one...
 
Depends on where outdoors though... I used to participate in state level athletic events and people would sit in the stands and smoke. Should be banned...

I totally agree with this... breathing in smoke from cancer sticks while at maximum physical exertion is NEVER a good thing....
 
It's too far to do this to a legal product, but I understand the thinking, but how do you enforce such terrible laws? It's gonna be hit and miss as far as catching people, and then fining the **** out of them. Really taking away rights.

You mean like outdoor consumption of alcoholic beverages in public spaces? Another legal product in most jurisdictions last I checked... The government has the right to restrict the use of legal products by certain classes of individuals and in public spaces...
 
Now subtract out the nominal direct heath care costs of non-smokers and the amount of lost productivity incurred each year out of non-smokers (less you're going to say that non-smokers never get sick or take vacation). Then calculate all the money made per year off of cigarettes to the State, the money saved through pension subsidization, and the additional money paid in insurance premiums from the average smoker. Then you'll have a more realistic number.

Can't speak for others, but I haven't taken sick leave in years and have only twice had to make a doctor's visit in the last three years (non-flu shot related)... I know this isn't the norm, but it is largely through my personal lifestyle choices. I shouldn't be penalized by those who don't make similar, healthy lifestyle choices...
 
It depends. Is the ban really about the clean, fresh air or is it more about the fact that people are slobs and keep littering the place with cigarette butts?

I'm all for keeping parks and beaches as clean as possible.

That's irrelevent, as littering is already covere by statute.

It's clear to me this regulation goes too far. You can't really argue that it's a health issue in an outdoor setting like a park. This is just criminilizing otherwise legal behavior, and coupled with sin taxes, it's highly punitive with little justification.
 
I completely support it. Public parks and beaches are there for EVERYONE to enjoy and not for smokers to take the joy away from the MAJORITY of people who DO NOT SMOKE those cancer sticks. With the number of children also assumed to be enjoying such public spaces, that places MORE of an imperative on banning those cancer sticks from such public spaces. You want to poison yourself with that pernicious weed, fine with me. But your rights end at my nose and you have no right to subject me with your cancer sticks on public spaces. Good on New York on this one...

I don't think we should enforce courtesy by law. Does the same standard apply to offensive perfume? Body odor?
 
Smokers are filthy people who don't give a damn about others.
I favor the ban.
Also much higher taxes on cigarettes to defray the expense of the clean-up....
As far as I am concerned, they can smoke in air-tight canisters and breath their own crap.
 
I don't think we should enforce courtesy by law. Does the same standard apply to offensive perfume? Body odor?
Good points..
A little tolerance goes a long way... much better than my overly emotional rant....
When we have "a better people" regular showers will be in and smelly perfumes will be out, along with the smoke..
 
Just another way to control us...BS plain and simple...
 
Littering is already illegal. What are they going to ban next? Eating popsickles on public?

Well, if you are eating popsicles ON the public, then aren't you violating their rights? :mrgreen:
 
I don't think we should enforce courtesy by law. Does the same standard apply to offensive perfume? Body odor?

Most people don't litter the grounds with perfume bottles....

I could really care less if people can't run around with burning dried leaves wrapped in paper in their mouths. If they weren't so addicted maybe they could go an hour without a cig. I see it as just another sign of weakness with their addiction.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom