I think if they are going to tell us we cant smoke then they should remove the taxes off cigarettes......The liberals are just like Hitler ffs...but they will be gone in the next election thank god ..
JAG .........BYE BYE Gallant and here is a pack of smokes for your long drive back to Moncton lmao
Sadly, I would not give my business to any bar that allowed smoking on its patio, and left me with no choice about having to smell someone's disgusting cigarette smoke. I uphold smoker's freedom of choice, to smoke, and I uphold my freedom of choice not to smoke - and not to have to smell and breathe someone else's second hand, putrid fumes.
The cigarette guilt tax is a revenue tax. Old McKenna, during his time increased the cig taxes to a level that smokers bought the cheaper black market cigarettes. After several years, the government of the day found that they were losing millions of dollars in tax revenue, which resulted in dropping the taxes. The taxation strategy appeared to be based on the law of diminishing returns.
Prior to the mid 80’s smoking in the universities class room was permitted both students and professors what was interesting you rarely seen people having asthma attacks, and those that did appeared to be a chronic condition that could be triggered regardless to whether cigarette smoke was present. So what has changed in 40 years? Has the new generation become genetically weaker?
Since the no smoking campaign has been initiated, the number of non-smokers over the last 20 have exceeded the number of smokers so you would expect a decrease in cancer rates if smoking is the “Cause” of cancer, but that isn’t the case, the number of cancer incidents has basically remained the same per capita. The Occurrence of cancers seems to be directly proportional to age, the older you get the greater are the chances that you develop cancer.
The best science that shows the biological effects of smoking are the results from pulmonary function tests. What the results show is that lung functions decrease with age, however when it is compared with a smoker degrade faster as the number of packages of cigarettes smoked. Therefore, someone who has smoked from a teenager can expect critical lung failure in their sixties, while the non-smoker can expect lung failure in their 80’s or 90’s.
The successful demonizing of smoking seems to be the result of effective marketing strategies, if you recall, legislation was brought in to prevent the tobacco company from doing any marketing supporting their argument so the public was given only one side of the argument.
In the fifties Sigmund Freud’s nephew Edward Barneys’ “Torch of freedom” campaign” was very successful increasing tobacco sales.
"One of the most famous campaigns of Bernays was the women's cigarette smoking campaign in 1920s. Bernays helped the smoking industry overcome one of the biggest social taboos of the time: women smoking in public. Women were only allowed to smoke in designated areas, or not at all. Women caught violating this rule were arrested. Bernays staged the 1929 Easter parade in New York City, showing models holding lit Lucky Strike cigarettes, or "Torches of Freedom". After the historic public event, women started lighting up more than ever before. It was through Bernays that women's smoking habits started to become socially acceptable. Bernays created this event as news, which it was not. Bernays convinced industries that the news, not advertising, was the best medium to carry their message to an unsuspecting public."
The increase of sales was the result of his campaign, so the successful demonetization of smoking my be due to barneys’ techniques of persuasion more than anything.
We all live in Canada under the same charter of rights and freedoms and the smokers the only ones having to live under Gallants dumb laws. why doesn't he do something useful to create job and pay off the debt.
He is making alot of really good points, patios are meant for wine and smoke and laughter, there has to be some pleasure in life that's a little "dangerous"...geez people., vagina much*?
I think if they are going to tell us we cant smoke then they should remove the taxes off cigarettes......The liberals are just like Hitler ffs...but they will be gone in the next election thank god ..
ReplyDeleteJAG .........BYE BYE Gallant and here is a pack of smokes for your long drive back to Moncton lmao
Sadly, I would not give my business to any bar that allowed smoking on its patio, and left me with no choice about having to smell someone's disgusting cigarette smoke. I uphold smoker's freedom of choice, to smoke, and I uphold my freedom of choice not to smoke - and not to have to smell and breathe someone else's second hand, putrid fumes.
ReplyDeleteThe cigarette guilt tax is a revenue tax. Old McKenna, during his time increased the cig taxes to a level that smokers bought the cheaper black market cigarettes. After several years, the government of the day found that they were losing millions of dollars in tax revenue, which resulted in dropping the taxes. The taxation strategy appeared to be based on the law of diminishing returns.
ReplyDeletePrior to the mid 80’s smoking in the universities class room was permitted both students and professors what was interesting you rarely seen people having asthma attacks, and those that did appeared to be a chronic condition that could be triggered regardless to whether cigarette smoke was present. So what has changed in 40 years? Has the new generation become genetically weaker?
Since the no smoking campaign has been initiated, the number of non-smokers over the last 20 have exceeded the number of smokers so you would expect a decrease in cancer rates if smoking is the “Cause” of cancer, but that isn’t the case, the number of cancer incidents has basically remained the same per capita. The Occurrence of cancers seems to be directly proportional to age, the older you get the greater are the chances that you develop cancer.
The best science that shows the biological effects of smoking are the results from pulmonary function tests. What the results show is that lung functions decrease with age, however when it is compared with a smoker degrade faster as the number of packages of cigarettes smoked. Therefore, someone who has smoked from a teenager can expect critical lung failure in their sixties, while the non-smoker can expect lung failure in their 80’s or 90’s.
The successful demonizing of smoking seems to be the result of effective marketing strategies, if you recall, legislation was brought in to prevent the tobacco company from doing any marketing supporting their argument so the public was given only one side of the argument.
In the fifties Sigmund Freud’s nephew Edward Barneys’ “Torch of freedom” campaign” was very successful increasing tobacco sales.
"One of the most famous campaigns of Bernays was the women's cigarette smoking campaign in 1920s. Bernays helped the smoking industry overcome one of the biggest social taboos of the time: women smoking in public. Women were only allowed to smoke in designated areas, or not at all. Women caught violating this rule were arrested. Bernays staged the 1929 Easter parade in New York City, showing models holding lit Lucky Strike cigarettes, or "Torches of Freedom". After the historic public event, women started lighting up more than ever before. It was through Bernays that women's smoking habits started to become socially acceptable. Bernays created this event as news, which it was not. Bernays convinced industries that the news, not advertising, was the best medium to carry their message to an unsuspecting public."
The increase of sales was the result of his campaign, so the successful demonetization of smoking my be due to barneys’ techniques of persuasion more than anything.
We all live in Canada under the same charter of rights and freedoms and the smokers the only ones having to live under Gallants dumb laws. why doesn't he do something useful to create job and pay off the debt.
ReplyDeleteJAG
He is making alot of really good points, patios are meant for wine and smoke and laughter, there has to be some pleasure in life that's a little "dangerous"...geez people., vagina much*?
ReplyDelete