The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

No Tobacco Day Options
srirr
Posted: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 1:01:36 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 12/29/2009
Posts: 8,507
Neurons: 484,288
World No Tobacco Day is observed around the world every year on May 31. It is meant to encourage a 24-hour period of abstinence from all forms of tobacco consumption. We all know about effects caused by tobacco. Say no to it. If you consume tobacco in any form, leave it for a day. It would be better if you can leave it forever.



[image not available]
sahra
Posted: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 4:32:44 AM
Rank: Newbie

Joined: 5/4/2011
Posts: 16
Neurons: 48
Location: Algeria
There should be 365 no tobacco days Pray
Once my doctor asked when I would stop smoking, cause I suffer from a severe allergy, and I answered him when all the smokers would stop it.
Of course I'm not a smoker I mean I'm a passive one like many people. I have one question for the smokers : I do believe they have the right to smoke and it's up to them to handle the consequences, but do they ever think that we, non-smokers have the right not to smoke and breathe non-polluted air?
My freedom ends where others' begin!
pedro
Posted: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 4:58:38 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/21/2009
Posts: 13,057
Neurons: 63,022
sahra wrote:
There should be 365 no tobacco days Pray
Once my doctor asked when I would stop smoking, cause I suffer from a severe allergy, and I answered him when all the smokers would stop it.
Of course I'm not a smoker I mean I'm a passive one like many people. I have one question for the smokers : I do believe they have the right to smoke and it's up to them to handle the consequences, but do they ever think that we, non-smokers have the right not to smoke and breathe non-polluted air?
My freedom ends where others' begin!



My stock reply questions to all the anti-smokers is 'do you make unnecessary car jouneys?' and 'could you forego your solitary drive to work and use public transport?' as cars cause vastly more damage to you non-smokers than passive cigarette smoking.
sahra
Posted: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 5:29:53 AM
Rank: Newbie

Joined: 5/4/2011
Posts: 16
Neurons: 48
Location: Algeria
pedro wrote:
sahra wrote:
There should be 365 no tobacco days Pray
Once my doctor asked when I would stop smoking, cause I suffer from a severe allergy, and I answered him when all the smokers would stop it.
Of course I'm not a smoker I mean I'm a passive one like many people. I have one question for the smokers : I do believe they have the right to smoke and it's up to them to handle the consequences, but do they ever think that we, non-smokers have the right not to smoke and breathe non-polluted air?
My freedom ends where others' begin!



My stock reply questions to all the anti-smokers is 'do you make unnecessary car jouneys?' and 'could you forego your solitary drive to work and use public transport?' as cars cause vastly more damage to you non-smokers than passive cigarette smoking.


Your totaly right! but I think there's no need to worsen the situation especially in closed areas. As we all know the only one to take benefit from tobacco is the manufacturer not even the silent dying smoker.
boneyfriend
Posted: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 8:35:50 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/3/2009
Posts: 2,625
Neurons: 10,546
Location: Columbia, South Carolina, United States
I wish I had had some warning about No Tobacco Day. I've messed it up already. But for you, Srirr, I will try to adhere from this moment on.
Vickster
Posted: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 8:54:22 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 2/19/2010
Posts: 2,404
Neurons: 7,211
Location: Massachusetts, United States
sahra wrote:
There should be 365 no tobacco days Pray
Once my doctor asked when I would stop smoking, cause I suffer from a severe allergy, and I answered him when all the smokers would stop it.
Of course I'm not a smoker I mean I'm a passive one like many people. I have one question for the smokers : I do believe they have the right to smoke and it's up to them to handle the consequences, but do they ever think that we, non-smokers have the right not to smoke and breathe non-polluted air?
My freedom ends where others' begin!


Yes... I too wish people wouldn't smoke next to my two year old child who also has asthma.. People are very inconsiderate... I also can't stand picking up cigarette butts thrown out of their cars into my yard... you want to smoke? Keep you mess to yourself.. is it that hard to extinquish it and throw it in the trash??

btw... not all can take public transportation... I can ride for free and would love to save money and take it if it would match my work schedule/day care hours... plus many people do use it... have you ever taken it? It's always packed like sardines...
pedro
Posted: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 9:13:47 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/21/2009
Posts: 13,057
Neurons: 63,022
I take public transport, I have asthma and I smoke moderately. I haven't had one on no smoking day but I generally only smoke in the evening which is what I will do today. Public transport isn't too bad in London (UK) apart from at the weekends when everything is 'being upgraded'. Perhaps if more people lobbied their representatives they could put pressure on transport providers to give better service.
animalfarm
Posted: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 11:12:00 AM
Rank: Newbie

Joined: 8/17/2010
Posts: 12
Neurons: 36
Location: Guatemala
cheers Pedro!!!
srirr
Posted: Wednesday, June 1, 2011 12:22:26 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 12/29/2009
Posts: 8,507
Neurons: 484,288
Annie, you put a smile on my face. :) Thanks.

Smoking is a serious concern. We often neglect the effects of smoking on others. In fact, as Pedro raised one more issue, we often neglect effects of many of our acts on others. We care only for our comfort, luxary, style, show, machoism. If we start thinking about others, the world will be heaven.
Truthseeker
Posted: Wednesday, June 1, 2011 7:38:41 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/10/2010
Posts: 275
Neurons: 820
An interesting aside is that the Federal and State governments in the U.S. reap about 25 billion dollars a year from cigarette sales. I wonder where they're going to make that up once everyone stops smoking?

sisikou
Posted: Wednesday, June 1, 2011 7:54:43 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/2/2011
Posts: 1,666
Neurons: 4,880
Location: Taiwan
My brother-in-law always asks my husband and I buy him cigarettes at the airport "tax-free" shop.
Each one can take two boxes (altogether 20*12*2)=480 cigarettes.Not talking
Each time we bring him (480*2)=960 cigarettes.Not talking

He did a lung operation years before, but it seems impossible for him to quit smoking.

Sometimes we keep it as a secret when we travel abroad.
percivalpecksniff
Posted: Wednesday, June 1, 2011 9:05:46 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/1/2011
Posts: 1,523
Neurons: 3,404
Location: United Kingdom
I have never smoked but I thought the following reply by Pedro to be valid except on one count: that two bad decisions do not amount to a good one.

Pedro said:

My stock reply questions to all the anti-smokers is 'do you make unnecessary car jouneys?' and 'could you forego your solitary drive to work and use public transport?' as cars cause vastly more damage to you non-smokers than passive cigarette smoking.
Ray41
Posted: Thursday, June 2, 2011 2:18:38 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/9/2010
Posts: 1,937
Neurons: 45,980
Location: Orange, New South Wales, Australia
Truthseeker wrote:
An interesting aside is that the Federal and State governments in the U.S. reap about 25 billion dollars a year from cigarette sales. I wonder where they're going to make that up once everyone stops smoking?


This is hardly a valid question. The cost of medical expenses to keep a smoker productive [or alive] far out-ways any revenue collected.
On top of that, there are all the work days that smokers take off sick,[yes, they take far more than non smokers] plus the loss of productivity.
In Australia we have been bringing in new laws over a period of time to reduce[ultimately eliminate] smoking in work places, clubs, public transport, etc. There is still some loss of production as workers sneak out to have a quick drag, but the incidence of smoking is decreasing and the health system is in a better situation to treat those in real need, not those who choose to inflict lung and heart disease on themselves [and work colleagues].
In our relatively small population over 15,000 people die every year from causes directly attributable to cigarette smoking, which is on the top of the list of deaths per head of population.
Then there are those who are too sick to work, those slowly dying of emphysema.
The cost of trying to give these people back some quality of life is far more costly than any 'revenue' they have ever paid on the cigarettes they have smoked.
Truthseeker
Posted: Thursday, June 2, 2011 7:06:35 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/10/2010
Posts: 275
Neurons: 820
Ray41 wrote:
Truthseeker wrote:
An interesting aside is that the Federal and State governments in the U.S. reap about 25 billion dollars a year from cigarette sales. I wonder where they're going to make that up once everyone stops smoking?


This is hardly a valid question. The cost of medical expenses to keep a smoker productive [or alive] far out-ways any revenue collected.



I beg to differ. The question is VERY valid. Money collected from cigarette taxes are spent on a wide variety of things in addition to general health issues, ranging from traffic enforcement to employee payrolls.

Once again, I ask: where will the government get the money to replace tax money collected on cigarettes when there are no more smokers to ante up?

Ray41
Posted: Thursday, June 2, 2011 7:40:46 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/9/2010
Posts: 1,937
Neurons: 45,980
Location: Orange, New South Wales, Australia
Agree to a point. Tax from cigarettes goes into 'consolidated revenue' out of which governments apportion set amounts to various departments.
The cost of treating tobacco related disease/illness would still be greater than the specific tax collected.
The money not spent on tobacco/cigarettes would be available to be spent on other consumer goods 'which are still taxable', albeit not at the same high rate.
Truthseeker
Posted: Thursday, June 2, 2011 8:21:57 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/10/2010
Posts: 275
Neurons: 820
Ray41 wrote:
Agree to a point. Tax from cigarettes goes into 'consolidated revenue' out of which governments apportion set amounts to various departments.
The cost of treating tobacco related disease/illness would still be greater than the specific tax collected.
The money not spent on tobacco/cigarettes would be available to be spent on other consumer goods 'which are still taxable', albeit not at the same high rate.


The money would be available, but would NOT be taxed at the same rate as cigarettes. I am a non-smoker. I've NEVER smoked. But I do defend the rights of those who wish to smoke.

There would still be a huge difference in the revenue. Who's going to make that up?

I have an idea. How about taxing the rich? That seems to be the only solution that is coming from the left.
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.