Tobacco Industry

this is something i have a pretty strong opinion about, and i was just wondering how anyone else felt.

in america today, there is a lot of discussion about whether large corporations that dominate the economy are a blessing or a curse. i feel that there are many companies, such as microsoft, that are completely legitimate, and more importantly, have used the free market economy as a way of advancing life and our culture in general. without bill gates, no "regular" person would be using a pc right now, i promise. he's provided society with a way of communicating, creating, learning, and many many other practical uses. in fact, i would go so far as to say bill gates is a great example of everything that is right with american business. he used his own intelligence to provide something useful to the public, and i have no problem with him having a buttload of money. he earned it. people complain about his monopoly, but this is america and if you don't like a free market, go to china and get a government provided job gutting fish for pennies a day.

on the other hand, there are companies that provide nothing good. i'm talking about tobacco companies. i feel so adamant in my disgust with this whole industry, and their complete lack of responsibility. i hate the pathetic excuses they cop for pushing cancerous products on the public in general. they say things like "it's up to you if you smoke or not". that may be true and i'm a big proponent of everyone taking charge of their own actions, but if you're selling someone poison and making them think it's not, you're to blame somewhere.

i'm just disgusted by the fact that someone somewhere in this country is making millions off my cancer. or my child's cancer. there is someone who's funding his trip to the bahamas with your tumor. how could you not be offended by that? there is absolutely NO good qualities in tobacco products whatsoever.

the absolute biggest outrage are the members of congress who openly support the cancer-merchants on the grounds that it increases economic growth and gives americans jobs. of course, while they're saying that, they stuff their pockets with kickbacks, and campaign finance money provided by philip morris. the hypocrisy that runs through government is exemplified by their "we have your best interests in mind" attitude, all the while continuing to support deadly products hitting the market.

in case you were wondering, i am for legalizing marijuana, not because i smoke pot (i don't) and not because i approve of it (because i don't) but rather because i am tired of hypocrites. every year, uncle sam's two best friends, cigarettes and booze, kill more people than weed ever will. of course, it's also easy to grow, and NOT easily controlled by the federal government.

the bottom line is: there are companies that make their living on cancer. no one seems to be stopping this, least of all the feds.

any opinions?

and by the way, i have nothing against people who smoke. i understand most people who do smoke want to quit, but it's more addictive than most illegal drugs. i'm upset with an entirely different party.

__________________
Wit is educated insolence - Aristotle

I'm torn here. I can't be THAT disgusted because, well, the Willy Wonka candy factory makes money off of somewhat addictive substances, too. So does Pepsi and Coca-Cola. But no one gives them crap. So where's the line drawn?

I am mad that some deny Tobacco's addictiveness...but I can't begrudge them heavily for selling it. These people make a decision to smoke. There's hardly a person in this country who doesn't know what cigarettes do to you. It's pretty much impossible to be ignorant as to their effects...and if you are, you haven't read what's written on each pack, and for that, you have only yourself to blame.

So, I'd say that if tobacco is going to be legal, then there isn't a huge issue here, because people willingly buy these things (some even sue afterwards...which I don't understand). The only part I can agree with at this point is the anger towards the companies that deny it's addictive qualities. I'm not sure which do this, or what they say specifically, however.

As for tobacco's killings: cars kill too. We don't regulate things based on stuff like that. People make a decision to drive their car. They know it's possible some idiot could slam into them. It's a risk, albeit a small one. Cigarettes are the same way...hence, both are legal.

So, what's the proposition here? Are you saying tobacco should be made illegal? Should we heap even more regulations on it?

it's naive and foolish to say that cars kill so they're as bad as cigarettes...... cars also get you to work on time. cars revolutionalize your life. ditto pepsi and coca-cola. they're addictive, yes, but they have redeeming qualities . there is no product on the market right now that has NO upside besides cigarettes. and there is no way you could ever argue that cars and soda pop kills as many people as tabacco. never.

what's my idea? either legalize marijuana and other harmful substances or ILLEGALIZE tobacco. but don't have a double standard. don't be a total hypocrite. to say that the whole program isn't fueled by money and money alone is a fallacy.

and i don't agree with your comment about it's everyone's own fault because they print a warning on the label. the tobacco industry puts images in your face announcing how wonderful their produt is, so obviously, there's a conflicting message.

they can't get their story straight, so it's easy for kids to become confused. yes, i said kids. you act as if it's clear-thinking rational adults who are just starting to smoke. no way. it's little kids, usually about 11-13 years old that are getting the wool pulled over their eyes.

You're right, it is naive and foolish. Two of the many reasons for my not saying it.

So, let me get this straight: cars kill many, many people, but they have "redeeming qualities," so they're alright. Cigarettes, in YOUR opinion, have no redeeming qualities (people like 'em...same as soda...that's not a quality?), so therefore, even if they kill less people than cars, they're bad?

Anyway, I never said that soda pop killed anyone (though I'm sure it has, but that's not the point). The simple point being made is that cigarettes being addictive is not truly the issue. If addiction were the issue, we'd have to take a long, hard look at sugar and caffeine, too.

So far, we've come to the conclusion that the thing that (apparently) sets cigarettes apart is NOT that they kill many people, or that they're addictive, but rather, that they're those two things without (in your opinion) having an upside of sorts.

It's not "total" hypocriscy, because the two are not totally the same thing. For one, with marijuana, the entire point of the thing is to put you outside yourself. Out of your normal, (and hopefully) right mind. Cigarettes do not do this. I like to, sometimes, think of drugs as a form of alcohol who's whole purpose, and ONLY end-result, is to get you drunk.

Do you honestly know anyone foolish enough to believe that tobacco can not potentially harm them because there's a commercial making it look nice? Even if you did, there aren't a whole lot of cigarette commercials out there last I checked. They're regulated like hell, and they've got warnings slapped on them, too. Bottom line: if you don't know what they can do to you, it's because you didn't care enough to pay attention to what you were putting into your body.

I don't buy it. For one, kids do lots of things. It's up to the parents to do something about it. It's not exactly easy to hide smoking from your parents. It's the kind of thing that makes itself incredibly obvious through smell, for one. For another, last I checked tobacco companies are already forced to shell out incredibly large amounts of money to go completely ape making sure convienence stores and such card anything that looks as if it might be under 80 years of age.

If we're going to start declaring war on the commercials kids could become confused over, don't you think we'll have a lot to do battle with?

yes, cigarettes are much, much worse than cars. even if you're going by numbers alone, you'd have to admit that car related fatalites are only higher because more people drive. obviously. and i stand by my statement that cigarettes absolutely do not have a single positive quality. people only "like em" because they're more addictive than black tar heroine.

if you're claiming that the reason marijuana is illegal and tobacco is not is HEALTH, you obviously have never met someone who has ever smoked weed. you could be high as a kite and your health would not be in as much jeopardy as if you ingested the arsenic laced rat poison that is cigarette smoke. do you think it's a coincidence that big tobacco is allowed to prosper when you know full well that government has it's hand in the honey jar and other lethal products are not when the government doesn't get a cut?

you're whole take responsibility for yourself thing is a legitimate argument when we're discussing adults making adult desicions. statistically, most people start smoking when they're 10-13. i didn't make it up, it's a fact. kids are fooled by advertisements all the time. it's not their fault, because succumbing to peer pressure is a completely natural, normal desire. the tobacco companies know this and exploit it.

think about it this way:

if i had..... i dunno.... let's say some strychnine that i wanted to sell to you. if i were a master bullsh** artist and you were 11, do you think i could do it? i think i could. i think it's the most horrible, disgusting unethical thing that businessmen do, really. i don't know how you could even go halfway. and kids will do things without their parent's consent FOREVER. you can't live in an idyllic fantasy world where mom and dad can watch out for junior at all times. and you say we can't battle any commercial that tries to fool kids. if disney fools kids and sells them action figures, it's a whole different story than if marlboro fools kids and sells them DEATH IN A BOX.

i don't know how you could be conflicted on the issue of poisoning children.

Sure, more people drive. But that's not the point I'm trying to make. The simple point is that it's not the killing that, according to you, sets cigarettes apart, it's the killing without benefit. But sugar's the same thing on a smaller level. Caffeine's addictive on a lesser level. Where's the line? And who are you to say they have no "upside"? Does alcohol have an upside? Are we to ban anything bad in any way that does not fit your definition of an upside?

No, I'm not claiming that. Frankly I have no idea what even gave you that idea.

The government's got problems, but I don't buy the conspiracy stuff. I do not think there is corruption in absolutely every office. Just more than there should be. And you don't think government officials could make money off of marijuana the same way they do with cigarettes? Really?

It's not their fault? Okay, then it's their parents fault. A 10 year old kid should know better than to do some things. As the child progresses more of the responsibility is shifted to them. Hence, no one blames a baby for getting into things it shouldn't. So, if we're talking about a 10 year old kid, their parents have a responsibility to explain things. My parents did. I've never had the urge to smoke.

So, if the responsibility does not sit with the children (that's on a case-by-case, IMO) because they're too young, it sits with their parents. There are NOT many tobacco-related commercials on TV. There are far more, at least out here, anti-tobacco commercials. So how exactly are we to figured that kids will believe the one, and not the other, when there's easily more on the negative side? We are BOMBARDED with anti-tobacco rhetoric. It's flippin' everywhere.

I'm not sure what it is you're requesting here. Is this just a space to rail against the industry, or is there an actual cause or bill or policy you want to see in place?

Could you? Not likely. Not me at age 11. Because my parents actually gave a sh*t. Of course they can't watch out for the kid the whole time. If they have any idea what they're doing, they don't have to. I obey my father quite often even if he's not around. Parenting SUCKS in this country today, on the whole. It's that simple. It's easy to make excuses and say it's impossible for parents to do this or that, but it's not impossible to raise responsible children. I've seen it happen.

The solution to temptation is not to never expose anyone to it. You don't run from all battles; some you defend against. The answer is not to put padding on every single corner of the house until it's completely impossible for the child to fall on anything but the softest fabric. You don't put blankets down on everything else regardless of who else it bothers or blames or conflicts with. You give the kid armor in the form of common sense. Maybe you think children are stupid, but I think they're capable of 10 times what is expected of them today. Likewise for parents.

The same way you can be conflicted about the killing of a human, or a murder: it's not about what happened. The debate is who is to blame. If children are being "poisoned," and I don't agree with the person you blame for that, that doesn't mean I'm supporting death. It doesn't mean I don't care. It means I don't like your conclusions. That line, to me, reads like a melodramatic catchphrase.

I don't know if I'm going to get fully involved in this debate, but I think both of you bring up good points.

Brodie, I agree with your statements about the legalization of marijuana - it would most definitely be a good thing, especially if it were government-regulated. Think of all of the billions of dollars thrown at the problem every year totally freed up, not to mention the insane amount of tax that could be placed on it. A ten dollar tax on a quarter bag...and no one will say anything, because it's pot. I also agree with a few of your statements about the tobacco companies, and how it is sickening that so much money is being made off of people's future health problems.

But I also agree with TWT when he asks where the line is drawn. People become addicted to caffeine, which can present heart problems later in life, but nobody is campaigning out in front of the Coca Cola company. Still, it's true - addiction shouldn't be the issue. The fact is, people DO have a choice. It's up to me whether or not I want to smoke cigarettes, if they're from Marlboro or I roll them myself. (On the other side of that coin, companies have a right, however disgusting it may be, to advertise their products, which ARE legal, whether we like it or not.)

Personally, I'm opposed to banning cigarettes, because that would make it harder for me to get them. I'm for the legalization of soft drugs, as long as they're government-regulated. I have no moral stance on either issue.

And now I'll get back to Science class.

__________________
**** the Lakers!

I am definately anti-tobacco, but saying that tobacco has no benefits and soda does, doesn't make too much sense to me. Cigarettes alleviate stress, whether we want to admit it or not. What benefit does soda have, except that it tastes good (depends) and somewhat alleviates the feeling of hunger?

__________________
One of the biggest myths told is that being intelligent is the absence of the ability to do stupid things.

twtcommish...... alright, i think i should sum up my whole viewpoint on the issue of not just cigarettes, but on parenting as well.

if you remember back to our whole censorship thread, you'll remember that i was adamantly against it on the grounds that people should take more responsibility for their own actions and people in this country need to be better parents. i still hold those views. there is no substitute for good parenting, not cigarette regulations, not labels or warnings or anything tipper gore has up her sleeve. parenting is something that is desparately needed in modern society, and i'll never disagree with you on that account.

my family are also really good people. in my entire time in high school, i never smoked, tried drugs (even once) or had a problem with alcohol. i know exactly what you mean when you say that good parenting is about trust and watching out for your kids. i hope you aren't implying that i come from an irresponsible family, or that i'm ok with kids not having a proper guiding force in their lives.

having said that, though..... i agree that part of the problem lies with kids being bad and parents being idiots. but it's only PART of the problem. another big part (the part that i'm addressing in my previous posts) is the tobacco companies' greater concern with the almighty dollar than with the safety of their product.

no matter who you are, where you come from, or what your upbringing was like, you WILL make mistakes. some people are unfortunate enough to start smoking. people who are, as far as i can tell, decent people with decent families smoke. it's not like they shot a guy or blew up a building. they just got a bad idea stuck in their heads. yeah, it was their parents fault..... and their own. but you can't completely overlook the fact that there are some shady characters in this world who DON'T MIND MAKING MONEY OFF OF PEOPLE'S DEATH. (that wasn't shouting, just emphasis.)

i don't know how you could do that without having a guilty, nagging voice in your head telling you it's wrong. i don't know why people don't stand up and have boycotts or demand stronger legislation.

if you claim they are already too heavily taxed and over-penalized, then why are there still kids smoking? because you can still see ads in sports illustrated or people or pretty much any magazine that's not "kids only". and because there are stores that won't card underage kids, and because the cigareete industry doesn't mind at all! i promise you, they only comply with the few rules the federal government hands down in order to stay in business and make more money. they will never go out of their way to make sure kids are safe because kids are their main source of income in the future.

firegod - cigarettes do provide you with a little letup of stress, that's true, but the only reason you continually keep smoking them is because of their dangerous addictive qualities. it's not as if anyone is up to two packs a day and still WANTS to keep smoking. if you decide to stop drinking soda, you can. you're probably drinking a can right now because you like the taste. if you're not, it's because you hate the taste and your body is fine with that. with cigarettes, your hands would be shaking and you'd be a total mess...... they know how cigarettes get their hooks in people. they even deliberately add chemicals specifically for addictive purposes.

steve - thanks for your opinion on marijuana. i only mentioned banning cigarettes as an example of what the government would do if it were to drop the charade and really protect us. it won't happen, and i'm not sure if i even like that idea. in fact, i don't have a permanent solution. i suppose ideally, the tobacco executives would grow a conscience overnight, but that won't happen, either.

No, don't worry, I wasn't referring to your or your family or anything.

The companies are allowed to care more about money than people. We can't stop that. You're allowed to think anything you want basically. If they're not breaking laws, nothing can be done. Sure, it's an awful thing to care more about money than lives. But it's not illegal...and that's what I'm primarily concerned about. Does no one any good, basically, to dislike that. It does good if we can change it somehow. And it's their right to be a**holes if they so choose.

Anyway, if they're at fault for that, should we go tracking down automobile manufacturers who may or may not have compromised safety standards on their vehicles to save money? If so, how precise do we get? Is it ANY compromise?

In short: I don't think we can do more than we have. The regulations are all over the place, and there are far more anti-smoking ads around than there are smoking ones. Sometimes tobacco companies are forced to pay for campaigns to prevent young'uns from smoking, and sometimes they're sued (how stupid is that?) for a buttload of cash. It's like we want to ban them without actually doing so. I say we've beat them to hell already, all we can do is try to sway the children and increase the quality of parenting. Either that or ban the things...which I don't think is an option.

banning things is always bad. i'm a libertarian thinker by nature, it would go against everything i stand for if the government said no cigarettes. i guess what i want is for companies to cease their current practices.

maybe i'm an idealist for wishing that money didn't control the world. it's just a shame that people could be that unethical in their business. i'm not pushing for government sanctions as much as i am for grass-roots anti-tobacco campaigns. there are probably PLENTY of people sick of being turned into human targets for money-grubbing CEOs. enough that tobacco companies shouldn't be able to go home and roll around in giant piles of cash just for giving us all cancer. i know you say people understand that smoking is bad, but believe it or not, there are a lot of people who don't understand the severity of it. take a look at the "infect truth" commercials. people are out and out shocked at the non-ending list of crap that's put into tobacco products. they can't believe at how ruthless and deadly the whole situation is. they're genuinely surprised. so in that light, maybe some education would help. instead of saying "cigarettes are bad for you" you could say "cigarettes are damn near the worst thing you could possibly do to yourself that's even legal". change the tone or something...... how many people die from cigarettes every year? it's a lot, i know that.

The "infect truth" commercials rarely shock me. There's "traces" of all kinds of crap in all kinds of other crap. Wasn't there a big hubub just last year about very small amounts of arsenic in public water supplies? If I remember correctly, it wasn't actually harmful at all.

So that doesn't shock me. Cigarettes are no more or less appealing to me because of it. I can't say I like all of those commercials, though. They can do what they want, but some of them make me roll my eyes. Of course, a LOT of anti-drug/anti-tobacco commercials make me roll my eyes. Some of them are just plain stupid. But that's another discussion.

So, I dunno. I don't see how we can reasonably do anything but continue to educate. If I had to choose one thing to concentrate on to remedy the problem (and many others at the same time), it'd be an increase in parental awareness.

lol.... you and your love for big companies. you're such a republican!

wanna start a point-counterpoint show on msnbc with me?

all jokes aside, you rule at these debates.

I loooooove the comp-nees! Free markets! Can't wait to run one of my own in at least a semi-serious way. And yeah, let's get a show together. We'll flip a coin, though. If it comes up heads, the show's on Fox News.

we'll call it.....

Hard Issue or PowerBall or Factor Zone it'll have really flashy visuals and you and i can argue about things. lol.... that actually sounds kind of fun.

Hmm, looks like our first argument would be over the title.

LOL Factor Zone....That's hilarious.

I think, after reading this debate, I'm going outside to smoke a cigarette.

out for a cigarette. that's priceless.

Y'Know, I hate it when people smoke around me, it gives me horrific migraines and makes me wanna puke. BUT....we live in a capitalist society, and well, tobacco companies have the right to make their product and to sell it. I honestly wouldn't want the government to step in and stop them, because that would open the door to all sorts of control that we won't like.

__________________
"You, me, everyone...we are all made of star stuff." - Neil Degrasse Tyson

https://shawnsmovienight.blogspot.com/

Jeezus I need a smoke.