T1B

From Joe Camel to scenes from CSI on a pack of smokes ??

http://www.fda.gov/TobaccoProducts/Labe ... efault.htm

Truth in advertising.

Smoking is harmful to your health?? Who knew?

Despite all of the attempts to educate the youth of America, teen smoking is allegedly on the rise. It takes more than warning labels on cigarette packs to get through to kids....it takes parenting. Therein lies the problem.

If parents would just start smoking the kids would probably lose interest.

Mikey wrote:If parents would just start smoking the kids would probably lose interest.

Hahaha! Actually, studies show that kids are more likely to smoke if their parents do. I don't know why that is other than people do what their parents do. That said, that shit is fucking nasty. If you smoke, you are a sick fuck. I would think that kids would see how nasty that shit is and what it does to the smell of their parents clothes/house and not be interested in smoking. But it doesn't.

Of course, the average IQ of a smoker is most likely very low (what intelligent person would put that shit in their mouth knowing what it does to them?), and stupid people breed stupid people, so...........

Both my parents were chain smokers throughout my childhood. My dad quit cold turkey when I was about 17. My sister and I grew up to be non-smokers, and never even remotely considered starting. Couldn't wait to be free of that shit.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:Both my parents were chain smokers throughout my childhood. My dad quit cold turkey when I was about 17. My sister and I grew up to be non-smokers, and never even remotely considered starting. Couldn't wait to be free of that shit.

"Ha. You don't know what you're missing out. Loser."

Sincerely,

:scs:

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:Both my parents were chain smokers throughout my childhood. My dad quit cold turkey when I was about 17. My sister and I grew up to be non-smokers, and never even remotely considered starting. Couldn't wait to be free of that shit.

Are we brothers?

Then again this movement may have possibilities.

Wolfman wrote:Then again this movement may have possibilities.

FTFY

Actually this may likely create a need for a new product--- cover up your creepy looking pack of smokes with neat new handy slip on "jackets" with pictures of smiley faces and other cool looking and fun art work.

Maybe we just need an additional tax to non-smokers to try to get smokers to stop smoking???

You'll get your wish on January 1st when the Bush tax rates expire.

IndyFrisco wrote:Maybe we just need an additional tax to non-smokers to try to get smokers to stop smoking???

Nice..you just gave B Monica another idea on how to confiscate earned income from the American taxpayer. Expect his rationale to start in 3....2....1..Now...

Go ahead and plaster the whole carton of smokes with warning labels. I don't give a fuck.

i just think it's stupid that taxpayer money is going into an initiative to say what we already know at a slightly higher volume. It's like Marcus Allen with a government job.

You could have cigarettes that come in a black pack, with a skull and a cross bone on the front, called Tumors and smokers would be lined up around the block going, "I can't wait to get my hands on these fucking things! I bet you get a tumor as soon as you light up! Numm Numm Numm Numm Numm."

TheJON wrote: Actually, studies show that kids are more likely to smoke if their parents do.

Of course, the average IQ of a smoker is most likely very low (what intelligent person would put that shit in their mouth knowing what it does to them?), and stupid people breed stupid people, so...........

Studies have also shown that anyone reading a JON post are more likely to suffer from depression and substance abuse, regardless of their IQ level.

Damnit, where'd I put that crackpipe?

When I was single and dating, I always looked for women in the bar who smoked. That lady would obviously put just about anything in her mouth. Hello?

Goober McTuber wrote:Hello?

You were fantasizing about jizzing in JONs' face?

IndyFrisco wrote:Maybe we just need an additional tax to non-smokers to try to get smokers to stop smoking???

What's awesome about this is that you have the federal government trying to discourage people from smoking to save money on healthcare, meanwhile the states, counties and cities are heavily dependent on the tax revenue from tobacco, and really wish the FDA would shut the fuck up so they can keep raking in $2+ per pack in taxes.

War Wagon wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:Hello?

You were fantasizing about jizzing in JONs' face?

Is JON a lady? Nice reach, moron.

OCmike wrote:

IndyFrisco wrote:Maybe we just need an additional tax to non-smokers to try to get smokers to stop smoking???

What's awesome about this is that you have the federal government trying to discourage people from smoking to save money on healthcare, meanwhile the states, counties and cities are heavily dependent on the tax revenue from tobacco, and really wish the FDA would shut the fuck up so they can keep raking in $2+ per pack in taxes.

3 pack a day loser who smokes 30 years will pay $65k in taxes at $2/pack. Smoking, percentage-wise, is more prevalent in the poor population. I'd venture to say when said loser is 65-70 and is in the hospital for however long getting chemo for the lung and throat cancer and the bill reaches around $500k, their insurance, or lack thereof, will not be footing that bill. Yours, Meds and my additional healthcare costs will be. Meanwhile, said loser wheels out to the parking lot every 20 minutes to smoke a cig through the open hole in his throat.

IndyFrisco wrote:

OCmike wrote:

IndyFrisco wrote:Maybe we just need an additional tax to non-smokers to try to get smokers to stop smoking???

What's awesome about this is that you have the federal government trying to discourage people from smoking to save money on healthcare, meanwhile the states, counties and cities are heavily dependent on the tax revenue from tobacco, and really wish the FDA would shut the fuck up so they can keep raking in $2+ per pack in taxes.

3 pack a day loser who smokes 30 years will pay $65k in taxes at $2/pack. Smoking, percentage-wise, is more prevalent in the poor population. I'd venture to say when said loser is 65-70 and is in the hospital for however long getting chemo for the lung and throat cancer and the bill reaches around $500k, their insurance, or lack thereof, will not be footing that bill. Yours, Meds and my additional healthcare costs will be. Meanwhile, said loser wheels out to the parking lot every 20 minutes to smoke a cig through the open hole in his throat.

So what percentage of the population is perfect? Perfection being, never making an unhealthy choice or developing an unhealthy habit that may cost others time and money.

I think the arguement that smoking causes gubmint expenses to go up is a poor one.

When the big C hits in the form of lung cancer, it generally hits like a fukking freight train with no warning, somewhere around the age of 60. Gubmint makes out on this deal like a mofo. they collect SS and cigarette excise taxes for 45-50 years and the is kicked out of the SS trough without paying for anything other than a few months hospital expenses.

This helps the rest of us who hope to linger into our nineties collecting a SS check. These are the fukkers that will break the system through 30 years of sapping it.

smackaholic wrote:I think the arguement that smoking causes gubmint expenses to go up is a poor one.

When the big C hits in the form of lung cancer, it generally hits like a fukking freight train with no warning, somewhere around the age of 60. Gubmint makes out on this deal like a mofo. they collect SS and cigarette excise taxes for 45-50 years and the is kicked out of the SS trough without paying for anything other than a few months hospital expenses.

This helps the rest of us who hope to linger into our nineties collecting a SS check. These are the fukkers that will break the system through 30 years of sapping it.

Not always. Joe DiMaggio checked out with lung cancer in his 80s. And my best friend's dad just got the big diagnosis a few months back. He's 78, has been collecting his SS for over 10 years and will of course be using medicare to pay for his treatment expenses. Get this, he had been smoking for over 60 years before they finally found a tumor. Now he's a fucking invalid with 2 years left (or less) who can't even so much as walk the length of his driveway to get the mail without being severely winded. And that's WITH the oxygen. Shit just ain't worth it.

there are exceptions, but it seems that if cancer is gonna get you, it usually does during your fifties/sixties. i read somewhere that lung cancer generally goes after those around 60.

what a deal, huh? pay into SS you whole life and get jack shit.

smackaholic wrote:there are exceptions, but it seems that if cancer is gonna get you, it usually does during your fifties/sixties. i read somewhere that lung cancer generally goes after those around 60.

what a deal, huh? pay into SS you whole life and get jack shit.

Jack shit is what we all get in the end. And you can't even take that with you, I don't care what poptart says.