General Discussion

mattclearing

(10,091 posts)

81. We also have single payer here, so discouraging smoking is in the public interest.

Sun Aug 19, 2012, 12:06 AM

Aug 2012

In the States, smoking is more of a "free market" issue between agriculture and the health industry, but tobacco is imported here and healthcare is taxpayer-funded, so there's less resistance by corporate interests to this sort of regulation.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

82 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Plain cigarette packaging passes in Australia. [View all] Amak8 Aug 2012 OP

Good for the Aussies! Odin2005 Aug 2012 #1

I'm curious to see what percent of people here think this is a good idea Travis_0004 Aug 2012 #2

Colorful logos are for marketing to children. Amak8 Aug 2012 #3

So lets ban smoking then Travis_0004 Aug 2012 #4

Smoking impacts other peoples health. Eating does not. Logical Aug 2012 #5

except when you're a kid and your parents buy you twinkies and ice cream and cake and cookies... WooWooWoo Aug 2012 #6

Well, if you like that stupid argument I guess the parents could make the kid smoke also. LOL, wow. Logical Aug 2012 #9

How is that a stupid argument? Fawke Em Aug 2012 #42

that is why we have nutritional school food programs and other things... Green_Lantern Aug 2012 #58

That would be tyranny. Amak8 Aug 2012 #11

No, but I do agree with the forced nutritional info. nt Comrade_McKenzie Aug 2012 #14

When smokers can keep that shit in their own lungs, Zoeisright Aug 2012 #10

When auto drivers can keep that shit in their own lungs... Luminous Animal Aug 2012 #13

woke up from a sound sleep to say +1000000 Cooley Hurd Aug 2012 #17

I'll be out in the wilderness with 10 smokers and smell mostly only fresh air... Luminous Animal Aug 2012 #20

Though they are long-dead from complications of smoking-related diseases lapislzi Aug 2012 #30

Studies show passive smoke is more dangerous than car exhaust joeybee12 Aug 2012 #24

What studies? n/t LTX Aug 2012 #43

auto exhaust is heavily regulated so with your example you Green_Lantern Aug 2012 #37

No it's not. Fawke Em Aug 2012 #44

sorry, I meant in production of cars... Green_Lantern Aug 2012 #49

According to the EPA, these are ways we can keep the air cleaner. Sivafae Aug 2012 #19

I've never been forced to breathe in second hand smoke Travis_0004 Aug 2012 #21

that is good enough for me... Green_Lantern Aug 2012 #38

So why are the smoking police trying to ban e-cigarettes? KamaAina Aug 2012 #31

I think it's a bad idea Major Nikon Aug 2012 #16

yep.. frylock Aug 2012 #28

Or how about a pic of a fat laden heart on your McDonald's bag? Major Nikon Aug 2012 #32

not everyone who eats McDonald's has heart disease.. Green_Lantern Aug 2012 #39

Who said anything about equivalence? Major Nikon Aug 2012 #50

they aren't even close... Green_Lantern Aug 2012 #51

Who said they were close? Major Nikon Aug 2012 #52

well if it isn't a close comparison then... Green_Lantern Aug 2012 #54

So where does it end? Major Nikon Aug 2012 #60

regulation of commercial activity isn't decided state by state... Green_Lantern Aug 2012 #63

So is alcohol, caffeine, and masturbation Major Nikon Aug 2012 #64

well cigarette ads are banned on tv and that hasn't resulted in all ads being banned... Green_Lantern Aug 2012 #71

And what good did that do exactly? Major Nikon Aug 2012 #72

Apples and oranges Green_Lantern Aug 2012 #73

Actually the reason why there aren't as many smokers has little to do with such campaigns Major Nikon Aug 2012 #77

you make a good point.... Green_Lantern Aug 2012 #82

because just banning it won't stop it... Green_Lantern Aug 2012 #36

Bloomberg is trying to reverse the fast "food" industry's social engineering - GoneOffShore Aug 2012 #56

So you are saying that people are idiots and need to be told how to act? Travis_0004 Aug 2012 #66

People are easily manipulated - Hence the idea of "Supersizing" GoneOffShore Aug 2012 #67

smoking is very idiotic Green_Lantern Aug 2012 #75

I, personally, don't think it will make any difference... yawnmaster Aug 2012 #7

Might as well place images of STD ravaged genitaila... -..__... Aug 2012 #8

Damn Dokkie Aug 2012 #40

Sure, if rubbers *increased* the likelyhood of pregnancy or STD transmission, then that'd make sense Electric Monk Aug 2012 #65

Not at all... -..__... Aug 2012 #68

That makes as much sense as putting pictures of healthy lungs and healthy mouths on cig packs Electric Monk Aug 2012 #70

Next up, they will have pics of aborted babies at clinics The Straight Story Aug 2012 #12

Hopefully pictures of disfigured bodies at military recruiting centers. nt Comrade_McKenzie Aug 2012 #15

Agreed. It's a slippery slope and I also think there are serious 1st Amendment concerns as well. nt rDigital Aug 2012 #18

I don't think the slippery slope argument works with smoking.. Green_Lantern Aug 2012 #45

If tobacco were a new product, it'd never be allowed on the market muriel_volestrangler Aug 2012 #22

Who is stupider, climate change deniers or tobacco=death deniers? CBGLuthier Aug 2012 #23

+1 joeybee12 Aug 2012 #26

Nice to see all the addicts trying to slam this great idea... joeybee12 Aug 2012 #25

And lot of straw men arguments in this thread too. RC Aug 2012 #27

When have you been forced to breathe in second hand smoke. Travis_0004 Aug 2012 #35

Right on Dokkie Aug 2012 #41

that is the basic argument against all regulation such as anti-discrimination laws... Green_Lantern Aug 2012 #46

Either way you are discriminating against somebody Travis_0004 Aug 2012 #53

having sex is legal, yet I can't do it everywhere... Green_Lantern Aug 2012 #55

Just because somebody is against this doesn't mean they are a smoker. Travis_0004 Aug 2012 #34

no people against it are either smokers or a bit naive about smokers... Green_Lantern Aug 2012 #47

This might discourage young people from taking up the habit. LiberalAndProud Aug 2012 #29

I suspect it won't discourage them. eom yawnmaster Aug 2012 #57

I'll smoke to that. If it makes the tobaccophobic a little less stressed, it's just fine with me. Egalitarian Thug Aug 2012 #33

smokers are either clueless are unreasonable Green_Lantern Aug 2012 #48

The people of the State of California made it nearly impossible to smoke in public...THANK YOU.. Tikki Aug 2012 #59

Picture worth 1000 printed warnings treestar Aug 2012 #61

I like this. Alduin Aug 2012 #62

Meh, bring back Joe Camel Ter Aug 2012 #69

The whole thing is pointless SOS Aug 2012 #74

even if it makes smoking slightly less attractive Green_Lantern Aug 2012 #76

Google "cigarette cases australia" jmowreader Aug 2012 #78

No it isn't - anything done to discourage smoking is good. reformist2 Aug 2012 #79

If it was pointless, Big Tobacco wouldn't be going nuts. Amak8 Aug 2012 #80

We also have single payer here, so discouraging smoking is in the public interest. mattclearing Aug 2012 #81