Do smoking areas freak you out when you're there?

[topless_mike]

Living in NJ, by now we are used to the non-smoking in just about all indoor places.
But sometimes I venture out and end up eating at a restaurant outside the state where you can smoke indoors.

It feels weird when this happens. Like wait a minute, you're not supposed... oh, its ok here.

Anyone else?

[dino_electropolis]

Living in NJ, by now we are used to the non-smoking in just about all indoor places.
But sometimes I venture out and end up eating at a restaurant outside the state where you can smoke indoors.

It feels weird when this happens. Like wait a minute, you're not supposed... oh, its ok here.

Anyone else?

Tell me more of these fine oasis' of personal freedoms? These last vestiges of americana.

Amaze us with tales of the long, long ago....the before time.

[weekapaugjz]

I smoke and I enjoy places that are smoke free. I enjoy stepping outside for a smoke.

[Dude!]

i wish they would allow
smoking on airplanes
like they used to

makes the cocktail hour
at 30,000 feet
so much more enjoyable

[TheMojoPin]

Tell me more of these fine oasis' of personal freedoms? These last vestiges of americana.

Amaze us with tales of the long, long ago....the before time.

The food tastes and smells like smokey shit.

The end.

[BlackSpider]

The food tastes and smells like smokey shit.

The end.

I'm starvin'.
We got any smoky shit back there, Earl...?

[underdog]

Tell me more of these fine oasis' of personal freedoms? These last vestiges of americana.

Amaze us with tales of the long, long ago....the before time.

It's a personal freedom to be able to smoke in an enclosed place where other people are eating?

Even when I used to smoke, I always thought smoking restaurants were retarded. Half the time, you had to walk through the smoking part to get to the non-smoking part.

[drjoek]

I hate smoking and am glad its not allowed in public places. I dont care one way or another if someone chose to do it. I just am glad to not be exposed to it.
As to the question. I've become very aware of it when it happens to it because it is so rare to be around anyone who smokes, its like an abberation. Where as growing up it was so common place.

[Jujubees2]

Absolutely find it odd to be in a place where there is smoking in public places. When I was in Europe with the family in 2001, the kids immediately noticed that people where smoking in restaurants. I can't stand eating where people are smoking.

[Greg_V]

Only queers don't smoke, give up and deal with it bitches.

[weekapaugjz]

Only queers don't smoke, give up and deal with it bitches.

I like the cut of your jib.

[hydee]

Tell me more of these fine oasis' of personal freedoms? These last vestiges of americana.

Amaze us with tales of the long, long ago....the before time.

I used to work at a greasy spoon when I was in high school, it had a smoking area, that happened to be my section to wait on. The smoking was so bad that there were times I would go home and my mother would accuse me of smoking because she could smell it on my clothes, and this is a women that smoked a pack a day for like 40 years so the smell had to be bad.

It was a great relief when the place became a non-smoking restaurant, I only went home smelling like onion rings and fries and didn't get yelled at for smoking again.

The worst thing on the planet to me is cigarette smoke smelling clothes, both my parents smoked heavily and I would get teased for smelling like cigarettes all the time. That is why I have never even tried a cigarette in my 35 years.

[cougarjake13]

Only queers don't smoke, give up and deal with it bitches.




wouldnt queers be more prone to smoke ??

[Aggie]

It's a personal freedom to be able to smoke in an enclosed place where other people are eating?

Even when I used to smoke, I always thought smoking restaurants were retarded. Half the time, you had to walk through the smoking part to get to the non-smoking part.

Actually, it should be the owner of the establishment's freedom. Not a law. My cousin owned a bar and it went out of business when they banned smoking in NY in bars.

Why go to a bar and overpay for alchol AND have to go outside and smoke? You might as well stay home and drink for cheaper and smoke indoors. Just saying it's fine if you don't want to be around it, but you can choose another restaurant or bar to visit if there is smoking. It killed a lot of businesses.

[Greg_V]

wouldnt queers be more prone to smoke ??

You'd know.

[epo]

Only queers don't smoke, give up and deal with it bitches.

So you finally quit smoking?

[dino_electropolis]

There's too many of you to quote, so i will just give this perspective:


You dont like sand, you dont go to the beach.

You dont like rock music, you dont go to rock concerts.


You dont like rap, you dont go to prison.



If you dont like smoke, dont go to where people are smokin.

Go to some gay ass bar where smokin aint allowed as per the owner's own decision, but stop with this state/fed anti smokin shit.

Cant a sad man in a bar have a smoke with his whiskey.

[HBox]

Actually, it should be the owner of the establishment's freedom. Not a law. My cousin owned a bar and it went out of business when they banned smoking in NY in bars.

Why go to a bar and overpay for alchol AND have to go outside and smoke? You might as well stay home and drink for cheaper and smoke indoors. Just saying it's fine if you don't want to be around it, but you can choose another restaurant or bar to visit if there is smoking. It killed a lot of businesses.

There was no choice in the matter. Where were there any non-smoking bars? And while I feel bad for your brother did he have to compete with any establishments that did allow smoking? If not I don't see how that could be the reason seeing as all his competitors were on the same playing field.

[HBox]

There's too many of you to quote, so i will just give this perspective:


You dont like sand, you dont go to the beach.

You dont like rock music, you dont go to rock concerts.


You dont like rap, you dont go to prison.



If you dont like smoke, dont go to where people are smokin.

Go to some gay ass bar where smokin aint allowed as per the owner's own decision, but stop with this state/fed anti smokin shit.

Cant a sad man in a bar have a smoke with his whiskey.

As soon as people who smoke forgo their health insurance when they get cancer and pay for it all themselves then I'm all for allowing people to smoke wherever they like. Until then since the rest of us are paying higher health insurance costs to foot the bill for the recklessness of smokers go take a fucking walk outside and let us eat a meal in peace.

The argument is always freedom and personal responsibility until the cancer hits.

[underdog]

Actually, it should be the owner of the establishment's freedom. Not a law. My cousin owned a bar and it went out of business when they banned smoking in NY in bars.

Why go to a bar and overpay for alchol AND have to go outside and smoke? You might as well stay home and drink for cheaper and smoke indoors. Just saying it's fine if you don't want to be around it, but you can choose another restaurant or bar to visit if there is smoking. It killed a lot of businesses.

I agree, to a point. I never understood why there was never a "non-smoking" bar market. No one ever opened it. No owner wanted to take the chance, so the government actually had to step in and force their hands. The only non-smoking bar I had ever seen never had any people in it.

[weekapaugjz]

There was no choice in the matter. Where were there any non-smoking bars? And while I feel bad for your brother did he have to compete with any establishments that did allow smoking? If not I don't see how that could be the reason seeing as all his competitors were on the same playing field.

Lots of people simply stopped going to bars in NYS. A limited number of places have received special licsenses to open smoking lounges inside the bar. They had to be able to prove a certain percentage of decline in sales.

[underdog]

You dont like sand, you dont go to the beach.

You dont like rock music, you dont go to rock concerts.

But I'm not going to smoking clubs. I want to go to a bar and get a drink.


Cant a sad man in a bar have a smoke with his whiskey.

You still can. At your home.

[HBox]

Lots of people simply stopped going to bars in NYS. A limited number of places have received special licsenses to open smoking lounges inside the bar. They had to be able to prove a certain percentage of decline in sales.

Oh yeah, I forgot the city ban went into effect before the state bans.

[Gvac]

When I went to Tennessee last summer I was taken aback when I entered a restaurant and was asked if I wanted the smoking or non-smoking section.

Even though it wasn't that long ago that we had it here, I adapted to it quite well and it seemed so odd that there were still places that let you smoke indoors.

I still think it should be up to each individual restaurant or bar as to which policy they'd prefer to have, but I don't mind going outside for a smoke.

[Aggie]

There was no choice in the matter. Where were there any non-smoking bars? And while I feel bad for your brother did he have to compete with any establishments that did allow smoking? If not I don't see how that could be the reason seeing as all his competitors were on the same playing field.

I'm not sure. It was in a podunk town in upstate NY and there really weren't many options at all. This was what he thought, that once the smoking ban took effect the people decided to stay home. It's like an endless winter up there. Who wants to go smoke a cig in -10 degrees and pay for overpriced drinks?

I see both sides and your point about insurance. But what about all the fat asses out there who we're paying for too? Ban fast food and junk food? No thanks, I don't want to live in a country like that but I'm stuck paying for their heart attacks and by passes. Such is life. It's not fair.

[underdog]

I see both sides and your point about insurance. But what about all the fat asses out there who we're paying for too? Ban fast food and junk food? No thanks, I don't want to live in a country like that but I'm stuck paying for their heart attacks and by passes. Such is life. It's not fair.

A lot of places have banned trans fats.

[TheMojoPin]

A lot of places have banned trans fats.

Hopefully HFCS is next.

[HBox]

I'm not sure. It was in a podunk town in upstate NY and there really weren't many options at all. This was what he thought, that once the smoking ban took effect the people decided to stay home. It's like an endless winter up there. Who wants to go smoke a cig in -10 degrees and pay for overpriced drinks?

I see both sides and your point about insurance. But what about all the fat asses out there who we're paying for too? Ban fast food and junk food? No thanks, I don't want to live in a country like that but I'm stuck paying for their heart attacks and by passes. Such is life. It's not fair.

I agree with the point about fat people. Not that I would ideally cut people who live blatantly unhealthy lifestyles totally out of the health care system. I just don't see why a person who stays in great shape and lives a healthy lifestyle is paying the same for health insurance as the 300 pound smoker sitting in the cubicle next door. People who live unhealthy lifestyles should pay much more for their insurance.

But getting back on point, I just like to point out that smokers are never ultimately responsible for the financial consequences of years of smoking. It's the rest of us. When they start doing that I take the personal responsibility argument seriously.

[Dude!]

I agree with the point about fat people. Not that I would ideally cut people who live blatantly unhealthy lifestyles totally out of the health care system. I just don't see why a person who stays in great shape and lives a healthy lifestyle is paying the same for health insurance as the 300 pound smoker sitting in the cubicle next door. People who live unhealthy lifestyles should pay much more for their insurance.

But getting back on point, I just like to point out that smokers are never ultimately responsible for the financial consequences of years of smoking. It's the rest of us. When they start doing that I take the personal responsibility argument seriously.

fine
how you going to police
all the gays that have
unprotected sex?

much greater chance of severe (really severe)
health damage from that than smoking

this is a really slippery slope
(and i don't mean the lubed up ass)

[epo]

fine
how you going to police
all the gays that have
unprotected sex?

much greater chance of severe (really severe)
health damage from that than smoking

this is a really slippery slope
(and i don't mean the lubed up ass)

There is a direct cause/effect to the smoking argument.

Homosexuals having unprotected sex is no different than heterosexuals having unprotected sex. You may want to try the "humans having promiscuous sex" argument. It's much stronger.

[underdog]

fine
how you going to police
all the gays that have
unprotected sex?

much greater chance of severe (really severe)
health damage from that than smoking

this is a really slippery slope
(and i don't mean the lubed up ass)

We don't police all the straights from having unprotected sex, either.

That produces something much more of a financial drain on society and something much more severe than aids.

[HBox]

fine
how you going to police
all the gays that have
unprotected sex?

much greater chance of severe (really severe)
health damage from that than smoking

this is a really slippery slope
(and i don't mean the lubed up ass)

There definitely isn't a much greater chance of severe health damage from unprotected sex. You have AIDS, which medical treatments have made a liveable condition. There is Herpes which isn't lethal. Women have to worry about cervical cancer from HPA but those odds are small in comparison to lung cancer risk.

Smoking can cause lung cancer, esophageal cancer and oral cancer. It can cause other lung diseases. It can cause heart disease. There's no comparison.

Besides which you can easily check for obesity. You can easily check if someone is smoking. You can't reliably and quickly check if someone is leading an unsafe sex life.

[jessicaduh]

i'm going to ban
writing conversational text
in stanzas.

that's the next stop
on the slippery slope
of internet censorship.

[SP1!]

What I dont understand is what the big deal is for smoking in bars/nightclubs? Quite a few of them have paid thousands of dollars for smoke eating machines that render the air purer than the air outside yet they get lumped into the same category.

I hate smoke filled places and when those popped up all over down here it was heaven, one pool bar had a machine that you couldnt even smell people smoking at the table right next to you.

[TripleSkeet]

I can understand the law for restuarants, but I dont understand why in bars it cant be up to the discretion of the owner. If so many people would rather not be around smoke, why wouldnt someone open up a bar like this and rake in the cash? Oh because smoking and drinking go hand in hand, thats why.

I personally dont care because half the places around here dont give a fuck if you smoke most of the time. They just ignore the law because its stupid. Hell the casinos in AC dont even have to follow it.

Smoking in bars never fucking really bothered people until California had to go change the law for all the pussies on the west coast. After that non-smokers suddenly became the whinest fucking faggots out there.

[TripleSkeet]

I agree with the point about fat people. Not that I would ideally cut people who live blatantly unhealthy lifestyles totally out of the health care system. I just don't see why a person who stays in great shape and lives a healthy lifestyle is paying the same for health insurance as the 300 pound smoker sitting in the cubicle next door. People who live unhealthy lifestyles should pay much more for their insurance.

But getting back on point, I just like to point out that smokers are never ultimately responsible for the financial consequences of years of smoking. It's the rest of us. When they start doing that I take the personal responsibility argument seriously.

You know why they pay the same? Because that healthy person has just as much a chance as being hit by a fucking bus and becoming a vegetable for life, thats why. My grandfather smoked 3 packs a day for 40 years, he died at 85 years of age and had been in the hospital about 3 times his whole life. Your argument is flawed.

Seriously you sound like youd like to live in the utopia of San Angeles where everything that is bad for you is illegal. Have fun eating at Taco Bell and listening to commercial jingles while wiping your ass with the 3 seashells. Personally, Id rather eat the ratburgers in the sewer.

[HBox]

You know why they pay the same? Because that healthy person has just as much a chance as being hit by a fucking bus and becoming a vegetable for life, thats why. My grandfather smoked 3 packs a day for 40 years, he died at 85 years of age and had been in the hospital about 3 times his whole life. Your argument is flawed.

Seriously you sound like youd like to live in the utopia of San Angeles where everything that is bad for you is illegal. Have fun eating at Taco Bell and listening to commercial jingles while wiping your ass with the 3 seashells. Personally, Id rather eat the ratburgers in the sewer.

Wow. Try reading what I actually wrote and not what you'd like to think I did. And find out what a flawed argument actually is.

It's all about probabilities. You would be a complete and total fool to think that smoking doesn't make the smoking population as a whole significantly less healthy than the non-smoking population. They get sick more often than non-smokers. They develop life-threatening and chronic illnesses at rates far higher than the non-smoking population. Of course there are exceptions. Your grandfather for one. Some people develop lung cancer without having smoked a day in their life. But these are EXCEPTIONS. The fact is that we spend more money to treat the smoking population than we would if they did not smoke. This is called a fact. Ask any doctor. By your example companies shouldn't be able to raise insurance premiums on drivers with a history of accidents, drunk driving and traffic stops because they don't get into an accident every time they get in the car.

So why should the rest of us who take care of ourselves have to pay higher premiums for other people's bad habits? What happened to taking responsibility for your own actions? Why do I have to pay more because it took a smoker 30 years and emphysema to realize what a mistake he made?

As for your Demolition Man nonsense. Grow up. I suggested nothing like that. I want people to be free to do anything they want as long as it doesn't impact others significantly. I also want those who take part in self-destructive activities to take responsibility for their own actions and not expect everyone else to foot the bill for them.

[A.J.]

The one good thing about living in Virginia is being able to smoke at the bar. And soon it'll be taken away here too.

And if I hear one more person complain about the smokers standing in front of the entrance to a bar (where smoking indoors is banned like in DC and Maryland), I'm putting my cigarette out in their eye. It's people like you who forced us outside. Deal with it.

[PapaBear]

The one good thing about living in Virginia is being able to smoke at the bar. And soon it'll be taken away here too.
At least they are allowing us to have places with separately ventilated smoking areas. But how many places will be able to afford that?

[TripleSkeet]

Wow. Try reading what I actually wrote and not what you'd like to think I did. And find out what a flawed argument actually is.

It's all about probabilities. You would be a complete and total fool to think that smoking doesn't make the smoking population as a whole significantly less healthy than the non-smoking population. They get sick more often than non-smokers. They develop life-threatening and chronic illnesses at rates far higher than the non-smoking population. Of course there are exceptions. Your grandfather for one. Some people develop lung cancer without having smoked a day in their life. But these are EXCEPTIONS. The fact is that we spend more money to treat the smoking population than we would if they did not smoke. This is called a fact. Ask any doctor. By your example companies shouldn't be able to raise insurance premiums on drivers with a history of accidents, drunk driving and traffic stops because they don't get into an accident every time they get in the car.

So why should the rest of us who take care of ourselves have to pay higher premiums for other people's bad habits? What happened to taking responsibility for your own actions? Why do I have to pay more because it took a smoker 30 years and emphysema to realize what a mistake he made?

As for your Demolition Man nonsense. Grow up. I suggested nothing like that. I want people to be free to do anything they want as long as it doesn't impact others significantly. I also want those who take part in self-destructive activities to take responsibility for their own actions and not expect everyone else to foot the bill for them.

Dude health insurance premiums are the same throughout because there are just too many unknowns to decide who is healthy and who isnt. For years professional athletes smoked and drank, yet they would be considered some of the healthiest people out there.

The difference is with life insurance. If your a healthy person your reward is cheaper life insurance the someone who smokes or is overweight. Just like car insurance is cheaper for safe drivers.

If your unhappy with health insurance, blame the fucking providers, they are the ones robbing you. Regardless of how much money they put out they still makes more money then they can count, and they still never want to pay out a claim. Insurance is nothing more then legal extortion.

As far as what you said about " I want people to be free to do anything they want as long as it doesn't impact others significantly." well who decides that? See you dont care because the freedoms being affected are ones you dont use. Its like Ronnie B. is always saying about how people are only open minded if its something they agree with. I dont give a fuck what anyone says, there is no legitamite reason there shouldnt be bars that allow smoking in every state in the country.

Im not saying they have to be, but if a bar owner wants to allow people to smoke, I dont see why thats the states business. The people that work there dont have to. They can go find another job. And the customers dont have to drink there if they dont like it. The only business hes affecting is his own, so how the fuck does the state have any right to tell him otherwise?

[conman823]

As soon as people who smoke forgo their health insurance when they get cancer and pay for it all themselves then I'm all for allowing people to smoke wherever they like. Until then since the rest of us are paying higher health insurance costs to foot the bill for the recklessness of smokers go take a fucking walk outside and let us eat a meal in peace.

The argument is always freedom and personal responsibility until the cancer hits.

Boy if that upsets you wait until Universal Health Care hits and you have to pay for every illegal immigrant and crack baby from an "octomom" too. Smokers will seem like a dream then!

I don't mind having a smoke free enviroment to eat in. Now if someone would start a market for Eatery's that don't allow children younger then 16 in, or ban parents who let thier little Bitch/Bastard run lose around your table.

That, my friends, is much worse then smoking.

[landarch]

wouldnt queers be more prone to smoke ??

well.....poles, I guess.

[hedges]

I like the cut of your jib.

I almost coughed up a lung laughing at that.

But seriously, before I smoked I never noticed the smoke on an airplane and I never noticed smoke coming from the smoking section in a restaurant. It never bothered me. I remember a few years ago I was in an airport and they had a smoking cubicle. It was a sealed area or room for smokers. And it was mostly glass, so all of the smokers were on display. That was kind of odd.

[A.J.]

I remember a few years ago I was in an airport and they had a smoking cubicle. It was a sealed area or room for smokers. And it was mostly glass, so all of the smokers were on display. That was kind of odd.

I hate those damn things. They are standing room only with smokers and there is hardly any ventilation. I like the ones they have in the Frankfurt and Zurich airports which are little free-standing stands with a really strong smoke-eater at the top.

[hedges]

It seems like most U.S. airports have no alternative other than going outside the terminal. But going through security again is such a pain in the ass, it's not worth the hassle.

[ToiletCrusher]

I don't care either way. Smoke inside or outside. Either way, you still smoke.

[underdog]

I remember a few years ago I was in an airport and they had a smoking cubicle. It was a sealed area or room for smokers. And it was mostly glass, so all of the smokers were on display. That was kind of odd.

I remember walking by one of those in the Philly airport (I think) and it was this cube completely filled with smoke. And there was a woman sitting in there smoking with her maybe 10 year old child sitting next to her.

[Jujubees2]

I remember walking by one of those in the Philly airport (I think) and it was this cube completely filled with smoke. And there was a woman sitting in there smoking with her maybe 10 year old child sitting next to her.

A couple of weeks ago when the swime flu panic first started, there was a tv news segment on and they showed a woman with a mask on (I'm assuming the she was worried about contracting the swine flu). Then she reaches up, pulls her mask down and takes a drag on a cigarette.

[ANC]

Yes I found it very odd.... when I smoked that is. But yeah it was like at any moment I'd be asked to cheese it because smoking wasn't allowed..



....cheese it....really? :wallbash:

[biggirl]

I don't smoke, and I prefer to not be around it. However, I used to smoke and when I am out w/o my kids I don't mind smelling it while standing next to someone outside. Indoor smoke really gets to me now.

I am glad they banned the smoking in MN because then I know my kids don't have to put up with it. I grew up with smoking parents...it was such a drag. All my friends with non-smoking parents thought I smoked (when I was a teen).

I don't even think I would go to a restaurant to eat if there was smoking allowed. I read a previous post about a smoking room. I don't think that is a half bad idea, as long as it had a separate outdoor entrance.

[topless_mike]

i grew up with a mom who was a smoker.
ugh.

i enjoy my cigars. outside though. there is nothing worse then back in the day, playing at a bar that was smoke filled. when i got home and washed my hair, the smell would make me want to heave.

the reason for all this was over this past weekend, we went to a/c as one of our last outings for a long while and when we got in the car to come home, we reeked of smoke.

[TripleSkeet]

i grew up with a mom who was a smoker.
ugh.

i enjoy my cigars. outside though. there is nothing worse then back in the day, playing at a bar that was smoke filled. when i got home and washed my hair, the smell would make me want to heave.

the reason for all this was over this past weekend, we went to a/c as one of our last outings for a long while and when we got in the car to come home, we reeked of smoke.

That because nobody tells the casinos what to do.

[HBox]

Dude health insurance premiums are the same throughout because there are just too many unknowns to decide who is healthy and who isnt. For years professional athletes smoked and drank, yet they would be considered some of the healthiest people out there.

Who considers them the healthiest people out there? They suffer physical injury mush more often than people in virtually every other known profession. Some of these injuries will cause chronic conditions that will haunt them the rest of their lives.

Of course there are a lot of unknowns. But there are also things we do know. Ever hear of pre-existing conditions? You aren't going to be paying the same as someone without one for the reason that people with diabetes will cost more than those without diabetes. People who smoke or people who are obese or people who participate in other unhealthy behaviors will cost more than those who don't but for some reason they get off. Some kid who develops diabetes as a child through no fault of their own and can't get health insurance through an employer is totally fucked. A fat smoker on his own isn't.

The difference is with life insurance. If your a healthy person your reward is cheaper life insurance the someone who smokes or is overweight. Just like car insurance is cheaper for safe drivers.

And it should be the same for health insurance.

If your unhappy with health insurance, blame the fucking providers, they are the ones robbing you. Regardless of how much money they put out they still makes more money then they can count, and they still never want to pay out a claim. Insurance is nothing more then legal extortion.

They are one of many, many, many problems with the current health system.

As far as what you said about " I want people to be free to do anything they want as long as it doesn't impact others significantly." well who decides that? See you dont care because the freedoms being affected are ones you dont use. Its like Ronnie B. is always saying about how people are only open minded if its something they agree with. I dont give a fuck what anyone says, there is no legitamite reason there shouldnt be bars that allow smoking in every state in the country.

What a persons health will be 5 or 10 years from now is unknown. You said pretty much the same thing. That's why we have health insurance in the first place. Most of the population will be OK aside from occasional use of the health system. A small minority will not be. They will need huge amounts of money to get and stay healthy, or to stay alive at all. We have health insurance because that small minority, aside from a microscopic number of people, won't be able to afford it and will end up dead without someone else paying for them. Health insurance is supposed to function as providing security for a unknown future. Most people will be OK but we don't know who. We all agree to put aside money to treat those who are sick and in return we receive assurance we will be taken care of in the case we become sick.

This system is breaking down rapidly for many reasons. One of those reasons is people's unhealthy lifestyles. Number one and number two on that list is obesity and smoking because of the high number of smokers and obese and the chronic conditions they both cause. We have so many people who get sick through no reason of their own to pay for. Why do we also have to pay for the idiots who knowingly damage themselves. I don't want to have to pay for a person who shoots themselves in the foot on purpose. But at least that is a one time payment. When you smoke or are obese you develop chronic conditions that require years and years of treatment and surgeries and drugs. These are massive costs.

You can't just cut these people totally out of the system. Some people, despite all logic and the clear consequences of their own self destructive behavior, won't stop. You only have to look at your neighbors to see this. But, at the same time, why would they want to be in a system that won't take care of their future needs? It's human nature. they won't stop but at the same time they won't take part in a system that won't take care of them.

So you have to let them in the system. I just don't want to let them in with a free pass. When we can tell if someone is doing something self-destructive, like smoking and obesity, then make them pay more to cover at least part of the cost they are knowingly making the rest of us incur. Take at least partial responsibility for their own actions. It's not fair. And by that i mean it's not fair to the rest of us because all the money smokers put into the system very likely will not cover the extra costs they create. But it's as close to fair as we will ever get.

[HBox]

Boy if that upsets you wait until Universal Health Care hits and you have to pay for every illegal immigrant and crack baby from an "octomom" too. Smokers will seem like a dream then!

It you had even a slight knowledge of what you are talking about you would know THAT WE ARE ALREADY PAYING FOR THEM.

The choice is between letting them see a doctor and let them get a prescription for an infection in its early stages or letting that infection going untreated and letting it turn into pneumonia and then having them go to an emergency room which turns into a hospital which we already require because we are not a country that allows sick people to die in the streets.

The second option, which we do now, is exponentially more expensive than the first. They are paid for through taxes and through higher insurance premiums because hospitals have to charge more to the people who are able to pay.

[Dude!]

i can't state the actual percentage
but some very large percent of
health care costs
i am sure it is over 35%
is for treating people
during the LAST YEAR of their life

in other words
prolonging the lives of the elderly
and terminally ill

the extreme measures we take
at end of life
may need to be re-thought

[HBox]

i can't state the actual percentage
but some very large percent of
health care costs
i am sure it is over 35%
is for treating people
during the LAST YEAR of their life

in other words
prolonging the lives of the elderly
and terminally ill

the extreme measures we take
at end of life
may need to be re-thought

That isn't exactly true but we do go overboard in allowing every treatment, no matter how ineffective and expensive, to be used to try and salvage time at the end of life.

But the more relevant stat is 80/20. 80% of health costs are incurred by the sickest 20% of the population. That would include what you talk about. But the real issue here is the costs of treating the chronically ill. It's very expensive and it's long term. It requires expensive treatment that you can't deny people because it's proven to work. This is he biggest and unavoidable issue in health care. You can make more cost effective decisions at the end of life and that will save a lot of money. But there is still a shit load of money that is needed to treat people who are sick but can still live on. The only thing that you can do to being down those costs is to put as much pressure you can on healthy people to do whatever they can to not become chronically ill through their own means and make sure that ineffective and expensive treatments are not used.

[khaxzan]

Living in NJ, by now we are used to the non-smoking in just about all indoor places.
But sometimes I venture out and end up eating at a restaurant outside the state where you can smoke indoors.

It feels weird when this happens. Like wait a minute, you're not supposed... oh, its ok here.

Anyone else?

I don't smoke! Period. It is evil and all smokers should turn that smoke backwards and burn a hole through the back of their head, bleed to death, and lie on the pavement.

I will kick you smokers! I will kill you!:furious:

Don't fuck up precious air fuckin smokers.

[razorboy]

I usually just light a cigarette. It calms me down.

[khaxzan]

Quit smoking, ya pus.:annoyed:

[razorboy]

YOU'RE the one who should quit smoking.

[khaxzan]

I don't smoke, do drugs, drink or commit crime. People who smoke commit crimes by attempted murder.

[razorboy]

Smoking and attempted murder are both hobbies of mine.

[TripleSkeet]

I don't smoke, do drugs, drink or commit crime. People who smoke commit crimes by attempted murder.

Congratulations. Youre the healthiest bore on Earth.



Of course there are a lot of unknowns. But there are also things we do know. Ever hear of pre-existing conditions? You aren't going to be paying the same as someone without one for the reason that people with diabetes will cost more than those without diabetes. People who smoke or people who are obese or people who participate in other unhealthy behaviors will cost more than those who don't but for some reason they get off. Some kid who develops diabetes as a child through no fault of their own and can't get health insurance through an employer is totally fucked. A fat smoker on his own isn't..

The problem is by doing this you open a very fucked up door that needs to stay closed. If they can charge people that smoke more money then whats to stop them from upping the charges to people that enjoy to drink? Or those that like red meat? Or sugar? My biggest problem is big business telling me how to live my life.

You know what? People that smoke do need more healthcare. But the bottom line is they pay into the system their whole lives too. Why shouldnt they get every penny they put into it back if they need it? Just because some people pay their whole lives and dont need it, its not the smokers fault.

See my big problem with your "plan" is you give too much power to the company. According to you "healthy" people should pay less money right? Well I am 6'2 and according to the national guidelines my ideal weight is somewhere around 200 lbs. Thats fucking ridiculous. In order to do that Id have to look like an AIDS patient. At one point I was 235, working out and running 2 miles a day. I was muscular and athletic and looked damn good. I was also considered 35 lbs. overweight. I dont know how they characterize obese but I know I was healthy and looked great. But by your standards the insurance companies would probably charge me more. Any system that gives an insurance company that kind of power is one I can never support. They are the most corrupt businesses out there.

[khaxzan]

...and you're getting worked up over a smoking thread. :lol:

[TripleSkeet]

...and you're getting worked up over a smoking thread. :lol:

No Im not. Especially not by your posts. They are one of the few where I can feel the sarcasm.