Prez Obama - FDA to regulate Cigarettes

[spywizard]

http://www.usatoday.com/money/indust...islation_N.htm

Prez Obama - FDA to regulate Cigarettes

Is this the change everybody was expecting??

I don't smoke, but i dont' want the Gov further intruding on the right for you to kill yourself with behavioral choices..

What i'd suggest.. you get lung cancer, you don't get treated under the Gov medical..

But, that's just me..

[Pocketbattleship2B]

http://www.usatoday.com/money/indust...islation_N.htm

Prez Obama - FDA to regulate Cigarettes

Is this the change everybody was expecting??

I don't smoke, but i dont' want the Gov further intruding on the right for you to kill yourself with behavioral choices..

What i'd suggest.. you get lung cancer, you don't get treated under the Gov medical..

But, that's just me..

That's the thing,if they refuse treatment you get lawsuits for leting people die.If you try to reatrict smoking you get people complaining,if you do nothing people complain about getting cancer and suing the tobacco companys.How so you win?

[spywizard]

sometimes it's time to just thin the herd..

why is there no cure for cancer yet we can manipulate genes.
why is aids still such an issue
why is there starvation and death

how many people die every year in car accidents?? we should ban cars that would keep people from harming themself..

[bjpennnn]

lol i could not agree with were you are going with this more spywizard.

[JiGGaMaN]

how many people die every year in car accidents?? we should ban cars that would keep people from harming themself..

i think the benefits of the car outweigh the benefits of cigarettes...

[Tigershark]

Read this on CNN's website. They are changing the packaging and the way they are sold too.

Limit the amount of nicotine and other chemicals in cigarettes

Ban most nicotine flavors (except menthol) to make cigarettes taste bad and limit enticement of first-time smokers

Eliminate the use of the words “light” and “low tar” on nicotine products

Require large health warnings on nicotine products and use of black and white text only instead of colorful ads and displays

Ban outdoor advertising within 1,000 feet of schools and playgrounds beginning in 2010

Deny approval for smokeless tobacco products unless the makers’ prove they won’t entice non-smokers or current smokers who want to quit

Impose a fee (perhaps $.06 per pack) on cigarette companies to fund the new FDA oversight activities, which will further increase the costs of smoking

[IM708]

How is it possible that something good could get possibly spun so that this is an evil obama socialist scheme.

[Ernst]

It seems kind of idiotic to me. Are they going to make certain cigars illegal too? No more swisher sweets? What about cloves? Misguided legislation IMO.

Next we'll be banning girlie drinks. Wine coolers and Smirnoff Ice-- the scourge of our youth! Slippery slope.

[Theatrix]

It's just a step. We can't make smoking illegal at the moment but we can continue to make it less and less attractive.
The impact of smoking on society is significant. 450,000 smoking related deaths per year (as compared to approx 30,000 auto deaths per year). Est. 100B in medical costs.
My wife would have everything thats bad fror you banned. Sure there are many different ways one can die. As mentioned above, cancer, aids, whatever....and who knows what the political/capitalist agenda is from one one man to the next. But logically, this and every step closer we get to stopping people from smoking is a win.

[peachfuzz]

The state goes after you and nobody cares.

The state goes after them, and nobody cares.

The state goes after me, oh shit. Nobody cares.

[quarry206]

I think this is a step that was coming no matter who was in office.

but, I do agree If you want to smoke car batteries I could care less and the government shouldn't stop you. I personally think they should make weed legal, even though I think it is a stupid drug.

[Iron_Pig]

Do you realize the government knows what is best for us, people piss and whine when they do nothing and they piss and whine when the do. You can not have your cake and eat it to. Fix the proplem uncle sam but do not take it away from me.

[SMCengineer]

How is it possible that something good could get possibly spun so that this is an evil obama socialist scheme.

Simple, people don't like being told what they can and can't do with their lives. And rightfuly so, why should any responsible adult have to be watched over like an infant? Do you like being told you can't inject aas (even if you've never done a cycle) given the knowledge you have regarding its usage? Whether or not aas is safer than smoking is superfluous. Natural law dictates that people have a right to choose how to live their lives as long as they don't interfere with the lives or property of others. That you would even assume a legislative act coming from Washington that decreases individual sovereignty and increases authoritarianism is "good" astounds me.

I'm reminded of an old saying that's quite fitting: Socialism is stopping a young child from touching a boiling pot; capitalism is letting him touch it.

It's just a step. We can't make smoking illegal at the moment but we can continue to make it less and less attractive.
The impact of smoking on society is significant. 450,000 smoking related deaths per year (as compared to approx 30,000 auto deaths per year). Est. 100B in medical costs.
My wife would have everything thats bad fror you banned. Sure there are many different ways one can die. As mentioned above, cancer, aids, whatever....and who knows what the political/capitalist agenda is from one one man to the next. But logically, this and every step closer we get to stopping people from smoking is a win.

How compassionate of you to rely on the government to tell everyone what's best for them.



Prohibitionist policies inevitable lead to a government subsidized black market of the prohibited. Simple economics.

[rogue01]

It's just a step. We can't make smoking illegal at the moment but we can continue to make it less and less attractive.
The impact of smoking on society is significant. 450,000 smoking related deaths per year (as compared to approx 30,000 auto deaths per year). Est. 100B in medical costs.
My wife would have everything thats bad fror you banned. Sure there are many different ways one can die. As mentioned above, cancer, aids, whatever....and who knows what the political/capitalist agenda is from one one man to the next. But logically, this and every step closer we get to stopping people from smoking is a win.

Why should the government have anything to do with people stopping smoking? I don't smoke and think it is a pretty nasty habit...but I don't think the gov should run the show. It is a choice to start smoking...maybe they should ban it like they did with alcohol. We all know how well that worked out. The gov needs to spend less time worried about smoking and baseball players and more time worrying about the fact that the dollar is crashing.

Here are a list of things that I think are bad for you and must be banned:
Cake
Pie
Video Games
Booze
1 night stands
people living in sin

...oh you don't agree, too bad
(the point is not everyone agrees so you can't just outlaw things that some people don't like)
(and actually I love all those things, so I hope they don't get banned)

[Kratos]

It's just a step. We can't make smoking illegal at the moment but we can continue to make it less and less attractive.
The impact of smoking on society is significant. 450,000 smoking related deaths per year (as compared to approx 30,000 auto deaths per year). Est. 100B in medical costs.
My wife would have everything thats bad fror you banned. Sure there are many different ways one can die. As mentioned above, cancer, aids, whatever....and who knows what the political/capitalist agenda is from one one man to the next. But logically, this and every step closer we get to stopping people from smoking is a win.

the ratio of births to deaths is pretty much 1 to 1 no matter what
let people live their lives how they want

[Dazza21]

sometimes it's time to just thin the herd..

why is there no cure for cancer yet we can manipulate genes.
why is aids still such an issue
why is there starvation and death

how many people die every year in car accidents?? we should ban cars that would keep people from harming themself..

Because Cancer and AIDS are big money, where is the profit for corporations if they create a pill that will cure you straight off? when they can stick you on a 6month course or lifetime treatment and get thousands of dollars off you, this is how the world works, profit over people. Sad fact, but a fact none the less

[xlxBigSexyxlx]

O ne
B ig
A ss
M istake
A merica

[Flagg]

the ratio of births to deaths is pretty much 1 to 1 no matter what
let people live their lives how they want

Hmm, I think the birth to death ratio is 5 people being born for every 3 that die each second with a net gain of 2 people being added to the population every second somewhere.

Because Cancer and AIDS are big money, where is the profit for corporations if they create a pill that will cure you straight off? when they can stick you on a 6month course or lifetime treatment and get thousands of dollars off you, this is how the world works, profit over people. Sad fact, but a fact none the less

Sad but unfortunately very true. We live in a world where a persons life is expendable and loss of profit is not acceptable. And that's justified by the greater number of people being born to dying which assuages a guilty conscience.

[silverstang1]

Quote:
Originally Posted by ironmaiden708
How is it possible that something good could get possibly spun so that this is an evil obama socialist scheme.
Simple, people don't like being told what they can and can't do with their lives. And rightfuly so, why should any responsible adult have to be watched over like an infant? Do you like being told you can't inject aas (even if you've never done a cycle) given the knowledge you have regarding its usage? Whether or not aas is safer than smoking is superfluous. Natural law dictates that people have a right to choose how to live their lives as long as they don't interfere with the lives or property of others. That you would even assume a legislative act coming from Washington that decreases individual sovereignty and increases authoritarianism is "good" astounds me.

I'm reminded of an old saying that's quite fitting: Socialism is stopping a young child from touching a boiling pot; capitalism is letting him touch it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Theatrix
It's just a step. We can't make smoking illegal at the moment but we can continue to make it less and less attractive.
The impact of smoking on society is significant. 450,000 smoking related deaths per year (as compared to approx 30,000 auto deaths per year). Est. 100B in medical costs.
My wife would have everything thats bad fror you banned. Sure there are many different ways one can die. As mentioned above, cancer, aids, whatever....and who knows what the political/capitalist agenda is from one one man to the next. But logically, this and every step closer we get to stopping people from smoking is a win.
How compassionate of you to rely on the government to tell everyone what's best for them.



Prohibitionist policies inevitable lead to a government subsidized black market of the prohibited. Simple economics.

************************************************** ************************************************** ***************

Wow! From fitness to politics!!!!

Here you go... A quote directly out of your reply... "Natural law dictates that people have a right to choose how to live their lives as long as they don't interfere with the lives or property of others..."

I would say that having to pay your "medical bills" or the "Fear of a lawsuit for denying medical attention", interferes greatly with my "Property, way of life, and life it self"!!!

By using your logic we would simply allow the use of cr**k and co***ne!!!! Yeah, yeah... "cigaretes are not responsible for crazy violent crimes!" So what if Im "one calm and collected cr**k head" that does not "interfere with the life or property of others"... Should I be allowed to use and sell cr**k to my "level headed cr**k head friends"!!!??? lol! ;-)

[xlxBigSexyxlx]

you sir, are an idiot...

[silverstang1]

xlxBigSexyxlx ---- What a pleasure to meet ya! Thanks for the kind words!
It was a damn joke... Maam!

I read your previous post... No doubt your narrow minded A$$ is a right wing self rightious lunatic that allows no room for a different oppinion! ;-)

Get over it! McCain lost! lol!

PS. Get a life!

[xlxBigSexyxlx]

xlxBigSexyxlx ---- What a pleasure to meet ya! Thanks for the kind words!
It was a damn joke... Maam!

I read your previous post... No doubt your narrow minded A$$ is a right wing self rightious lunatic that allows no room for a different oppinion! ;-)

Get over it! McCain lost! lol!

PS. Get a life!

You're funny.

Who is your daddy, and what does he do?

[silverstang1]

lol! Thats the best you can do? lol!
I bet my daddy could beat your daddy's a$$! LMAO!!! :-P

[xlxBigSexyxlx]

lol! Thats the best you can do? lol!
I bet my daddy could beat your daddy's a$$! LMAO!!! :-P

[Kratos]

Hmm, I think the birth to death ratio is 5 people being born for every 3 that die each second with a net gain of 2 people being added to the population every second somewhere.
.

I ment all who live will die silly
at some-point in their life will most likely produce a pile of medical bills, often on their way out the door
smokers aren't hurting anyone but themselves

pretty soon if I want a coke, I can expect a tax on it
cause sugar isn't good for me

[silverstang1]

LOL! You win! Thats a great picture! LOL! :-P ;-)

[beatango2008]

this is what you all get for putting him in office lol
pretty soon he is going to ban booze too,
then all the college kids who helped him get in office are going to regret it

[Trippensee]

this is what you all get for putting him in office lol
pretty soon he is going to ban booze too,
then all the college kids who helped him get in office are going to regret it

Prohibition all over again? As much as I dislike Obama (yes, I know) I doubt he will want to deal with another Al Capone.

[spywizard]

It's just a step. We can't make smoking illegal at the moment but we can continue to make it less and less attractive.
The impact of smoking on society is significant. 450,000 smoking related deaths per year (as compared to approx 30,000 auto deaths per year). Est. 100B in medical costs.
My wife would have everything thats bad fror you banned. Sure there are many different ways one can die. As mentioned above, cancer, aids, whatever....and who knows what the political/capitalist agenda is from one one man to the next. But logically, this and every step closer we get to stopping people from smoking is a win.

I agree, we should also ban unusual medical treatment for those that can't afford to pay for it. We should stop spending millions of dollars to keep a person or a child alive for a few hours or days/months..

It's about limiting gov presence in our life... what if they come out and say do to genetic markers in your dna you will be sterilized...

Think that's outrageous?? not really.. your wages are already taxed, now since people are tooo stupid to invest for retirement, and the gov knows better what's best for you, they will force you or rather just have your employer take money from your check and put it in a fund that the gov will control... bet no one saw that one coming..

[ray0414]

i think everyone has the wrong idea, the problem is that the cigarette companies are ruthless and should be somewhat regulated. in the 90s when alot of people WANTED to quit the tobacco industry simpled added more nicotine so they couldnt and thats a FACT you can look it up. nicotine amounts went up like 15% over only a few years in hte late 90s. i think this bill will benifit people that want to quit cuase the tobacco companies wont be able to just UP the nicotine to stop people from trying to quit. its very misleading and untrue to put "light" on a cigarette. they shouldnt be allowed to put it cuase they are purposely decieving the consumer and this bill will stop them from doing it. all people in 1 way or another are ruthless and greedy and we all need to be regulated or else the world would be chaotic. OBAMA IS A SMOKER, so hes not trying to ban smoking so dont even say that crap.

[MuscleScience]

How is it possible that something good could get possibly spun so that this is an evil obama socialist scheme.

Because its the first move in a push for more federal control over various things. It is logical to put something like this as the first push because it is widely a popular move. This sets a powerful precedence to justify future actions by the government, Not just the Obama Administration but others down the road.

Liberty is not always taken in sweeping unpopular moves. Modern historical context was that of Hitler and is widely popular moves to help bring back a crumbled defeated Germany after WWI. Hitler first started his Nazi Socialist moves my making moves that the common German found very popular. I dont think I have to tell you how the rest went.

Not comparing Obama to Hitler by any means, Just showing how a relatively highly educated people can be persuaded into doing things that cause them to lose total control of their society by its power hungry government.

What many fear with Obama, or more specifically fear with the elements in the Federal Government that want to push for a more socialized society.

A socialist government in order to operate and enact its reforms and manage its projects has to grow to compensate for each and every new program. Americas traditionally have been very skeptical of Big Government.

[MuscleScience]

i think everyone has the wrong idea, the problem is that the cigarette companies are ruthless and should be somewhat regulated. in the 90s when alot of people WANTED to quit the tobacco industry simpled added more nicotine so they couldnt and thats a FACT you can look it up. nicotine amounts went up like 15% over only a few years in hte late 90s. i think this bill will benifit people that want to quit cuase the tobacco companies wont be able to just UP the nicotine to stop people from trying to quit. its very misleading and untrue to put "light" on a cigarette. they shouldnt be allowed to put it cuase they are purposely decieving the consumer and this bill will stop them from doing it. all people in 1 way or another are ruthless and greedy and we all need to be regulated or else the world would be chaotic. OBAMA IS A SMOKER, so hes not trying to ban smoking so dont even say that crap.

And the most powerful man in the world.

[ray0414]

And the most powerful man in the world.

are u saying obama is the most powerful man in the world? i disagree. hes merely a puppet theres people much more powerful than him pulling strings around the world. unless of course you are saying that obama is litterally posessed by the devil, which could technically make him the most powerful man in the world. but i must add, i voted for obama and do think i should have voted ron paul instead.

[SMCengineer]

Wow! From fitness to politics!!!!

Please learn how to quote (it's the radio button in the bottom right hand corner of every post that says 'Quote'). You're post was very difficult to sift through. Also, your attempt at diminishing what I said (Wow! From fitness to politics!!!!) was poor at best considering you are on a aas site and fitness like politics is simply an interest.

Here you go... A quote directly out of your reply... "Natural law dictates that people have a right to choose how to live their lives as long as they don't interfere with the lives or property of others..."

I would say that having to pay your "medical bills" or the "Fear of a lawsuit for denying medical attention", interferes greatly with my "Property, way of life, and life it self"!!!

Does having to pay for your food and mortgage interfere with your "Property, way of life, and life it self?" Or should that be provided for free as well? And what of the people who provide the service of your medical care? Are you not taking their labor? Are they to be slaves for the good of society? Your response is extraordinarily naive and doesn't take into account any real economic theory or the consequences of 'providing' something for free.

You also mention lawsuits, but I'm sure you haven't actually thought about why medical malpratice suits are so cancerous to the healthcare industry, have you? It couldn't be because of the quasi-socialized government run healthcare that we currently suffer from. Or could it be? Medical malpractice suits are so common because there's a third party involved. There's a third party involved because of 'government compassion' or having to 'do something' back in 1973 and 74 when congress enacted the HMO act and ERISA. Insurance is completely overused and abused precisely because of government meddling, which inevitably drives prices up. Government intervention always leads to unintended consequences no matter how good the intentions were.

By using your logic we would simply allow the use of c**** and co*****!!!! Yeah, yeah... "cigaretes are not responsible for crazy violent crimes!" So what if Im "one calm and collected crack head" that does not "interfere with the life or property of others"... Should I be allowed to use and sell c**** to my "level headed crack head friends"!!!??? lol! ;-)

Board rules dictate that you cannot mention recreational drugs so you should probably edit your post. However, my logic is sound if you actually care to research it. I actually tend to agree with your mock sensationalist arguement although I would argue that legalizing drugs would not only lead to a major decline in blackmarket sales and it's related violence, but also a sharp decline in usage. Research prohibitionist policies and it's affect on the criminal underworld/blackmarket before making an uneducated response. You might be surprised to learn that drug use increases not in spite of government polices, but because of them.

i think everyone has the wrong idea, the problem is that the cigarette companies are ruthless and should be somewhat regulated. in the 90s when alot of people WANTED to quit the tobacco industry simpled added more nicotine so they couldnt and thats a FACT you can look it up. nicotine amounts went up like 15% over only a few years in hte late 90s. i think this bill will benifit people that want to quit cuase the tobacco companies wont be able to just UP the nicotine to stop people from trying to quit. its very misleading and untrue to put "light" on a cigarette. they shouldnt be allowed to put it cuase they are purposely decieving the consumer and this bill will stop them from doing it. all people in 1 way or another are ruthless and greedy and we all need to be regulated or else the world would be chaotic. OBAMA IS A SMOKER, so hes not trying to ban smoking so dont even say that crap.

That's funny considering the Federal government subsidized all that ruthlessness in the 90's. It's not time for more regulation it's time for less government interference and hypocrisy.

And the most powerful man in the world.

That title goes to Bernanke.