• Howdy! Welcome to our community of more than 130.000 members devoted to web hosting. This is a great place to get special offers from web hosts and post your own requests or ads. To start posting sign up here. Cheers! /Peo, FreeWebSpace.net
managed wordpress hosting

FDA Will Control The Cigarette

Less nicotine?

....Do you know what that means? Cigarettes are $5.32 a pack, and I smoke a pack a day. I can't ----ing afford to be smoking any more than that. Less nicotine = More cigarettes, not less. The government already owns 2 car companies, how the ---- can they own cigarette giants too?

People blame Obama for this socialist crap.... I think it's just this country.

INSTEAD.... Why don't they get control of the health insurance companies and make it so I don't have to pay $300 a month for that? OR make it so my health insurance company has to cover more stop-smoking drugs?


I'm seriously pissed.
 
DavidsAwesome I know, why don't you just quit smoking? It's not good for you anyways...

You will be able to use all that new found money from smoking to go to nice servers! :)
 
People blame Obama for this socialist crap....

They should. Democrats are always pushing the government's hand deeper into everything.

The federal government is not your daddy, I don't get why people want it to be. It shouldn't have to take you to the doctor, pay for your kids, or in this case -- control your bad habits.

More government involvement is always a bad thing.

Kind of like more democrats.
 
no power will ever force a smooker to quit smoking, quiting should come from the smoker himself.
raising the prices will not make people quit smoking :)
a smoker will smoke even if it was $10 a pack!
 
----ing bull---- that cloves are now illegal. If you're going to ban flavorings because they tempt children, why not menthol, the most popular? Oh... because it's also the most profitable? Right. This isn't about helping anyone, this is about some politicians getting re-elected without losing too much of the tobacco lobby.
 
I don't know why they bother. It's very hard for smokers to quit and they're willing to pay anything for a smoke.
 
....Do you know what that means? Cigarettes are $5.32 a pack, and I smoke a pack a day. I can't ----ing afford to be smoking any more than that. Less nicotine = More cigarettes, not less. The government already owns 2 car companies, how the ---- can they own cigarette giants too?

You're complaining about $5.32 a pack? It's $8.50 up here for a pack, or more usually. Though I don't smoke so I could care less. Not fond of lung cancer.
 
If the government really cared about our health they would make cigarettes illegal but they aint' ditchin' that money train anytime soon ..trust
 
If the government really cared about our health they would make cigarettes illegal but they aint' ditchin' that money train anytime soon ..trust

That worked great with alcohol.

I'd rather the government not tell me what recreational drugs I can and can't use.

I'm only paying $2.5 for a 20 pack of Lucky Strike, so no complains here
$3.63 for a pack of L&M Reds here. It's a Marlboro Red that's been rebranded and doesn't cost $6.00 a pack. Even has the Phillip-Morris logo on the side.
 
They will ban "light" and flavored cigarettes, as well as advertising to young people, they will also make cigarette companies to print bigger warning labels, and list ingredients that cigarettes have, as well as reduce the amount of nicotine in the cigarettes.
What exactly is the point of "reducing" the amount of nicotine? I've never been a smoker, but I understand that tobacco is carcinogenic, and nicotine is not. Therefore, if you reduce the amount of nicotine in a cigarette the smoker has to smoke more tobacco not less to inhale an equal amount of nicotine, and that means increasing (not decreasing) their risk of cancer. That just sounds like a bad policy to me!

By the Way "DavidsAwesome", a pack of 25's in Australia costs $13-$14.
 
What exactly is the point of "reducing" the amount of nicotine? I've never been a smoker, but I understand that tobacco is carcinogenic, and nicotine is not. Therefore, if you reduce the amount of nicotine in a cigarette the smoker has to smoke more tobacco not less to inhale an equal amount of nicotine, and that means increasing (not decreasing) their risk of cancer. That just sounds like a bad policy to me!

By the Way "DavidsAwesome", a pack of 25's in Australia costs $13-$14.

They're sold by packs of 25 in Australia? Interesting, they're usually in packs of 20 here.
 
Well get used to it .. they are banning smoking everywhere it seems

They "banned" indoor smoking at restaurants here. So the ones that wanted to keep allowing smoking (ex. some restaurants with bars) require you to be 18 to enter. At the school I'm taking summer classes at, there are 'no smoking' symbols outside everywhere, yet everybody smokes. Often in front of them.

Whenever I'm smoking outside and somebody walks by while doing a fake cough and making a disgusted face, I have to resist the urge to break their lower jaw.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top