TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- Sad day for Ontario
Pages (4): « 1 [2] 3 4 »


Posted by loca on Jun-09-2005 17:35:

quote:
Originally posted by Thracky
Getting wet doesn't cause cancer and millions of dollars in health care costs last I checked.


This is why we should have private healthcare option. So people could stop fucking whining about how it's going to cost them money, blah blah blah.


Posted by Jayx1 on Jun-09-2005 17:36:

quote:
Originally posted by Thracky
Getting wet doesn't cause cancer and millions of dollars in health care costs last I checked.


great let me opt out so i dont have to listen to this bullshit arguement.

And if i knowingly choose activities that could be hazardous to my health thats my choice.

Im guessing based on your comment above that you dont eat fast food, have sex, do drugs or drink alcohol. Otherwise you might be a hypocrite.


Posted by Thracky on Jun-09-2005 17:37:

quote:
Originally posted by loca
This is why we should have private healthcare option. So people could stop fucking whining about how it's going to cost them money, blah blah blah.


Move to the states then. That way you can smoke, carry a gun, and pay retarded amounts of money for healthcare!


Posted by Thracky on Jun-09-2005 17:40:

quote:
Originally posted by Jayx1
great let me opt out so i dont have to listen to this bullshit arguement.

And if i knowingly choose activities that could be hazardous to my health thats my choice.

Im guessing based on your comment above that you dont eat fast food, have sex, do drugs or drink alcohol. Otherwise you might be a hypocrite.


It's got nothing to do with being a hypocrite, I just choose to do things that are not AS detrimental to my health, smoking is one of the stupidest habits to develop ever, and I've had MANY smokers tell me this themselves. How many deaths PER year does weed cause in comparison to tobacco? or Alcohol?

Regardless, your comments have absolutely no relevance to the discussion at hand.


Posted by Jayx1 on Jun-09-2005 17:40:

quote:
Originally posted by Thracky
Move to the states then. That way you can smoke, carry a gun, and pay retarded amounts of money for healthcare!


Actually europe has a mix of public and private care. Canada is the only country i know of with this disaster experiment.


Posted by Jayx1 on Jun-09-2005 17:42:

quote:
Originally posted by Thracky
It's got nothing to do with being a hypocrite, I just choose to do things that are not AS detrimental to my health, smoking is one of the stupidest habits to develop ever, and I've had MANY smokers tell me this themselves. How many deaths PER year does weed cause in comparison to tobacco? or Alcohol?

Regardless, your comments have absolutely no relevance to the discussion at hand.


ok you just fell into my trap. Not AS hazardous? Really? So you are telling me basically that as long as you choose to do something its ok even though there is a health risk but if you dont do something no one else should either.

And tell me that drugs and booze arent as hazardous and i laugh like this ----> hahahahahaha


Interesting

You are ALMOST as ridiculous as those health concious vegans who get high and drink their lives away....

ALMOST


Posted by loca on Jun-09-2005 17:42:

quote:
Originally posted by Thracky
Move to the states then. That way you can smoke, carry a gun, and pay retarded amounts of money for healthcare!


I don't like the states, and don't feel the need to carry a gun, thanks

Like Jay said, i wish it was more of a European mix, a choice between public and private... but wait, i guess you think there's probably something wrong with that too, right?


Posted by ShadoWolf on Jun-09-2005 17:43:

quote:
Originally posted by Jayx1
Actually europe has a mix of public and private care. Canada is the only country i know of with this disaster experiment.



Canada is one of only two nations on the globe with a universal public system that forbids a parallel private system; the other is North Korea.


Posted by Thracky on Jun-09-2005 17:44:

quote:
Originally posted by Jayx1
Actually europe has a mix of public and private care. Canada is the only country i know of with this disaster experiment.


So does Alberta actually, where people with money can get stuff done quickly and people who don't have money wait months and months.

I was going to have to wait 6 months for an MRI on my knee but we paid 700 bucks and got it done within 2 days.

Not that this is a bad thing mind you, I was happy about it.


Posted by Jayx1 on Jun-09-2005 17:44:

BTW we already pay ridiculous amounts to health care...

Have you seen your tax bill lately?


Posted by Jayx1 on Jun-09-2005 17:45:

quote:
Originally posted by Thracky
So does Alberta actually, where people with money can get stuff done quickly and people who don't have money wait months and months.

I was going to have to wait 6 months for an MRI on my knee but we paid 700 bucks and got it done within 2 days.

Not that this is a bad thing mind you, I was happy about it.


I hope you dont do sports...why should I have to pay for your knee surgury?


Posted by Thracky on Jun-09-2005 17:47:

quote:
Originally posted by Jayx1
ok you just fell into my trap. Not AS hazardous? Really? So you are telling me basically that as long as you choose to do something its ok even though there is a health risk but if you dont do something no one else should either.

And tell me that drugs and booze arent as hazardous and i laugh like this ----> hahahahahaha


Interesting

You are ALMOST as ridiculous as those health concious vegans who get high and drink their lives away....

ALMOST


Ah just because I partake every once in a while doesn't mean I'm a chronic weed smoker and an alcoholic. Frankly weed and alcohol aren't nearly as addictive as niccotine. I'd say smoking a pack a day of smokes or inhaling 5 packs worth of second hand smoke is probably far worse than a joint a couple times a month, or a few beers on the weekends.


Posted by Jayx1 on Jun-09-2005 17:48:

Regarding Loca---- Its funny how a european who many here regard to be "socialists" and whom liberals in canada look to for inspiration has what many would consider to be conservative views in canada. Its funny also how real liberal thinkers elsewhere actually believe in freedom as opposed to the left wing social engineers that exist in this country.


Posted by Jayx1 on Jun-09-2005 17:50:

quote:
Originally posted by Thracky
Ah just because I partake every once in a while doesn't mean I'm a chronic weed smoker and an alcoholic. Frankly weed and alcohol aren't nearly as addictive as niccotine. I'd say smoking a pack a day of smokes or inhaling 5 packs worth of second hand smoke is probably far worse than a joint a couple times a month, or a few beers on the weekends.


And i enter a bar with smoking once a week. Not nearly as bad as breathing in the fumes of cars every day is it?

Bottom line is that you do things for recreation that could cost the health care system money. So you should just leave smokers alone too.

You dont have to breath in smoke under the current laws anyways so whats your problem with DSRs?


Posted by Matt on Jun-09-2005 17:50:

quote:
Originally posted by Jayx1
I hope you dont do sports...why should I have to pay for your knee surgury?




and I don't wanna pay for smokers who need help from the healthcare system.


Posted by Thracky on Jun-09-2005 17:50:

quote:
Originally posted by Jayx1
I hope you dont do sports...why should I have to pay for your knee surgury?



Most high performance athletes get stuff done privately, either in Alberta or in the US somewhere hehe.

Also an MRI isn't surgery, but it did eventually lead to my surgery which WAS covered by the government ;-)


Posted by Jayx1 on Jun-09-2005 17:51:

quote:
Originally posted by Thracky
Most high performance athletes get stuff done privately, either in Alberta or in the US somewhere hehe.

Also an MRI isn't surgery, but it did eventually lead to my surgery which WAS covered by the government ;-)


yeah because our crappy health care system is too backed up to deal with them properly.


Posted by Jayx1 on Jun-09-2005 17:53:

quote:
Originally posted by Matt
and I don't wanna pay for smokers who need help from the healthcare system.


see post above... i hope you dont do any of the things i mentioned as well.

dont worry... the tax money that the government takes in with cig taxes more than covers that 1.7 billion. Funny how they never mention that part though.


Posted by Thracky on Jun-09-2005 17:56:

quote:
Originally posted by Jayx1
And i enter a bar with smoking once a week. Not nearly as bad as breathing in the fumes of cars every day is it?

Bottom line is that you do things for recreation that could cost the health care system money. So you should just leave smokers alone too.

You dont have to breath in smoke under the current laws anyways so whats your problem with DSRs?


The key is moderation. Most smokers know no such bounds, not to mention *smoking* not alcohol not weed, kills a veritable shitload of people every year and is one of the *largest* drains on health care dollars.

Sure alcohol causes car accidents and weed does too, but the culture of smoking is a real long term health crisis.


Posted by Jayx1 on Jun-09-2005 17:59:

Please understand that im not defending the act of smoking. I made my CHOICE not to start. What im saying is that someone who indulges in vices has no moral authority to tell others that they cannot smoke. Smoking is a choice one makes. No one forces anyone to start and people know that its addictive before they do.

For you to tell people that they should not smoke while admitting to drinking and getting high smacks of hypocrisy. Not to mention that you keep bringing up the health care issue which has already been answered by a number of people.

That arguement just does not work.


Posted by Thracky on Jun-09-2005 18:05:

quote:
Originally posted by Jayx1
Please understand that im not defending the act of smoking. I made my CHOICE not to start. What im saying is that someone who indulges in vices has no moral authority to tell others that they cannot smoke. Smoking is a choice one makes. No one forces anyone to start and people know that its addictive before they do.

For you to tell people that they should not smoke while admitting to drinking and getting high smacks of hypocrisy. Not to mention that you keep bringing up the health care issue which has already been answered by a number of people.

That arguement just does not work.


Vices are not a black and white issue. Some are worse for you than others. Smoking just so happens to be one of, if not THE worst. Not to mention the frequency also plays a huge part. I have a few beers on the weekends, and smoke a joint maybe once or twice a month if I'm lucky. The fact that we are generating a culture that says causing yourself large amounts of harm on a daily if not hourly basis is ok is a problem. I'm not saying smoking weed and drinking are right, but they're definitely less detrimental *IN MODERATION* when compared to someone who smokes 2-3 packs a day.

Sure anything in large quantities is bad for you. Water for example you can drown in :P So why then can't smokers restrict themselves to maybe one on the weekends or something? Because of the nature of the addiction.


Posted by Jayx1 on Jun-09-2005 18:08:

There are lots of people who chronically drink and get high. There are also a lot of casual smokers. Your arguement is very weak. It is very much a black and white issue. Your issue is that you dont partake in it so why should others? I bet you are the first to wonder why they cant legalize weed yet support smoking bans.


Posted by MarkT on Jun-09-2005 18:16:

The status quo amounts to gov't taxation on the legalized DRUG ADDICTION that currently exists...and then the gov't also covers the resultant health related costs...how ridiculous.

I understand that business have concerns over lost revenue...that's fine...but watching DRUG ADDICTS (that's what most smokers are) fight for their right to remain an addict and be able to satiate that addiction wherever they want...it's somewhat disturbing and perversely comical at the same time.

*flame away*

seriously though...I support the previous bylaw...but not this new one. DSRs should be allowed.


Posted by Thracky on Jun-09-2005 18:23:

quote:
Originally posted by Jayx1
There are lots of people who chronically drink and get high. There are also a lot of casual smokers. Your arguement is very weak. It is very much a black and white issue. Your issue is that you dont partake in it so why should others? I bet you are the first to wonder why they cant legalize weed yet support smoking bans.


Sure there are lots, but find me numbers that tell me that alcoholics and chronic weed smokers are outnumbering or in equal numbers to cigarette smokers.

It's only a black and white issue if you're a person who can only think in absolutes, after all it's not as if they're banning smoking entirely. They are simply making it so it's a little harder for people who smoke to harm people who choose not to. I personally think DSR's were a great idea, and I'm not necessarily saying this smoking ban is the BEST thing for club business, but I seriously doubt it's going to have a *large* effect on club revenue. I support smoking bans because as a person who chooses not to shorten my life VASTLY on a daily basis, I don't want people forcing their smoke on me and i don't think I should be restricted as to where I can and can't go because of it. Call it hypocrisy if you want, but it's a fact that smoking is a much larger problem than anything else. At least when I drink I don't give OTHER people long term health problems (unless I'm stupid enough to get in a car and drive, which I am not thank you) and same when I smoke weed, I don't do things that would be detrimental to other people. Hell I won't smoke weed inside, period, not because of the smell, but because I don't want to bother other people. Unfortunately smokers don't give a shit and now claim this whole thing as some sort of huge loss of freedoms. I think I have as much freedom to be free from second hand smoke in public places and be healthy if not more freedom than people have to impose their second hand smoke upon me.

As far as legalizing weed goes, I know why it's not legal because it has an immediate detrimental effect on how you act. And it doesn't surprise me it's not legal.


Posted by Jayx1 on Jun-09-2005 18:25:

quote:
Originally posted by MarkT
The status quo amounts to gov't taxation on the legalized DRUG ADDICTION that currently exists...and then the gov't also covers the resultant health related costs...how ridiculous.

I understand that business have concerns over lost revenue...that's fine...but watching DRUG ADDICTS (that's what most smokers are) fight for their right to remain an addict and be able to satiate that addiction wherever they want...it's somewhat disturbing and perversely comical at the same time.

*flame away*

seriously though...I support the previous bylaw...but not this new one. DSRs should be allowed.


The same arguement can be used for booze. Which will most likely be the next thing they go after since the tobacco cause is almost over.


Pages (4): « 1 [2] 3 4 »

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.