Banning Smokers

Here we go. We've went from banning smoking to banning smokers. Now people are being refused jobs and even fired for using tobacco on their own time. As if telling private restaurant and bar owners they can't allow smoking in their establishments wasn't a big enough step towards fascism, now Big Brother controls what you do in your living room behind closed doors.

Those of you who cry for a public health care system, but don't subsist exclusively on bean sprouts and tofu will want to pay special attention to this.

The people discriminating against the smokers do so on the grounds that its too expensive to pay the health care costs of someone who is potentially taking risks with their long-term health. They think its unfair, if they're going to pick up the bill for someones health care, that the person can engage it behavior likely to increase the amount of those medical bills. I can't really disagree with the logic.

While we're at it, I'd also like to see public employees prohibited from having high blood pressure, high cholesterol, and being fat. Those are all risk factors for heart disease – a very expensive malady, and anyone suffering from them needs to be removed immediately from the government payroll. Oh yeah, the ones who pass their blood pressure tests and get to keep their job need to be forced to exercise three times a week. On their own time.

Now that they're saying fast food and junk food increases your risk of cancer, any government employee caught indulging in a Big Mac can get canned just like the cop that was fired after someone wrote a anonymous letter accusing him of smoking at a party.

That all sounds pretty silly doesn't it? But can you tell me where I crossed the line from rational to unreasonable? This is the kind of thing that is already happening.

This is a great example of what would be devastatingly wrong with a public health care system. As soon as the government pays for keeping you healthy, they get to start telling you what to do with your life.

My question is, if they can tell cops they can't smoke, why can't they tell welfare recipients not to?

Comments

[Rob]

Hey, lets fire everybody with Diabetes too. Insulin and blood-sugar checking devices are expensive too.

[BadPenny]

Even if socialized health care never becomes a reality in the US, it will do little to safeguard one's right to use tobacco. People are refused jobs and fired for smoking marijuana on their own time, and this is under system of privatized healthcare. While I agree that a policy of socialized health care may hasten the process, it is not contingent upon it. I also believe it is falacious to argue that the trend to stigmatize smoking is related to socialized healthcare.

[Eric]

>>

The thing is, healthcare costs paid by the taxpayer are the rationalization being used to justify discrimination against smokers. That's discrimination, not just stigmatization. I don't think it takes an incredible stretch of the imagination to see a future step is prohibiting anyone with govt-paid healthcare will be banned from smoking - being it's already taking place.

What is fallacious is arguing that because marijuana is illegal cigarettes soon will be - non sequitur.

[Rob]

Discrimination against practitioners of the perfectly legal act of smoking is only symptomatic of socialized medicine, not the main problem. Once a taxpayer funded health care system is in place the health gestapo will be able to use the taxpayers as leverage for banning activities they don't like. Like eating at McDonald's for instance.

I can see it now: Ban fast food, because fat people cost more to take care of. The message may not come in those exact words, but it would come.

But to be perfectly honest, the biggest problem with universal health care will be the mind-blowing bilk fest the taxpayers will take once they are stuck with the medical bills. You think hospitals charge insurance companies a lot? Wait until they can bill the federal government.

[Doug]

I'm all for banning smokers.

Why should we all have to pay for the stupidity of others?

In fact, we should ban any people who knowingly engage in unhealthy behaviors... illegal drugs, alcohol abuse, etc...

[Rob]

Ok then, Dan. I'm going to start a movement to ban you from sitting in front of your computer and reading blogs. You're obviously not exercising and the negative health consequences from your inactivity are costing me healthcare dollars.

Go find a treadmill before I send the health police over there for some mandatory workouts.

[Wince and Nod]

Having children is an expensive medical proposition and very risky. Getting old is also an expensive medical proposition and very risky. Logan' Run, here we come!

Bleepity, bleeping regulatory nazis.

Yours,
Wince

[cannon]

Actually my rational for banning smoking in public places is different. I will make a deal with each smoker out there. When you all can keep the by-products of your smoking internal then I will be all for you all smoking in a public place. Deal?

[B. Durbin]

This exact happenstance was predicted (with sad accuracy) in the book Bellwether by Connie Willis. Since the book is about fads, it was described as an "aversion fad" and in its later stages, it leads to persecution. There is a character in the book who is hired because she's excellent for the job, but over half the company complains because "you can tell she's one of *them.*" (i.e. she has nicotine stains on her hands.) Later on she is forced to smoke outside in a snowstorm because she doesn't have a car in which to get her nicotine fix.

And I agree with the author in her depiction of the aversion fad; such things will get worse, and for no apparent reason, and some people will suffer unjustly because of it. And yes, I do think that firing (or refusing to hire) people solely over the issue of smoking is extremely unreasonable and unjust. Even though I hate smoking and the smell of cigarettes myself.

[Paul P]

The Economist (www.economist.com) says that it is not actually true
that smokers are a burden on society.
Smokers are far more likely to die quickly
from a horrible disease, without
using that pension they've spent their lives building up.

It is healthy people who need the most care and pension in their long, non-productive old ages.

[Paul P]

"Actually my rational for banning smoking in public places is different. I will make a deal with each smoker out there. When you all can keep the by-products of your smoking internal then I will be all for you all smoking in a public place. Deal?"

Yes I agree but then I don't agree that, say, a privately-owned restaurant is a public place.
It would therefore be illegal to smoke outside the restaurant on the publicly owned pavement/sidewalk.

[SOPHIE]

HIYA

[ashlee]

people should not stop smokin its gd 4 ya

[ashlee]

hiya ashlee r u going to c ritchy the nite? rite bk plzr u wagging it this afternoon?is joanne not in the day coz\ she wasnt in reg so i was left all on my own lol

[Ashlee]

na am not waggin it am on report agen joanne off the day. richy has been bein a dickhed l8ly

[Kevin]

I agree that obesity is becoming a problem, but right now obesity is only costing the U.S. 1/4 of what active smokers costs. On top of that there were only 280,000 deaths in the world due to obesity. That doesnt even touch the 3 million people that died last year from smoking related illnesses. I think you need a little more evidence to back your theory up.

[Joe Shmoe]

Vote for George Bush!

[dzwonki polifoniczne]

Hi! Greetings to everybody that visited that page. By the way I invite you all to my www site. Take a look and use it for your mobile!

[phoenix arizona]

greetings from phoenix... in arizona.

[Rebecca]

hey how bout all the people that dont smoke and get sick because some had just been smoking around them? i dont agree with fireing people that smoke unless the person was informed of this before they started the job. can everyone let me know please what they think about the govement benning smoking in pubs and clubs
thanks
Rebecca

[Rebecca]

hey how about all the people that dont smoke and get sick because some had just been smoking around them? i dont agree with fireing people that smoke unless the person was informed of this before they started the job. can everyone let me know please what they think about the govement benning smoking in pubs and clubs
thanks
Rebecca

[john]

hello !

great page !

[stella]

i think it's wrong because...WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN? these parents are smoking and the children know if they keep on smoking there parents are going to get cancer or go blind. the parents don't listen

[Paul]

Paul loves Jenny Adams

[Paul]

Paul loves Jenny Adams