should smokers be responsible for paying for every ones medical bill just because they do not smoke?

Question

They now have no smoking in bars in Minnesota where I live, they are trying to make it illegal to smoke in your own apartment here now. They are talking about raising taxes on tobacco to pay for the new health care bill that just got passed. Isn't it time for a million smoker march on D.C. to smoke Congress, The Senate and House out? Why do the non-smokers have to be like the christians who force their beliefs on everyone?

Answer 1

I am with you. We have been very passive about this. It is time we do something to change it. Things will not get better until we do something.

Answer 2

I don't smoke! I don't think people who smoke should smoke around other people who don't want to be exposed to it! It is a health risk to all parties.
On the other hand I very seldom wear a seat belt, so I understand what you are saying.
These laws are just going to keep coming, even if they are good laws they are taking away individual rights. At some point in time they will legislate the amount of toilet paper you can use at each setting! Sounds a lot like good old fashion communism to me!
As for the taxes, tobacco has always been an easy mark because of the health risk!
When the government can't squeeze anymore money out of smokers I guess they will start on coffee drinkers!
Just my thoughts!

Answer 3

It's too late now. We all stood by when this first began sometime in the eighties. All smokers thought designated smoking areas were a good and "socially responsible" development and it spiraled out of control. Money from the tobacco settlement doesn't go toward health care, it goes into the State coffers. If we want to stop the authorities from controlling our lives, we need to speak up now about the latest privacy invasion's. Today the smoker, tomorrow the overweight. City governments are banning certain fats (cooking oils), we need to say enough is enough. Although I must add if we continue to have these products they will need to be labeled, with some sort of disclaimer or we'll have to sign for them so we, or our families can't sue the manufacturer when we get sick.

Answer 4

Here in the UK we have had smoking bans in public places since the 1st October 07. It has put a lot of noses out of joint and as the cold weather closes in more and more, people are complaining. I can only imagine if they tried to ban smoking in your own house, there would be out and out mutiny. Perhaps we should charge people for being overweight or the elderly or footballers/sportsmen or the perpetually pregnant. It goes on and on. So much for freedom and human rights hey?
Lots of people also conveniently forget that taxes paid on cigarettes in the UK go directly to the NHS.

Answer 5

Now keep in mind I am a smoker:

1. We have no smoking in any public place where I live. It's actually rather nice to not smell smoke as you eat and it turns out 1/2 my hangover from bars was from all the residual smoke.

2. It is not your OWN apartment. You do not own it. Other people live there. Rights are rights as long as they do not infringe on others. Why should the baby down the hall inhale your smoke cause you don't wanna go outside. (I think smoking in a home or a car with a child should be child abuse). If you don't like it, buy your own house and smoke all you like.

3. They should tax the crap outta tobacco..it is harmful and a luxury item. (Smokes here are now 12$ a pack). Don't like it, don't smoke.

4. Ultimately this does not come down to forcing beliefs on others...this comes down to avoiding you (and I) forcing our deadly toxins into others lungs.

Answer 6

When christians try to force their beliefs on people, they're doing it because according to their religon, that is what they're supposed to do. Non smokers on the otherhand are passing legislation to make smoking more restricted and expensive because it harms the health of everyone in the vicinity. The difference is ideological nonsense vs a practical desire not to get cancer. BTW, I don't think the million smoker march would make it more than a block or two :D

Answer 7

I do think that there are other things that they can tax other than cigarettes but smoking really does affect more than just the smoker. Everyone around them has to live with their second hand smoke if they smoke in public and many dont want to have other people's bad habits forced on them. However, if you want to smoke in private that's your own business as long as cigarettes are legal.

Answer 8

O_o No. That would be too risky. People could come forward for money from a smoker and they weren't even near them. And furthermore, non-smokers are like Christians in that they try to get people to "convert" from smoking, but if someone is stubborn, they give up and learn to accept it. The government should not interfere in peoples' lives.

Answer 9

I think if you are paying to live somewhere, you should be able to smoke...it is still LEGAL. Many apartment complexes now have smoking and non-smoking building available. When people are told they cannot smoke in their cars or own homes, that is getting rediculous...seeing as how smoking is still legal.

Answer 10

thousands? You advise billions. yet you're failing to benefit from the tax it is levied on cigarettes which quantities to around £11billion. to no longer point out that people who smoke on undemanding die youthful meaning 'mark downs' interior the fee of social care. The NHS is unfastened for all, the day we initiate discriminating on stuff like this may be a poor day for the NHS, and that i think of you will locate the fee to the NHS having to safeguard denying therapy to people who smoke in courtroom will possibly negate most of the 'mark downs' that are to be made.

Answer 11

No the government should be responsible, because their the ones that control Tobacco. It's their fault cigarrettes are on the market, Why can't they make a cigarrettte without the poison in it??? That should be illegal selling cigarrettes with poison in it.