Smokers at Work

[katyon6th]

Does anyone here work for a company that does not hire smokers?

I had a candidate interview with a client yesterday who I thought was absolutely perfect for their position. Turns out, they thought so too, other than smelling a "hint" of smoke on her.

:bang

[BacktoBasics]

Can you really discriminate like that?

[katyon6th]

Absolutely. Smokers are not a protected class. Just like you can discriminate against fat people.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

Well, she's a fucking idiot for having a fag before the interview.

[katyon6th]

That's actually my biggest frustration.

[BacktoBasics]

You know it goes to show how narrowly scoped the ignorant can be if they're willing to turn away a candidate that is likely to excel all because of a vice. Risking profit over a third party's habit has to be one of the dumbest paths of thinking I've ever heard of. I guess you're swimming in qualified non-smoking candidates. People get way too caught up in the perfect picture over the big picture.

[ashbeeigh]

My parents both smoke. When my mom was working (she's a stay at home mom) she would drown herself in body spray, febreeze, and all that other extra stuff to keep the smoke out. If you aren't smart enough to hide that stuff than you aren't doing it right.

I don't. And, we all know I still live with them. I'm always afraid that the slightest hint of smoke on my clothes, no matter how clean they are (and how much febreeze I spray on them) someone will think I smoke and throw my application out with the rest of them. And with the area I want to work in, it's pretty important that I don't smoke.

Along those same lines...Katy...if the company does ask for non-smokers...do they usually ask if you don't smoke or are some of them more subtle about it?

[katyon6th]

We actually have that question on our application. So, all of our clients who need to know the answer can ask us without having to ask the candidate themselves. I think if it's a company policy, they will ask. If it's merely a preference, which in the case above it was, they'll just sniff you.

[ashbeeigh]

We actually have that question on our application. So, all of our clients who need to know the answer can ask us without having to ask the candidate themselves. I think if it's a company policy, they will ask. If it's merely a preference, which in the case above it was, they'll just sniff you.

Ugh. That's what I was afraid of. They could at least ask, because I haven't touched a cigarette in my life, except to hand it to someone. They gross me out. :rolleyes

[BacktoBasics]

I guess the old saying of "shit rises to the top" holds true here. Plenty of good reasons to discriminate in this world but sacrificing potential success over smoking or the hint of smoke has to be one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. Especially in the case of someone like Ash who doesn't even smoke.

What if I ate some BBQ for lunch? OMG don't hire that guy, he's hickory.

[ploto]

Smokers miss more work and file more claims for health and disability benefits.

[BacktoBasics]

Smokers miss more work and file more claims for health and disability benefits.According to who?

[CosmicCowboy]

I pay insurance on smokers and non-smokers. I see the quotes and smokers can cost the company $1000 or more a year in higher premiums. It's just the way it works. Smoking is a proven factor in cancer, blood pressure issues, and heart disease.

[Kermit]

Maybe she should quit.

[ashbeeigh]

According to who?




The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates $92 billion in lost wages annually in the United States from smokers who die prematurely. In addition, the economic cost of smoking includes $75.5 billion per year in direct health care costs.



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11394043/

[lil'mo]

Pwned!

[Viva Las Espuelas]

This as about as dumb as looking at someones credit before hiring them. I kinda understand cigs and overweight people but not looking at your credit.

[boutons_deux]

actuarially, smokers and fatties have higher health costs and more lost work days than non smokers and leanies.

While punishing measurably unhealthy people with higher insurance rates would never fly politically, significantly rewarding measurably healthy/fit people with discounted insurance rates shouldn't bother anybody.

unhealthy's pay 100%, healthies pay 75% or less.

$$$ is the best way to motivate Americans, since the culture is not strong enough to shame people into not being overweight or obese or smoker.

[mrsmaalox]

Maybe she should quit.

That would be the right thing to do---if she were indeed a smoker. I was pulling out of my driveway the other night when the UPS guy pulled up and handed me a package. When I put down my window I didn't smell anything but as soon as I touched that package the cigarette stink almost knocked me out. I had to stop further down the street and throw the package to the furthest corner of my car but it was too late----I reeked and so did my car. Good thing I was just going to a basketball game and not a job interview!

[thispego]

katie what do you do and what was the position for?

[BacktoBasics]

Pwned!I didn't dispute the fact you fucking moron.

[katyon6th]

katie what do you do and what was the position for?


I'm a recruiter. The position was for a Project Coordinator.

And why can't you spell my name correctly when it's right in front of you?

[BacktoBasics]

I'm a recruiter. The position was for a Project Coordinator.

And why can't you spell my name correctly when it's right in front of you?Even so. If he's a non-smoker he's bound to land a job.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

And why can't you spell my name correctly when it's right in front of you?

I was wondering that myself.

[thispego]

I'm a recruiter. The position was for a Project Coordinator.

And why can't you spell my name correctly when it's right in front of you?

rofl, sorry, i have a friend katie. Project coordinator for what? You told me absolutely nothing about what you do. recruiter for what? what does your company do?

[CosmicCowboy]

rofl, sorry, i have a friend katie. Project coordinator for what? You told me absolutely nothing about what you do. recruiter for what? what does your company do?

LOL she's a head hunter dumb ass. She said that.

[BacktoBasics]

LOL she's a head hunter dumb ass. She said that.
She can hunt my head any day.

[Bigzax]

some smokers take 15 minute breaks every other hour if not every hour.

it's a legitimate concern when hiring.

[mrsmaalox]

I don't think I would care if I worked with a smoker who was just a little bit stinky, but no way could I stand to be stuck in an office with one that has that loud death rattle cough all the time. I'd go bananas.

[BacktoBasics]

some smokers take 15 minute breaks every other hour if not every hour.

it's a legitimate concern when hiring.It being a concern wasn't my point. The point is that if you have the right candidate for the job and he can help your business profit its ridiculous to look him/her over for the next closest candidate all because of smoking. Especially if all things aren't equal. It sounds like they're simply not entertaining a good hire based on one unchecked or check box on an app. Potentially missing an otherwise perfect match. The bottom line should be the most important thing not a preference of habit.

[mrsmaalox]

It being a concern wasn't my point. The point is that if you have the right candidate for the job and he can help your business profit its ridiculous to look him/her over for the next closest candidate all because of smoking. Especially if all things aren't equal. It sounds like they're simply not entertaining a good hire based on one unchecked or check box on an app. Potentially missing an otherwise perfect match. The bottom line should be the most important thing not a preference of habit.

True, but realistically, there are a lot more workers than jobs right now. If it's not an emergency situation, it can be to the employer's advantage to not jump on the first almost perfect match and wait around for the real perfect one to show up. Hell they might even get the hair color they prefer.

[Strike]

some smokers take 15 minute breaks every other hour if not every hour.

it's a legitimate concern when hiring.

I'm a smoker and so are a couple of people on my crew. I never take more than my 2 breaks and lunch break every day. There are some days where the only break I take is my lunch if my workload is high enough. I've blasted people on my crew if they take an extra "smoke" break. Being a smoker doesn't entitle you to more breaks than a non-smoker. Kind of hard for them to argue that point when their foreman is, himself, a smoker.

I understand the point of discriminating against smokers based on health, insurance and productivity issues. Same thing with fat people, people who engage in dangerous activities outside of work, etc. I'm sure I've missed out on a job or two in my life based on the fact that I walked into an interview smelling like my ashtray.

[BacktoBasics]

True, but realistically, there are a lot more workers than jobs right now. If it's not an emergency situation, it can be to the employer's advantage to not jump on the first almost perfect match and wait around for the real perfect one to show up. Hell they might even get the hair color they prefer.Like I said before if they're swimming in a bath of over qualified perfect matches I can understand but we aren't doing as bad down here as they're doing up North.

[thispego]

LOL she's a head hunter dumb ass. She said that.

I dont see anywhere where she tells me what her company does. You must be the dumb ass.

[BacktoBasics]

I dont see anywhere where she tells me what her company does. You must be the dumb ass.You're misunderstanding here. She's a head hunter. People come to her looking to be matched up with her clients that need jobs filled. It could be any job? Usually in the professional type fields. Office jobs...

[Frenzy]

smelling smoke on some is pretty dam nasty. Small company I work at has about 50 on the payroll and 2 smoke(Including 1 mgr) When I started out it was about 6 people who smoked. All of which who were long term. Last few years the smokers quit or got fired(some were good at what they do) Came to my attention the mgr don't like smokers. There is an untold policy for not hiring smokers. Ouch..

[mrsmaalox]

LOL she's a head hunter dumb ass. She said that.


I dont see anywhere where she tells me what her company does. You must be the dumb ass.

Shit I should be a recruiter for dumb asses! :D

[Bigzax]

I'm a smoker and so are a couple of people on my crew. I never take more than my 2 breaks and lunch break every day. There are some days where the only break I take is my lunch if my workload is high enough. I've blasted people on my crew if they take an extra "smoke" break. Being a smoker doesn't entitle you to more breaks than a non-smoker. Kind of hard for them to argue that point when their foreman is, himself, a smoker.

I understand the point of discriminating against smokers based on health, insurance and productivity issues. Same thing with fat people, people who engage in dangerous activities outside of work, etc. I'm sure I've missed out on a job or two in my life based on the fact that I walked into an interview smelling like my ashtray.


hourly or salary for the crew?

much more freedom if you not 'on the clock', so to speak.

[jack sommerset]

Good God. The only problem they have with this person is they smelled smoke. I could never be that anal. Never.

I hear this stupid smoking argument all the time before we hire someone. After that, it disapears. It's simple. You do a good job, you keep your job.

[ashbeeigh]

Good God. The only problem they have with this person is they smelled smoke. I could never be that anal. Never.

I hear this stupid smoking argument all the time before we hire someone. After that, it disapears. It's simple. You do a good job, you keep your job.

I agree. The only way a smoker wold really bother me is if I had to work with them on a consistent close basis...like if I worked in a cubicle or team environment where it was just the two of us. That would bother me. Otherwise, whatever.

[thispego]

You're misunderstanding here. She's a head hunter. People come to her looking to be matched up with her clients that need jobs filled. It could be any job? Usually in the professional type fields. Office jobs...

oh it's all clear now.

i thought she worked HR for a company and they wouldn't hire her there. so really this has nothing to do with katy except she doesn't get commission? got it.

[katyon6th]

oh it's all clear now.

i thought she worked HR for a company and they wouldn't hire her there. so really this has nothing to do with katy except she doesn't get commission? got it.

I won't make commission off of that candidate but I will fill the position with another non-smoking candidate.

[Strike]

hourly or salary for the crew?

much more freedom if you not 'on the clock', so to speak.

I'm hourly and so is my crew. Even if I was salaried, I still wouldn't take more than 2 breaks and a lunch.

[katyon6th]

Strike, do you clock out for your smoke breaks?

[Strike]

No. breaks are paid.

[whottt]

First of all..a big suck my dick to everyone posting stats about smokers. I smoke a shitload of cigarettes and I bet you I get sick less than any of you. I bet I have missed less time at work than any of you. I bet you I am in better shape for my age than any of you.

Secondly...

Suck this too:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeanne_Calment




Jeanne Calment
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Jeanne Louise Calment

Calment celebrating her 121st birthday in 1996
Born 21 February 1875(1875-02-21)
Arles, France
Died 4 August 1997
(aged &0000000000000122.000000122 years, &0000000000000164.000000164 days)
Arles, France
Known for Becoming the oldest person whose age was verified by official documents
Spouse(s) Fernand Calment (lived: 1868–1942,
married: 1896–1942)
Jeanne Louise Calment (French pronunciation: [ʒan lwiz kalˈmɑ̃]; 21 February 1875 – 4 August 1997, 10:45AM CET)[1] was a French woman with the longest confirmed lifespan in history at age 122 years 164 days (44,724 days total).[2] She lived in Arles, France, for her entire life, [edit] Health and lifestyle
Calment's remarkable health presaged her later record. At age 85, she took up fencing, and at 100, she was still riding a bicycle. She was reportedly neither athletic, nor fanatical about her health.[7] Calment lived on her own until shortly before her 110th birthday, when it was decided that she needed to be moved to a nursing home after a cooking accident (she could barely see) started a small fire in her flat. However, Calment was still in good shape, and was able to walk until she fractured her femur during a fall at age 114 years and 11 months, which required surgery.[3][10] After her operation, Calment became confined to a wheelchair and weighed 45 kg in 1994.[12] Calment became ill with the flu shortly before her 116th birthday.[13] She smoked until the age of 117, only five years before her death.[13][14][15] She ascribed her longevity and relatively youthful appearance for her age to olive oil, which she said she poured on all her food and rubbed onto her skin, as well as a diet of port wine, and nearly two pounds of chocolate eaten every week.[9]

So you see, the oldest person who ever lived was a smoker. Stick that stat up your asses.

And one other one..in Japan over 50% of the population smokes and they have the lowest incidence of lung cancer in the world.


I already pay a HUGE fucking tax on every cigarette I smoke to offest the increased health risk. The insurance companies are clearly double dipping.





It's truly amazing the way the bigoted mind works.

[katyon6th]

No. breaks are paid.

Paid smoke and lunch breaks? Damn, where do you work?

[whottt]

some smokers take 15 minute breaks every other hour if not every hour.

it's a legitimate concern when hiring.

Damn, I guess that would mean 15 minutes less posting time on Spurstalk....

[whottt]

#1 cause of cancer btw:

http://www.nydailynews.com/lifestyle/health/2009/09/24/2009-09-24_obesity_is_now_the_leading_cause_of_cancer_beat ing_out_smoking_and_hormone_repla.html



Obesity is now the leading cause of cancer
BY Rosemary Black
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Thursday, September 24th 2009, 2:36 PM

GettyKeeping off the pounds isn't just good for your figure, it can help fight cancer, too. Related NewsArticlesThe warning signs of incestTylenol issues recall of children's liquid productsPregnant woman gets pregnant againWoman left on operating table is suing over no-show docsWaging war against those extra pounds just might save your life.

The leading cause of cancer these days is obesity, according to The Associated Press, with about 1 in 12 new cases of the disease due to excess weight.

European researchers say that obesity now accounts for up to 8% of cancers on the continent, according to the AP.

“Obesity is catching up at a rate that makes it possible it could become the biggest attributable cause of cancer in women within the next decade,” University of Manchester cancer expert Andrew Renehan told the AP. He spoke this week at a joint meeting of the European Society for Medical Oncology and the European Cancer Organization.

The news on this side of the pond’s not much more encouraging. Obesity and being overweight account for up to 14% of cancer deaths in men and 20% of cancer deaths in women, according to the National Cancer Institute. Some 20% to 30% of common cancers such as colon, postmenopausal breast, uterine and esophageal may be related to being overweight and to a lack of physical activity, according to the institute.

In the findings in Europe, colorectal cancer, breast cancer in menopausal women and uterine cancer accounted for 65% of all the cancers because of being overweight, according to the AP.

Though scientists don’t know why being obese increases cancer risk, they think it may be linked to hormones, according to the AP. Chubbier people produce more hormones, such as estrogen, that help tumors thrive. And big-bellied people have more stomach acid, which can lead to stomach and intestinal cancers.

Anyone who’s not sure whether or not they qualify as obese can check out the National Cancer Institute’s Web site. If you have a body mass index (BMI) of 18.5 to 24.9, you’re a healthy weight. Overweight people have a BMI of 25.0 to 29.9, and obese people weigh in with a BMI of 30 or higher.

The take-away message from the National Cancer Institute? Get moving! Lack of activity is the big culprit for why so many Americans are too fat, says the institute.

Sedentary pastimes like TV watching are to blame. One of the National Cancer Institute’s target goals for next year is to increase to 60% the proportion of adults who are at a healthy weight.

Renehan said it’s necessary to devise strategies to help people maintain a healthy weight, according to the AP. “We need to find the biological mechanism to help people find other ways of tackling obesity,” he said. “Just telling the population to lose weight obviously hasn’t worked.”

Maybe giving them some scary stats will.
Related Topics




Alcohol ranks pretty highly too...so let's go ahead and start discriminating.

[Strike]

Paid smoke and lunch breaks? Damn, where do you work?

10 minute breaks are paid. Lunches are not.

[BacktoBasics]

Beware: FatCancer

[whottt]

Reminds me of when I was working an election...none of these motherfuckers smoked. One day it was totally dead and we were doing nothing but sitting on our asses waiting for people to come into vote, they occupied their time by...eating, fucking around on the internet..I would go out and smoke.

The judge got on my ass about me and told me I was taking too many breaks and I was like...hey MF, this job is the break, I am getting up off my ass to go and do something because I am tired of being on break. I can only sit on my ass in one spot for 2 hours or so doing absolutely nothing.

[ploto]

Paid smoke and lunch breaks? Damn, where do you work?

Breaks are paid at my job, but I never take them. Don't most places give you a paid 15 minute break for every 4 hours you work.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

I wouldn't doubt the addition of high fructose corn syrup in almost everything edible is just as dangerous, if not more so, than smoking.

[David Bowie]

All this talk of health insurance is getting me confused. Say I go to a specialist about twice a month and get meds. And another person from my company never goes to the doctor and never takes meds. Does my employer pay more for my health insurance then for my co-workers?

Anyone know the answer to this ? :greedy

[Strike]

#1 cause of cancer btw:

http://www.nydailynews.com/lifestyle/health/2009/09/24/2009-09-24_obesity_is_now_the_leading_cause_of_cancer_beat ing_out_smoking_and_hormone_repla.html



Obesity is now the leading cause of cancer
BY Rosemary Black
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Thursday, September 24th 2009, 2:36 PM

GettyKeeping off the pounds isn't just good for your figure, it can help fight cancer, too. Related NewsArticlesThe warning signs of incestTylenol issues recall of children's liquid productsPregnant woman gets pregnant againWoman left on operating table is suing over no-show docsWaging war against those extra pounds just might save your life.

The leading cause of cancer these days is obesity, according to The Associated Press, with about 1 in 12 new cases of the disease due to excess weight.

European researchers say that obesity now accounts for up to 8% of cancers on the continent, according to the AP.

“Obesity is catching up at a rate that makes it possible it could become the biggest attributable cause of cancer in women within the next decade,” University of Manchester cancer expert Andrew Renehan told the AP. He spoke this week at a joint meeting of the European Society for Medical Oncology and the European Cancer Organization.

The news on this side of the pond’s not much more encouraging. Obesity and being overweight account for up to 14% of cancer deaths in men and 20% of cancer deaths in women, according to the National Cancer Institute. Some 20% to 30% of common cancers such as colon, postmenopausal breast, uterine and esophageal may be related to being overweight and to a lack of physical activity, according to the institute.

In the findings in Europe, colorectal cancer, breast cancer in menopausal women and uterine cancer accounted for 65% of all the cancers because of being overweight, according to the AP.

Though scientists don’t know why being obese increases cancer risk, they think it may be linked to hormones, according to the AP. Chubbier people produce more hormones, such as estrogen, that help tumors thrive. And big-bellied people have more stomach acid, which can lead to stomach and intestinal cancers.

Anyone who’s not sure whether or not they qualify as obese can check out the National Cancer Institute’s Web site. If you have a body mass index (BMI) of 18.5 to 24.9, you’re a healthy weight. Overweight people have a BMI of 25.0 to 29.9, and obese people weigh in with a BMI of 30 or higher.

The take-away message from the National Cancer Institute? Get moving! Lack of activity is the big culprit for why so many Americans are too fat, says the institute.

Sedentary pastimes like TV watching are to blame. One of the National Cancer Institute’s target goals for next year is to increase to 60% the proportion of adults who are at a healthy weight.

Renehan said it’s necessary to devise strategies to help people maintain a healthy weight, according to the AP. “We need to find the biological mechanism to help people find other ways of tackling obesity,” he said. “Just telling the population to lose weight obviously hasn’t worked.”

Maybe giving them some scary stats will.
Related Topics




Alcohol ranks pretty highly too...so let's go ahead and start discriminating.

Whether or not it's the leading cause, smoking still causes cancer, emphysema, heart disease and other illnesses. And whether or not you miss more work than your nonsmoking co-workers, is meaningless. There are exceptions to nearly every rule. Generally, generally, smokers, fatties and drinkers miss more work due to related illness. And their related illnesses end up costing health insurers more than people who do not smoke, do not drink, and are not fat. The stats are there, dude, whether you want to believe them or not.

[katyon6th]

Breaks are paid at my job, but I never take them. Don't most places give you a paid 15 minute break for every 4 hours you work.

No, it's not required in Texas.

[BacktoBasics]

No, it's not required in Texas.
Really. I thought 15 minutes every 3 hours was the law.

[Höfner]

<-- check it.

Ida lit one up right there.

[whottt]

Whether or not it's the leading cause, smoking still causes cancer, emphysema, heart disease and other illnesses. And whether or not you miss more work than your nonsmoking co-workers, is meaningless. There are exceptions to nearly every rule. Generally, generally, smokers, fatties and drinkers miss more work due to related illness. And their related illnesses end up costing health insurers more than people who do not smoke, do not drink, and are not fat. The stats are there, dude, whether you want to believe them or not.




So, the stats also say a dark skinned person is much more likely to commit a crime than a light skinned one. I guess that's a good reason to discriminate too.


I gotta stat...for you to suck.

And like I said, I already pay a huge fucking tax on every cigarette I smoke because of the increased health risk. What the fuck is that tax for?

[Höfner]

So, the stats also say a dark skinned person is much more likely to commit a crime than a light skinned one. I guess that's a good reason to discriminate too.


I gotta stat...for you to suck.

And like I said, I already pay a huge fucking tax on every cigarette I smoke because of the increased health risk. What the fuck is that tax for?


I don't think Big Brother likes you complaining about his attempts to keep you healthy.

[katyon6th]

Really. I thought 15 minutes every 3 hours was the law.

There are no work laws in the state of Texas that require employers to give their employees any breaks whatsoever. You can be required to work a 12 hr day with no break and it's completely legal in Texas.

[Blake]

So, the stats also say a dark skinned person is much more likely to commit a crime than a light skinned one. I guess that's a good reason to discriminate too.


I didn't realize people were born with a smoking gene.

[whottt]

One of you guys please tell my fucking boss to discriminate properly, I was already passed over for a promotion at one of my jobs, likely because I am a smoker...

I wish he would fully discriminate against me though...and take into account my frail health due to being a 41 year old smoker...that would mean I get to sit at stage left, stage right or the mixer at the Kiss concert tonight like all the non-smoking lardasses and women will be doing...

Instead, he will again confuse me with the 21 year old male UT students and I will likely spend the evening, standing and working the barricade.


I mean if he is going to disciminate based on my unhealthiness I wish he would do it fully. It's not like he has to worry about health benefits for me.


I've never had insurance in my entire adult life. I personally think it is for pussies unaware of the fact that we did not have it for 999999999.9999999% of our existence on this planet, and the oldest people who have yet lived never had it either. That said, I pay some huge smoker tax because of the increased health risks for smokers...I'd just like to know exactly who is getting that money since insurance companies charge extra for smoking and I'm damn sure not getting any of it back.



Everything causes fucking cancer.

If you go stand outside and do nothing else, you will get cancer.

[CuckingFunt]

So, the stats also say a dark skinned person is much more likely to commit a crime than a light skinned one. I guess that's a good reason to discriminate too.

There's a pretty big difference between discrimination based on the assumption that someone is an inherently bad or violent person, and discrimination based on the statistical evidence that a person's habits can lead to increased health care concerns.

[MannyIsGod]

I love it when Whottt melts down.

[MannyIsGod]

There's a pretty big difference between discrimination based on the assumption that someone is an inherently bad or violent person, and discrimination based on the statistical evidence that a person's habits can lead to increased health care concerns.

Is there? Whottt is right that there is statistical evidence that clearly shows African Americans are far more likely to commit a crime than Anglo Americans. Its not a disputed fact.

There are of course reasons for this but I don't see how one form of discrimination is different from another if the turning point is statistical proof that there could be a negative impact upon your company.

[David Bowie]

All this talk of health insurance is getting me confused. Say I go to a specialist about twice a month and get meds. And another person from my company never goes to the doctor and never takes meds. Does my employer pay more for my health insurance then for my co-workers?
y


Anybody know the answer to this? :greedy

[Höfner]

I take tons of smoke breaks all day. Got to keep my heart pumping free of blockages.

[whottt]

I didn't realize people were born with a smoking gene.

Um...you don't realize a great deal my dear Blake. My guess is that you should completely avoid any sort of discussions about genetics if you want to avoid topics which are rich in things you, do not realize.

Some people are genticially pre-dissposed to certain types of addictions based on their brain chemistry.

For instance...in my youth, I was quite fond of methamphetamine. I broke the law to consume it, I was heavily addicted to it. I was told what a scumbag I was. I went to rehab and broke the addiction...then when they sent me to the doctor he diagnosed me with depression, and it is strong in my faimily history..


You know what they frequently prescribe for depression?

Adderall.


Look it up and maybe you will get the humor behind it.


PS: there most cetainly is evidence of a genetic predispostion to nicotine addiction. I am sorry you do not realize this, but if the world consisted of nothing but things you realize...there wouldn't be much to it. It'd be a Chengdeite rock and nothing else...and I am being generous.

[Höfner]

Um...you don't realize a great deal my dear Blake. My guess is that you should completely avoid any sort of discussions about genetics if you want to avoid topics which are rich in things you, do not realize.

I think he's an expert on the gay gene.

[katyon6th]

All this talk of health insurance is getting me confused. Say I go to a specialist about twice a month and get meds. And another person from my company never goes to the doctor and never takes meds. Does my employer pay more for my health insurance then for my co-workers?


No, your employer does not pay more for your health insurance then for your co-workers.

[CuckingFunt]

Is there? Whottt is right that there is statistical evidence that clearly shows African Americans are far more likely to commit a crime than Anglo Americans. Its not a disputed fact.

There are of course reasons for this but I don't see how one form of discrimination is different from another if the turning point is statistical proof that there could be a negative impact upon your company.

I think there is a difference. Regardless the statistical evidence, which does exist in both cases, one of these assumptions involves a person's character and one involves merely dollars and cents.

I will say, however, that I don't think one form of discrimination is better or more justified than the other, just that there are other factors that keep them from being analogous.

[J.T.]

You know what they frequently prescribe for depression?

Adderall.

Ahh, good ol' prescription drugs. Reminds me of when Ecstasy was legal and prescribed for 'marital problems'.

BTW I take smoke breaks at work on the reg. And at my job we're not supposed to smoke on the property. Crisis easily averted by walking across the mother fucking street.

[Strike]

So, the stats also say a dark skinned person is much more likely to commit a crime than a light skinned one. I guess that's a good reason to discriminate too.


I gotta stat...for you to suck.

And like I said, I already pay a huge fucking tax on every cigarette I smoke because of the increased health risk. What the fuck is that tax for?

Discrimination based on race is illegal. Discrimination based on whether or not you smoke is not. Don't like it? Work to get the laws changed. And if you don't want to pay the cigarette taxes, either stop smoking or buy your cigarettes illegally. your choice, dude.

[whottt]

There's a pretty big difference between discrimination based on the assumption that someone is an inherently bad or violent person, and discrimination based on the statistical evidence that a person's habits can lead to increased health care concerns.

I think I get where you are coming from...it's ok to reduce a smoker to a stat but not a minority. Because there are clear and valid exceptions to minority stats and there are none with smokers...

Inspite of the fact that I posed unquestionable proof that the oldest person who ever lived was a smoker.



You are truly brilliuant funt.

[BacktoBasics]

I think there is a difference. Regardless the statistical evidence, which does exist in both cases, one of these assumptions involves a person's character and one involves merely dollars and cents.

I will say, however, that I don't think one form of discrimination is better or more justified than the other, just that there are other factors that keep them from being analogous.
Dollars and cents? Black people as a whole are way more costly across the board than white people.

[whottt]

Discrimination based on race is illegal. Discrimination based on whether or not you smoke is not. Don't like it? Work to get the laws changed. And if you don't want to pay the cigarette taxes, either stop smoking or buy your cigarettes illegally. your choice, dude.

When I hear this I know I am dealing with a bigoted mind who is simply doing an unbigoted thing in terms of race because of the social condemnation that comes with it, because he is told it is wrong, not because he actually understands it and why it is wrong. Not to mention stupid.

That's exactly what this is...


In the long run, as it does with racial or religious or gender discrimination...the employer with this statistical based mindet is his own worst enemy...because at some point he is going to turn a way a better employee for a lesser one on the basis of stats.

The biggest fools in history are those that think they can tell what an individual can or cannot do, based on superficial characteristics. It's not a case of if they will be proven wrong...just a matter of when.


Just think if someone turned down Marie Calumet because she was a smoker...and thought she might cost them money due to illness. She was the healthiest person in history...

And her smoking ass owned her doctor on a reverse mortgage...that he had to pay until he died...

[austN Spur]

I'm a recruiter. The position was for a Project Coordinator.

And why can't you spell my name correctly when it's right in front of you?
my wifes name is cadi and she is always crying that people spell her name katy or katie. yalls name is just easily mispell like that

[whottt]

Japanese seem to pretty damn hardy workers. And they smoke likle chimneys.

No offense, but since you guys feel it's ok to discriminate based on stats I might as well too...

I'd takie a chain smoking Jap as an employ over some lazy fatassed non-smoking American any day of the week.

[Strike]

When I hear this I know I am dealing with a bigoted mind who is simply doing an unbigoted thing in terms of race because of the social condemnation that comes with it, because he is told it is wrong, not because he actually understands it and why it is wrong.

That's exactly what this is...


In the long run, as it does with racial or religious or gender discrimination...the employer with this statistical based mindet is his own worst enemy...because at some point he is going to turn a way a better employee for a lesser one on the basis of stats.

The biggest fools in history are those that think they can tell what an individual can or cannot do, based on superficial characteristics.

What is bigoted about what I said? Stating the fact that discriminating smokers isn't illegal is bigoted? Maybe stating the fact that racial discrimination is illegal is bigoted? Suggesting you work to change the discrimination laws is bigoted? Suggesting you quit smoking to avoid the tobacco taxes?

No one is saying you can or cannot smoke. If you want to smoke, smoke. I smoke. I smoke knowing the health risks, the social stigma, and the possibility that some employers may not hire me because of it.

[Strike]

Japanese seem to pretty damn hardy workers. And they smoke likle chimneys.

No offense, but since you guys feel it's ok to discriminate based on stats I might as well too...

I'd takie a chain smoking Jap as an employ over some lazy fatassed non-smoking American any day of the week.

When you own your own company, you're free to hire chain smoking Japanese over non-smoking Americans all you want. Well, maybe. Could be considered racial discrimination.

[whottt]

When you own your own company, you're free to hire chain smoking Japanese over non-smoking Americans all you want. Well, maybe. Could be considered racial discrimination.



No no...it's not any kind of discimination. It's simply going with the stats.

When I hear someone say what you just said...I know I am arguing with someone who would have justified slavery prior to the civil war on the basis that the law said it was ok.

The law may set the limits for your intelligence...I otoh choose not to be stupid.

[katyon6th]

So, whottt. Am I a bigot for adhereing to a company's policy in their right to not hire someone based solely on the fact they are a smoker or a non-smoker?

[MannyIsGod]

No but you are a bad person for wearing uggs.

[whottt]

So, whottt. Am I a bigot for adhereing to a company's policy in their right to not hire someone based solely on the fact they are a smoker or a non-smoker?



Depends on why you were banging your head:


Does anyone here work for a company that does not hire smokers?

I had a candidate interview with a client yesterday who I thought was absolutely perfect for their position. Turns out, they thought so too, other than smelling a "hint" of smoke on her.

:bang

I thought you definitely got "it" which is what lead to you starting this thread in the first place.

Did you agree with your employers decision to discriminate?


If you are asking if working for a bigot makes you one...no. I've done and do that myself. I mean I work for an employer who is bigoted against smokers too...that doesn't mean I am bigoted against them.

[katyon6th]

Depends on why you were banging your head:

I thought you definitely got "it" which is what lead to you starting this thread in the first place.

Did you agree with your employers decision to discriminate?


If you are asking if working for a bigot makes you one...no. I've done and do that myself. I mean I work for an employer who is bigoted against smokers too...that doesn't mean I am bigoted against them.


First off, it was my client's decision to discriminate, not my employer. Secondly, I don't agree with it but I adhere to it. And I think that's what Strike is aruging, especially considering he's a smoker himself. Yet you called him a bigot.

[whottt]

First off, it was my client's decision to discriminate, not my employer. Secondly, I don't agree with it but I adhere to it. And I think that's what Strike is aruging, especially considering he's a smoker himself. Yet you called him a bigot.

I called him a bigot based on the logic he was using. That it wasn't discrimination because the law says it wasn't. And it doesn't matter if he's a smoker or not.

As I already said, the law once said slavery was ok too.

If the discussion is about whether or not it's illegal to discriminate against smokers...I don't see much room for discussion there, it's totally legal to do so. I wouldn't waste 2 second arguing whether or not it's illegal or legel. It's most definitely legal and not even open to debate.

That doesn't mean it isn't discrimination, in the true sense.

[jack sommerset]

I don't have anything against black people. I just want to own a few of them.

[katyon6th]

But...

I don't see where Strike said it was the "right" thing to do but rather the employer's right to do so.

[katyon6th]

And...

Comparing discrimination of smokers to slavery is like comparing apples to oranges. You just shouldn't do it.

[Strike]

No no...it's not any kind of discimination. It's simply going with the stats.

When I hear someone say what you just said...I know I am arguing with someone who would have justified slavery prior to the civil war on the basis that the law said it was ok.

The law may set the limits for your intelligence...I otoh choose not to be stupid.

I don't recall ever saying it was right. Just because it is/isn't law doesn't mean it's right/wrong. I don't think smoking or possessing weed is wrong simply because it is illegal. I do, however, acknowledge the fact that smoking or possessing weed in this country could land me in jail.

[whottt]

But...

I don't see where Strike said it was the "right" thing to do but rather the employer's right to do so.

He used the stats to defend a descriminatory mindset(not ao mention double stadards)...and a stupid one at that, as most of them are.

Like I said then...the stats also say a dark skinned person is much more likely to be a criminal than a light skinned one.

As he said to me...the stats are there whether anyone likes it or not.


I mean if he is trying to debate the legality of it with me...I'd like to see anywhere I claimed it was illegal...I claimed it was wrong, and I said it was wrong because it was a stupid mindset(not to mention a doublestandard) that will be proven wrong...sooner or later.



I am not interested in debating the legality of it at all...only the intelligence behind the generalizing, and I will win that argument. Marie Calumet wins it for me. She's the oldest person that has ever lived...and she was a smoker.


I think anyone should be allowed to hire whoever they want for whatever reason they want, or not, as loing as they aren't funded by the Government, however, I will debate the intelligence behind statistical generalizing when doing so.

[Blake]

i love it when whottt melts down.

+1

[jack sommerset]

Thats not a meltdown. He is making some good points.

[J.T.]

I don't have anything against black people. I just want to own a few of them.

:lmao

[J.T.]

katy would you hire me?

i may or may not promise to never come to work stoned

and i'll probably take a minimum of three cigarette breaks each hour

[whottt]

You can think I was doing whatever you want...but I guarantee you I knew every anti-smoking stat that was going to be thrown at me...I will also guarantee that no one I am arguing with in this thread knew that the oldest person who ever lived was a smoker. Or that the Japanese inspite of being nuked, and over 50% of their population smoking, have the lowest incidence of lung cancer in the world.

By all means, paint with that broad brush...because it's so smart.

[Blake]

Um...you don't realize a great deal my dear Blake. My guess is that you should completely avoid any sort of discussions about genetics if you want to avoid topics which are rich in things you, do not realize.

Some people are genticially pre-dissposed to certain types of addictions based on their brain chemistry.

I know enough about genetics to know that no matter how you much you bleach your skin you can't quit being Black.


For instance...in my youth, I was quite fond of methamphetamine. I broke the law to consume it, I was heavily addicted to it. I was told what a scumbag I was. I went to rehab and broke the addiction...then when they sent me to the doctor he diagnosed me with depression, and it is strong in my faimily history..


You know what they frequently prescribe for depression?

Adderall.


Look it up and maybe you will get the humor behind it.


PS: there most cetainly is evidence of a genetic predispostion to nicotine addiction. I am sorry you do not realize this, but if the world consisted of nothing but things you realize...there wouldn't be much to it. It'd be a Chengdeite rock and nothing else...and I am being generous.

At the end of the day smoking is still a choice and if an employer sees that as a weakness and a potential financial hit against the company then so be it.

The employer has the same right to discriminate against people missing limbs, that are blind, or have any number of ailments or addiction that might cost the company time or money somewhere down the line.

It has been proven pretty much without a shadow of a doubt that smoking is hazardous to a person's health. It has not been proven that all Blacks have a genetic disposition to crime.

Your argument is beyond stupid.

[Strike]

He used the stats to defend a descriminatory mindset(not ao mention double stadards)...and a stupid one at that, as most of them are.

Like I said then...the stats also say a dark skinned person is much more likely to be a criminal than a light skinned one.

As he said to me...the stats are there whether anyone likes it or not.

In reality, I think it's bullshit that I might be denied a job based on whether or not I smoke. As Katy said, I'm defending an employer's right to do so because as of today, it's not illegal. And any company that wouldn't hire me because I smoke is a company for whom I wouldn't want to work.



I mean if he is trying to debate the legality of it with me...I'd like to see anywhere I claimed it was illegal...I claimed it was wrong, and I said it was wrong because it was a stupid mindset(not to mention a doublestandard) that will be proven wrong...sooner or later.

I never said you claimed it was illegal. You spit out the "people of color commit more crimes than whites" statistic as a comparison. I stated the difference between the two as it pertains to hiring practices.


I am not interested in debating the legality of it at all...only the intelligence behind the generalizing, and I will win that argument. Marie Calumet wins it for me. She's the oldest person that has ever lived...and she was a smoker.

So a few people who lived to a ripe old age while smoking trumps the hundreds of thousands of people who find an early grave because of smoking?


I think anyone should be allowed to hire whoever they want for whatever reason they want, or not, as loing as they aren't funded by the Government, however, I will debate the intelligence behind statistical generalizing when doing so.

I agree. Hire who you want based on your own factors, so long as those factors aren't illegal. All I'm saying is, right or wrong, employers have the legal right to not hire a smoker based on the statistical evidence that smokers average more sick days, have more health risks, and risk costing companies more in lost productivity.

[whottt]

Anyway, off to work security for KISS...where my boss has likely again mistaken my 41 year old smoking ass for a non-smoking 20 year old and put me on the shitty spot...and while I may be a frail and sickly inefficient smoking worker...one thing I don't do is post in the internet while at work. Have a nice evening gang :smokin

[Blake]

Or that the Japanese inspite of being nuked, and over 50% of their population smoking, have the lowest incidence of lung cancer in the world.

By all means, paint with that broad brush...because it's so smart.



The prevalence of coronary disease is increasing in the Japanese population, although it remains lower than in the US and other Western populations. Nevertheless, the prevalence of lipid risk factors in younger Japanese people is now similar to that in the US population, and there has been a continuous increase in the frequency of diabetes in Japan. As in Western populations, hypercholesterolaemia is associated with increased CHD risk. There is thus concern regarding what coming years will bring in terms of continued increases in coronary disease.

http://eurheartjsupp.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/6/suppl_A/A8

by all means paint with that brush that doesn't have all the facts........because it's so smart

[Strike]

Or that the Japanese inspite of being nuked, and over 50% of their population smoking, have the lowest incidence of lung cancer in the world.

By all means, paint with that broad brush...because it's so smart.



The prevalence of coronary disease is increasing in the Japanese population, although it remains lower than in the US and other Western populations. Nevertheless, the prevalence of lipid risk factors in younger Japanese people is now similar to that in the US population, and there has been a continuous increase in the frequency of diabetes in Japan. As in Western populations, hypercholesterolaemia is associated with increased CHD risk. There is thus concern regarding what coming years will bring in terms of continued increases in coronary disease.

http://eurheartjsupp.oxfordjournals....l/6/suppl_A/A8


by all means paint with that brush that doesn't have all the facts........because it's so smart

Maybe he was too busy smoking to find that.

[CuckingFunt]

I think I get where you are coming from...it's ok to reduce a smoker to a stat but not a minority. Because there are clear and valid exceptions to minority stats and there are none with smokers...

Inspite of the fact that I posed unquestionable proof that the oldest person who ever lived was a smoker.



You are truly brilliuant funt.


Dollars and cents? Black people as a whole are way more costly across the board than white people.

None of this has anything to do with the point I was making.

There is a difference between "you are a bad person" and "you have a bad habit." No matter how many times smokers (including a good number of my friends and the guy I'm dating) try to make the connection between the discrimination they face as smokers and the discrimination others face due to their race, it simply isn't there. Is either justifiable? No. Do they both suck? Yes. Are they the same? Not by a long shot.

[ploto]

No, your employer does not pay more for your health insurance then for your co-workers.

If the company is self-insured, it costs the company more because of people who seek more care and rack up more bills.

[katyon6th]

If the company is self-insured, it costs the company more because of people who seek more care and rack up more bills.

You're correct. But your employer won't pay more for you individually if you seek more care and rack up more bills. Before open enrollment, the provider will look at the company as a whole and they then determine the next year's insurance rates.

[sabar]

Not even looking at the smoking part, showing up to an interview with any kind of nasty odor is generally bad.

Also, long living smokers and Japan are called exceptions to the rule. This is why we use meaningful statistics like averages and medians, not single cases. It doesn't help that 85% of lung cancer patients are smokers.

Anyways, few people are going to have sympathy for something that is 100% voluntary and done to yourself. Alcoholics, druggies, sex-addicts, or really any addict doesn't exactly have it easy in the job market either. People with tattoos and piercings still have trouble, even if those things cost the company no money in any way.

Anyways, is it right? No. Someone's personal life choice isn't going to seriously affect profit unless that person is in a position to put out nation-wide negative-publicity with their social stigma. But how many jobs are actually like that?

Should these practices be illegal? Not really. Culture and society will just need to get to a point of acceptance, or the people that do things to themselves need to rethink what they do before they do it.

I think showing up to the interview smelly is more reason to not hire someone. Personal hygiene is a basic human thing.

[Strike]

Not even looking at the smoking part, showing up to an interview with any kind of nasty odor is generally bad.

Also, long living smokers and Japan are called exceptions to the rule. This is why we use meaningful statistics like averages and medians, not single cases. It doesn't help that 85% of lung cancer patients are smokers.

Anyways, few people are going to have sympathy for something that is 100% voluntary and done to yourself. Alcoholics, druggies, sex-addicts, or really any addict doesn't exactly have it easy in the job market either. People with tattoos and piercings still have trouble, even if those things cost the company no money in any way.

Anyways, is it right? No. Someone's personal life choice isn't going to seriously affect profit unless that person is in a position to put out nation-wide negative-publicity with their social stigma. But how many jobs are actually like that?

Should these practices be illegal? Not really. Culture and society will just need to get to a point of acceptance, or the people that do things to themselves need to rethink what they do before they do it.

I think showing up to the interview smelly is more reason to not hire someone. Personal hygiene is a basic human thing.

Doesn't matter to whottt. One Japanese smoker trumps the rest of the world.

[whottt]

I know enough about genetics to know that no matter how you much you bleach your skin you can't quit being Black.

And I'd say you don't know shit about genetics then.




At the end of the day smoking is still a choice and if an employer sees that as a weakness and a potential financial hit against the company then so be it.

And at the end of the day, it will be stupid.




The employer has the same right to discriminate against people missing limbs, that are blind, or have any number of ailments or addiction that might cost the company time or money somewhere down the line.

I don't give a shit what the employer has a right to do...I am not arguing whether or not they have a right to do it.

I am arguing about whether or not it is bigotry, and it is. Whether they have a right to do it or not.




It has been proven pretty much without a shadow of a doubt that smoking is hazardous to a person's health. It has not been proven that all Blacks have a genetic disposition to crime.

Well I am sorry but it hasn't proven that all smokers are going to get sick and get lung cancer either, you stupid fuck.


Do you need me to post the link yet again that refutes the fact that beyond all shadow of a doubt smoking is hazardous to ones health?




Your argument is beyond stupid.

No blake, you are beyond stupid. You have a bigoted mind, the same sort of mental processes that lead to people to make racial judgements on intelligence, and you are doing the exact same thing, and you are simply too stupid realize it.

I personally don't give a shit, your own stuopidity and tendency to generalize will make an ass of you enough to where I don't need to worry about it.

You will be wrong, in fact you already are, you've already been refuted, beyond all shadow of a doubt, and still you argue.



Let me make this clear, you will never convince me that your argument is right, intelligent or any way fair and open minded. I consider you to have the generalizing mind of a bigot, and that will never change unless you stop being a whole lost less stupid than you frequently are. So you can just stuff it...because you will not ever get me to see things as you see them.

[whottt]

None of this has anything to do with the point I was making.

There is a difference between "you are a bad person" and "you have a bad habit." No matter how many times smokers (including a good number of my friends and the guy I'm dating) try to make the connection between the discrimination they face as smokers and the discrimination others face due to their race, it simply isn't there. Is either justifiable? No. Do they both suck? Yes. Are they the same? Not by a long shot.

Oh yes they fucking are......they are both generalized assumptions based on superficial factors not taking anything pertaining to the actual individual into account.

Saying well he's a smoker so he is going to get sick and cost me money is exactly like saying, well he's black so therefore he is going to steal.

It is exactly the same fucking thing.

And you know what, if people or employers do it, it doesn't truly make a rats ass to me either...I just consider them to be stupid.

So you turn away a smoker, because they are smoker..and hire a non-smoker, well I hate to tell you this, but non-smokers have health problems too. And if your only measure is whether or not they are a smoker, it is a stupid measure. But since I consider stupidity to be punishment enough...I don't really give a shit one way or the other. But let's be clear on this, it is a generalized assumption that is exactly like someone makes when they say...well htey're black so they must be lazy, or they're mexican so they must be a thief.

It is the exact same thought process.

I don't expect anyone with that mind to realize they do it, if they realized it, they wouldn't do it.


Plus funt, you're a woman and everyone knows logic isn't ya'lls strong suit. Never missing work is....

[whottt]

Maybe he was too busy smoking to find that.

Maybe you are too stupid to realize smoking wasn't mentioned anywhere in that article.

Maybe you are too stupid to realize that in a dicussion about smoking and lung cancer that article is about coronary heart disease, scarely mentions lung cancer, and has absolutely no mention of smoking.

And maybe you don't realize it doesn't refute anything I said.

But by all means, keep thinking you have proven something.

[polandprzem]

I hate smokers who thinks they should be allowed to smoke in public places.
I have to deal with smoke at my work. Shit that shit!

[J.T.]

I hate smokers who thinks they should be allowed to smoke in public places.
I have to deal with smoke at my work. Shit that shit!

So walk ten feet away from whoever's smoking.

I went to a bowling alley the other day and it was no smoking. Are you fucking kidding me? A bowling alley!

[polandprzem]

So walk ten feet away from whoever's smoking.

I went to a bowling alley the other day and it was no smoking. Are you fucking kidding me? A bowling alley!


Umm I can't :rolleyes

[leemajors]

So walk ten feet away from whoever's smoking.

I went to a bowling alley the other day and it was no smoking. Are you fucking kidding me? A bowling alley!

Been that way for a couple years now in Austin. Unless you hit up the Poodle Dog, I think they smoke in there.

[CuckingFunt]

Oh yes they fucking are......they are both generalized assumptions based on superficial factors not taking anything pertaining to the actual individual into account.

Saying well he's a smoker so he is going to get sick and cost me money is exactly like saying, well he's black so therefore he is going to steal.

It is exactly the same fucking thing.

And you know what, if people or employers do it, it doesn't truly make a rats ass to me either...I just consider them to be stupid.

So you turn away a smoker, because they are smoker..and hire a non-smoker, well I hate to tell you this, but non-smokers have health problems too. And if your only measure is whether or not they are a smoker, it is a stupid measure. But since I consider stupidity to be punishment enough...I don't really give a shit one way or the other. But let's be clear on this, it is a generalized assumption that is exactly like someone makes when they say...well htey're black so they must be lazy, or they're mexican so they must be a thief.

It is the exact same thought process.


There is a difference between "you are a bad person" and "you have a bad habit."

[Strike]

Maybe you are too stupid to realize smoking wasn't mentioned anywhere in that article.

Maybe you are too stupid to realize that in a dicussion about smoking and lung cancer that article is about coronary heart disease, scarely mentions lung cancer, and has absolutely no mention of smoking.

And maybe you don't realize it doesn't refute anything I said.

But by all means, keep thinking you have proven something.

I never said I proved anything. And, it was a joke. I'm sorry. I didn't know you were so fragile. From what I've seen, you are unable to have a discussion about anything with anyone on this board without resorting to insults and accusations of bigotry toward anyone who disagrees with you. If that's how you play with others, fine. I find it amusing, as do many other people here.

[Jekka]

This as about as dumb as looking at someones credit before hiring them. I kinda understand cigs and overweight people but not looking at your credit.

They do that for a lot of government jobs, because they want some insurance that if you're bribed you're less likely to take it. If you've got $15,000 in credit card debt, places like the Government Accountability Office or FBI aren't going to hire you, and I'm okay with that. It's my understanding that many private companies do that for the same reason.

[Drachen]

You're correct. But your employer won't pay more for you individually if you seek more care and rack up more bills. Before open enrollment, the provider will look at the company as a whole and they then determine the next year's insurance rates.

Yes but these rates are partially based on usage, just like auto insurance rates. This is why small businesses which have group insurance for their employees get absolutely killed if one of their employees gets cancer. The increase in premium per person when spread amongst 20 people is immense as compared to the increase in premium per person when spread amongst 2000 people if one of those people gets cancer.

[whottt]

There is a difference between "you are a bad person" and "you have a bad habit.

No Funt, your semi-homosexuality is a bad habit, tobacco use is something man has done for centuries that has many many provable positive benefits, especially in terms of job performance...whereas I don't believe there are any attributed to homosexuality.

[whottt]

I never said I proved anything. And, it was a joke. I'm sorry. I didn't know you were so fragile. From what I've seen, you are unable to have a discussion about anything with anyone on this board without resorting to insults and accusations of bigotry toward anyone who disagrees with you. If that's how you play with others, fine. I find it amusing, as do many other people here.

Ironically enough, I hardly ever start an argument with anyone. I simply came into thread and said as I usually do, "you guys" that feel this way or think this _____________. I named no names and I did that for a reason. I just threw the bait out there, I didn't force anyone to take it. I hardly ever do, initially(although after certain barriers have been broken I do reserve the right to start an argument with someone). There is a very good reason I do it that way...

And besides, what makes you think I am serious in a mad sort of way? I just have an offbeat sense of humor. I won't say I've never gotten mad on this board but it is rare...last time was when we played the Pistons in the finals. I actually was going to quit the board because Kori wouldn't let me ban all the Pistons fans if they beat us.

It may come off as a meltdown but if you were to actually see my reaction in most of my arguments on this board you would not come away the perception I was mad or melting down, but more like a kid in a candy store. You see I never get into an argument I don't already know I have won before I got into it. And I love challenging mass aquired opinions being substituted for knowledge...breaking up the herd so to speak.


Like in this case...I got to point out that the oldest person whoever lived was a smoker, something I am certain no on in this thread thread knew. I love that...and whether you like it or not it totally shits on blanket judgements, which is another thing I love to do. I knew it wouldn't change anyone's opinion(beyond the truly open minded) anymore than instantly revealing a cliff in front of a train is going to prevent that train from going off it.


I didn't even have to go to my ace in this argument based on the counters I was given, which was to list off some the flat out astounding health benefits of smoking...a shame too because I actually wanted to do it. Turn everyones painted on perception on it's ear.

[marini martini]

Ironically enough, I hardly ever start an argument with anyone. I simply came into thread and said as I usually do, "you guys" that feel this way or think this _____________. I named no names and I did that for a reason. I just threw the bait out there, I didn't force anyone to take it. I hardly ever do, initially(although after certain barriers have been broken I do reserve the right to start an argument with someone). There is a very good reason I do it that way...

And besides, what makes you think I am serious in a mad sort of way? I just have an offbeat sense of humor. I won't say I've never gotten mad on this board but it is rare...last time was when we played the Pistons in the finals. I actually was going to quit the board because Kori wouldn't let me ban all the Pistons fans if they beat us.

It may come off as a meltdown but if you were to actually see my reaction in most of my arguments on this board you would not come away the perception I was mad or melting down, but more like a kid in a candy store. You see I never get into an argument I don't already know I have won before I got into it. And I love challenging mass aquired opinions being substituted for knowledge...breaking up the herd so to speak.


Like in this case...I got to point out that the oldest person whoever lived was a smoker, something I am certain no on in this thread thread knew. I love that...and whether you like it or not it totally shits on blanket judgements, which is another thing I love to do. I knew it wouldn't change anyone's opinion(beyond the truly open minded) anymore than instantly revealing a cliff in front of a train is going to prevent that train from going off it.


I didn't even have to go to my ace in this argument based on the counters I was given, which was to list off some the flat out astounding health benefits of smoking...a shame too because I actually wanted to do it. Turn everyones painted on perception on it's ear.

**swoon**

My hero!!!:hat

[BRHornet45]

sons I don't have a problem with people discriminating against smokers. I don't hire them either. 9 times out of 10 they will spend at least an hour of their day outside smoking. every hour or two they take their "5 minute smoke break" which in reality is more like 10-15 minutes completely wasted. not to mention most of them are too lazy and trashy to bother throwing the cigarette buts in a designated trash bin because its a further walk from where they like to smoke. so instead they just fill up your parking lot with the shit. don't hire em.

[jack sommerset]

sons I don't have a problem with people discriminating against smokers. I don't hire them either. 9 times out of 10 they will spend at least an hour of their day outside smoking. every hour or two they take their "5 minute smoke break" which in reality is more like 10-15 minutes completely wasted. not to mention most of them are too lazy and trashy to bother throwing the cigarette buts in a designated trash bin because its a further walk from where they like to smoke. so instead they just fill up your parking lot with the shit. don't hire em.

Son, best sig yet, I got instant wood! Tell your smokers, no smoking at work, period. You will be doing them a favor.

[katyon6th]

Yes but these rates are partially based on usage, just like auto insurance rates. This is why small businesses which have group insurance for their employees get absolutely killed if one of their employees gets cancer. The increase in premium per person when spread amongst 20 people is immense as compared to the increase in premium per person when spread amongst 2000 people if one of those people gets cancer.

You're correct as well. But your employer will not and does not pay more for you indvidually if you see a doctor more often due to being diagnosed with cancer (as you used as an example) than a co-worker. You can bet your ass your rates will go up the next year though - as a whole - because of that one employee.

[David Bowie]

You're correct. But your employer won't pay more for you individually if you seek more care and rack up more bills. Before open enrollment, the provider will look at the company as a whole and they then determine the next year's insurance rates.

So, the employer can see how much money you rack up for a medical bill over the year? That seems kind of fishy.....

[whottt]

sons I don't have a problem with people discriminating against smokers. I don't hire them either. 9 times out of 10 they will spend at least an hour of their day outside smoking. every hour or two they take their "5 minute smoke break" which in reality is more like 10-15 minutes completely wasted. not to mention most of them are too lazy and trashy to bother throwing the cigarette buts in a designated trash bin because its a further walk from where they like to smoke. so instead they just fill up your parking lot with the shit. don't hire em.

son, me wanting to smoke a cigarette hurts no one and judges no one. On the contrary son, you people are the ones doing the judging, and shitstarting. And the commenting.

But son you need to realize something, son, the #1 cause of cancer son, diabetes, heart disease, early, death, missed work etc. is not smoking son, it is obesity combined with a sedentary lifestyle son. Son, smoking has been proven to help weight loss and prevent weight gain. So son while it may be considered part of the reason for the #2 cause of death, it helps prevent the main culprits behind the #1 and other leading(Alzheimers) causes of death.

Son it also prevents or reduces the chance of getting alzheimers, parkinsons disease, breast cancer, some types of skin cancer and improves coginitive brain function, alertness and mental acuity.

Son that whole Parkinsons and Alzheimers thing is an important one son. While the idea of spending a couple of months coughing up blood on a morphine drip may seem like an awful death to you, spending the last 10 years of your life forgotten in a nursing home hoping someone will remember to change your diaper, feed you, or pick you up off the floor, that week, and being forcibly kept alive and imprisoned in your own body when every part of it, including your mind is telling you to die because it's not going to get any better, seems like a much worse way to go out to me. But to each their own. We all gotta die of something.




But since you went there son...let's look at the smokers vs the non-smokers.

Since WWII(and just about all of them used tabacco, or weed sometimes even an ephedrine drink made from boiling a plant, similar to coffee, prior to WWII), these are the Presidents that have smoked tabaccy(in office), we'll call them the two termers for lack of a better term(LBJ chose not to run again):

http://z.about.com/d/americanhistory/1/6/x/9/32_fdr_1.jpghttp://z.about.com/d/americanhistory/1/6/-/A/35_jfk_1.jpghttp://z.about.com/d/americanhistory/1/6/0/A/36_lbj_1.jpghttp://z.about.com/d/americanhistory/1/6/4/A/40_reagan.jpghttp://z.about.com/d/americanhistory/1/6/6/A/42_clinton-1.jpg


These are the ones that didn't, we'll call them the wallflower crew since they are either one termers, non full termers, failed to finish their second termers or two termers out of complete and total stupidity on the part of the loyal opposition:


These are your non-smoking, healthy, non-lazy, Presidents son:


http://z.about.com/d/americanhistory/1/6/y/9/33_truman_1.jpghttp://z.about.com/d/americanhistory/1/6/z/9/34_eisenhower_1.jpghttp://z.about.com/d/americanhistory/1/6/1/A/37_nixon_1.jpghttp://z.about.com/d/americanhistory/1/6/2/A/38_ford_1.jpghttp://z.about.com/d/americanhistory/1/6/3/A/39_carter_1.jpghttp://z.about.com/d/americanhistory/1/6/5/A/41-georgebush_1.jpghttp://z.about.com/d/americanhistory/1/6/7/A/43_georgewbush-1.jpg

And we all know which one Mr. Obama is btw thanks to the avatar of antitimvp. I did not like Mr. Obama original stances on either Iraq or Afghanistan, I considered him to be somewhat of an asshat for having them...that said, he changed his opinion on Iraq after visiting it, and he has come to a fairly sensible conclusion on Afghanistan once he processed additional information, although his announcement of a time limit was a stupid one which he will never live up to. So on those two key issues he has taken a non-asshat stance after recieving additional information(something guys like blake and the wallflower Presidents could not do)...Jury's still out on him. Too early.

All politics aside, one group was pretty overwhelmingly two termers(or more) due to popularity, not just within their own base, but with everyone, the second group, who are half and half, are barely even liked by their own parties.

And yes son, Reagan was a smoker, 3 packs a day, while he was President. I'll just point out that he survived being shot(in the lung no less, at the age of 70), the only President to do so, and was the oldest President at the time of taking office and was considered to be incredibly healthy for his age. He did quit smoking, and he also got Alzheimers shortly afterwards. Still, he made it to 90 something years old despite being a 3 pack a day smoker, getting shot in his 70's and took down the commies in the process. Not too bad for a frail sickly lazy ass and stinky smoker.


Son, you non-smokers also get this guy:

http://www.librarising.com/astrology/celebs/images2/A/adolfhitler.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoking_ban

Seems ole Adolph was one of those pussies with an oversensitive nose. You sh always watch out for those guys.


The first modern, nationwide tobacco ban was imposed by the Nazi Party in every German university, post office, military hospital, and Nazi Party office, under the auspices of Karl Astel's Institute for Tobacco Hazards Research, created in 1941 under orders from Adolf Hitler.[24] [b]Major anti-tobacco campaigns were widely broadcast by the Nazis until the demise of the regime in 1945.[25]

It's the Truth(dotorg) son.... So when I call you guys Nazis...it's based on fact.

Actually, ya'll are worse....at least to start off.

So, IMHO, if you are an anti-smoking vegetarian...I'd definitely be on the watch for Parkinsons...if I were you. And please don't run for office.


You see...it's not insane for me to say, hey, look at that plant, I think I'll smoke it. It's insane for you to say well I am going to persecute you for doing it, not to mention tax the living shit out of you and tell you you stink. Oh btw, buy this much more expensive gum containing the same drug(minus the hallucinogens)

One is clearly a huge fucking asshole minding someones else business...the other is not.

[Blake]

And I'd say you don't know shit about genetics then.

please explain how a Black man can change his genetic code into that of a White man.


And at the end of the day, it will be stupid.

na, if the chances are high that not hiring a chain smoker will save the company, then no, it will not be stupid.

It's only stupid to smokers like you.



I don't give a shit what the employer has a right to do...I am not arguing whether or not they have a right to do it.

I am arguing about whether or not it is bigotry, and it is. Whether they have a right to do it or not.

you've been arguing that the employer basically has a moral obligation to not discriminate against smokers which is why you've been typing the word bigot so frequently. I'm saying the employer does have the moral right to discriminate against smokers.

For the record, you've been grossly misusing the word 'bigot'.


Well I am sorry but it hasn't proven that all smokers are going to get sick and get lung cancer either, you stupid fuck.

no, but there are no healthy side effects that can be directly attributed to the act of smoking.


Do you need me to post the link yet again that refutes the fact that beyond all shadow of a doubt smoking is hazardous to ones health?

Feel free to post whatever links you'd like to. I'll be willing to bet the link will be easily refutable as it's common knowledge that cigarette smoke is carcinogenic........unless you are a stupid fuck.



No blake, you are beyond stupid. You have a bigoted mind, the same sort of mental processes that lead to people to make racial judgements on intelligence, and you are doing the exact same thing, and you are simply too stupid realize it.

no whottt, you are misusing the word bigot and dropping the race card in a smoking thread.

That is beyond stupid.


I personally don't give a shit, your own stuopidity and tendency to generalize will make an ass of you enough to where I don't need to worry about it.

Your own tendency to deflect the issue by directly insulting posters instead of sticking to the topic makes you an ass..... and based on the fact that you put me on ignore after your last meltdown, I'm guessing you do worry about my stuopidity.


You will be wrong, in fact you already are, you've already been refuted, beyond all shadow of a doubt, and still you argue.

huh? where?

btw, you were wrong when you said "over 50% of Japanese are smokers".

about 43% of Japanese men and about 13% of Japanese women are smokers.

Let me know if you need the link, but if you argue that, you will be wrong.



Let me make this clear, you will never convince me that your argument is right, intelligent or any way fair and open minded. I consider you to have the generalizing mind of a bigot, and that will never change unless you stop being a whole lost less stupid than you frequently are. So you can just stuff it...because you will not ever get me to see things as you see them.

It's already clear to me. You smoke and you don't like it when people discriminate against smokers like you.

I'm not trying to get you to see things as I see them. I dont really care about you personally.
I like to debate though and I get a kick out of putting grossly opinionated, ignorant, name calling honks like you in their place......especially when they try pass off half truths as fact.

[Blake]

Saying well he's a smoker so he is going to get sick and cost me money is exactly like saying, well he's black so therefore he is going to steal.

It is exactly the same fucking thing.



no, it really isn't.

It would never cross my mind that if I hired David Robinson in my company that he would steal from me....

but if he were to start smoking, I'd probably wonder if somewhere down the road if I was going to take a hit on my insurance costs.

keep dropping the race and bigot cards though......it's like you're a kid in a candy store.

[Blake]

I didn't even have to go to my ace in this argument based on the counters I was given, which was to list off some the flat out astounding health benefits of smoking...a shame too because I actually wanted to do it. Turn everyones painted on perception on it's ear.

don't let anyone stop you....please feel free to rattle off the astounding health benefits of smoking.

[Blake]

I went to a bowling alley the other day and it was no smoking. Are you fucking kidding me? A bowling alley!

yeah, it's about time bowling alleys become smoke free.

[Strike]

yeah, it's about time bowling alleys become smoke free.

Bars, bowling alleys, etc. all went smoke free at the start of 2009 in Oregon. It bugged me at first but I got over it pretty quick. Now if I'm at a bar or bowling alley, I don't really notice the fact that I'm drinking but not burning a heater. If I'm out and I really want to blow a butt, I'll go outside for 5 minutes and come back in. No big deal.

The store in which I work had a smoke room that was closed off from the rest of the break room. Now, because of the "no smoke in the workplace" laws, we all have to go outside to smoke. Once again, bugged me at first but I got over it. If it's too cold outside, I just don't bother. The amount of people who go outside and shiver while they smoke makes me laugh.

[Blake]

son, me wanting to smoke a cigarette hurts no one and judges no one. On the contrary son, you people are the ones doing the judging, and shitstarting. And the commenting.

no one here is judging you personally for wanting to smoke a cigarette. Katy doesn't have to hire you though for it, and I don't blame her.


But son you need to realize something, son, the #1 cause of cancer son, diabetes, heart disease, early, death, missed work etc. is not smoking son, it is obesity combined with a sedentary lifestyle son.

where does smoking rank in those categories?


Son, smoking has been proven to help weight loss and prevent weight gain.

this is what would be known as an unhealthy way to lose weight.


So son while it may be considered part of the reason for the #2 cause of death, it helps prevent the main culprits behind the #1 and other leading(Alzheimers) causes of death.

faulty logic, but I guess it helps you to justify your smoking habit


Son it also prevents or reduces the chance of getting alzheimers,

"April 16, 2008 --...In what is being lauded as a significant finding, research presented at the American Academy of Neurology's 60th Anniversary Annual Meeting this week in Chicago shows that smoking and drinking are among the most important preventable risk factors for Alzheimer's disease.....

http://www.webmd.com/alzheimers/news/20080416/drinking-smoking-up-early-alzheimers


parkinsons disease,

"The observation that smokeless tobacco users also have a lower risk of Parkinson's disease suggests that the most likely candidates are not compounds generated by combustion, but rather constituents of the tobacco leaves."

SOURCE: Neurology, March 6, 2007.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSCOL06339920070320


breast cancer, some types of skin cancer

With the new classification on smoking causing colorectal cancer, 17 cancers are now attributed to smoking.

http://health.usnews.com/articles/health/healthday/2009/12/03/smoking-exposure-now-linked-to--colon-breast.html?PageNr=2


and improves coginitive brain function, alertness and mental acuity.

nicotine is what increases the brain function.


Son that whole Parkinsons and Alzheimers thing is an important one son. While the idea of spending a couple of months coughing up blood on a morphine drip may seem like an awful death to you, spending the last 10 years of your life forgotten in a nursing home hoping someone will remember to change your diaper, feed you, or pick you up off the floor, that week, and being forcibly kept alive and imprisoned in your own body when every part of it, including your mind is telling you to die because it's not going to get any better, seems like a much worse way to go out to me. But to each their own. We all gotta die of something.

so you'd apparently rather die of lung cancer or a heart attack than Parkinson's or Alzheimers.

to each their own.




But since you went there son...let's look at the smokers vs the non-smokers.

Since WWII(and just about all of them used tabacco, or weed sometimes even an ephedrine drink made from boiling a plant, similar to coffee, prior to WWII), these are the Presidents that have smoked tabaccy(in office), we'll call them the two termers for lack of a better term(LBJ chose not to run again):

http://z.about.com/d/americanhistory/1/6/x/9/32_fdr_1.jpghttp://z.about.com/d/americanhistory/1/6/-/A/35_jfk_1.jpghttp://z.about.com/d/americanhistory/1/6/0/A/36_lbj_1.jpghttp://z.about.com/d/americanhistory/1/6/4/A/40_reagan.jpghttp://z.about.com/d/americanhistory/1/6/6/A/42_clinton-1.jpg


These are the ones that didn't, we'll call them the wallflower crew since they are either one termers, non full termers, failed to finish their second termers or two termers out of complete and total stupidity on the part of the loyal opposition:


These are your non-smoking, healthy, non-lazy, Presidents son:


http://z.about.com/d/americanhistory/1/6/y/9/33_truman_1.jpghttp://z.about.com/d/americanhistory/1/6/z/9/34_eisenhower_1.jpghttp://z.about.com/d/americanhistory/1/6/1/A/37_nixon_1.jpghttp://z.about.com/d/americanhistory/1/6/2/A/38_ford_1.jpghttp://z.about.com/d/americanhistory/1/6/3/A/39_carter_1.jpghttp://z.about.com/d/americanhistory/1/6/5/A/41-georgebush_1.jpghttp://z.about.com/d/americanhistory/1/6/7/A/43_georgewbush-1.jpg

And we all know which one Mr. Obama is btw thanks to the avatar of antitimvp. I did not like Mr. Obama original stances on either Iraq or Afghanistan, I considered him to be somewhat of an asshat for having them...that said, he changed his opinion on Iraq after visiting it, and he has come to a fairly sensible conclusion on Afghanistan once he processed additional information, although his announcement of a time limit was a stupid one which he will never live up to. So on those two key issues he has taken a non-asshat stance after recieving additional information(something guys like blake and the wallflower Presidents could not do)...Jury's still out on him. Too early.

All politics aside, one group was pretty overwhelmingly two termers(or more) due to popularity, not just within their own base, but with everyone, the second group, who are half and half, are barely even liked by their own parties.

And yes son, Reagan was a smoker, 3 packs a day, while he was President. I'll just point out that he survived being shot(in the lung no less, at the age of 70), the only President to do so, and was the oldest President at the time of taking office and was considered to be incredibly healthy for his age. He did quit smoking, and he also got Alzheimers shortly afterwards. Still, he made it to 90 something years old despite being a 3 pack a day smoker, getting shot in his 70's and took down the commies in the process. Not too bad for a frail sickly lazy ass and stinky smoker.

well by God, if the good presidents were all smokers then why the hell don't we stick a picture of joe camel on our currency instead of some weird pyramid with an eye?



Son, you non-smokers also get this guy:

http://www.librarising.com/astrology/celebs/images2/A/adolfhitler.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoking_ban

Seems ole Adolph was one of those pussies with an oversensitive nose. You sh always watch out for those guys.


The first modern, nationwide tobacco ban was imposed by the Nazi Party in every German university, post office, military hospital, and Nazi Party office, under the auspices of Karl Astel's Institute for Tobacco Hazards Research, created in 1941 under orders from Adolf Hitler.[24] [b]Major anti-tobacco campaigns were widely broadcast by the Nazis until the demise of the regime in 1945.[25]

It's the Truth(dotorg) son.... So when I call you guys Nazis...it's based on fact.

Actually, ya'll are worse....at least to start off.

first it's the race card, then the bigot card, then the POTUS card, and now the Nazi card....

seriously, what's left?


You see...it's not insane for me to say, hey, look at that plant, I think I'll smoke it. It's insane for you to say well I am going to persecute you for doing it, not to mention tax the living shit out of you and tell you you stink. Oh btw, buy this much more expensive gum containing the same drug(minus the hallucinogens)

smokers do stink and you won't get taxed if you grow your own tobacco.

[polandprzem]

first it's the race card, then the bigot card, then the POTUS card, and now the Nazi card....

seriously, what's left?


Non-Admiral fans

[whottt]

please explain how a Black man can change his genetic code into that of a White man.

Because there's no such thing as a white genetic code or a black genetic code and if you had even a cursory knowledge of genetics you would understand that.

There is no racial genetic code and any attempts to create a criteria for one would result in all non-blacks and a lot of blacks being classified as one race, and like 200 different black races. You could have two Africans that live 5 miles apart that are identical in physical appearance classified as different races.

All races have differences in skin tone and facial features and hair type within the race, at the gentic level, it's not that blacks all look alike or orientals all look alike, it's that we all look alike.

You see, idiot, I can tell you have only a rudimentary knowledge of genetics and have never been remotely close to a genetics class in your life. I can tell this by the way you posed the question, I know I'm right, and I'm calling you an idiot while I'm making the correct assessment, not because you asked a clever question, but because you asked one that reveals beyond all doubt you have little or no understanding of how it works and think you can substitute willfull obstinance in it's place. And you will never be able to do so.

I don't anticipate you will stop doing this anytime soon...so more than likely you will continue to be called an idiot by me, for that reason.

There is no such thing as a racial genetic code, the concept of race was not born from science, but rather some idiots that extrapolated a bunch of non-physical differences into differences in skin tone and facial features.





na, if the chances are high that not hiring a black will save the company, then no, it will not be stupid.

It's only stupid to blacks like you

I changed one word...this is where you apply different and inequal standards to smokers and minorities to prove how unbigoted you are blake...go ahead, do it. Apply those different standards.





you've been arguing that the employer basically has a moral obligation to not discriminate against smokers which is why you've been typing the word bigot so frequently. I'm saying the employer does have the moral right to discriminate against smokers.

For the record, you've been grossly misusing the word 'bigot'.

For the record you idiot, I've made no arguments of moral obligations to hire anyone, you're just an idiot. Who doesn't know what a moral obligation is, or what I am arguing, and thinks he does.




no, but there are no healthy side effects that can be directly attributed to the act of smoking.

Oh yes there are.




Feel free to post whatever links you'd like to. I'll be willing to bet the link will be easily refutable as it's common knowledge that cigarette smoke is carcinogenic........unless you are a stupid fuck.

Good god you are seriously without a doubt the stupidest person on this forum.




no whottt, you are misusing the word bigot and dropping the race card in a smoking thread.

I am not misusing the word bigot, and I'm not dropping the race card. You are just stupid.



That is beyond
stupid.

No, you are beyond stupid.




Your own tendency to deflect the issue by directly insulting posters instead of sticking to the topic makes you an ass

Oh I'm sticking to the topic, and I'm insulting you. I'm not insulting you because of the challenging arguments you present, I'm insulting you because you are fucking stupid. I'm right, while I'm insulting you.

It may not seem fair but hey...we aren't all equal, some of us better than others.




..... and based on the fact that you put me on ignore after your last meltdown, I'm guessing you do worry about my stuopidity.

Dude, there is nothing special about you being on my ignore list. There are lots of idiots just like you on my ignore list. You're about as rare as hydrogen. As are these types of arguments between myself and those types of individuals.



huh? where?

btw, you were wrong when you said "over 50% of Japanese are smokers".

about 43% of Japanese men and about 13% of Japanese women are smokers.

Let me know if you need the link, but if you argue that, you will be wrong.

Maybe I should do what you do and post a totally unrelated link and stupidly think I have countered something you said?

Nah, only a fucking idiot does something like that, so instead I'll just say, my bad, I got the PCT's wrong. Damn that was difficult. See how a non-stupid person deals with that blake? I hope you were paying close attention.





It's already clear to me. You smoke and you don't like it when people discriminate against smokers like you.


Noooooooooooooooooooooooooo! What was your first clue? The part where I said I smoke and don't like it when people discriminate against smokers like me?

Amazingly enough, very few people do like being discriminated against.

Believe it or not blake, fat people don't like it, gay people don't like it, women don't like it, blacks don't like it...

And based on your reaction in this thread, stupid people don't like it either.



I'm not trying to get you to see things as I see them. I dont really care about you personally.

Then never post another response to me again. Prove it or shut up. You keep posting to me even though you are ingnore telling me how little you care...you prove it.



I like to debate though

You don't have the ingelligence to engage in a debate, you are too stupid to do so. You simply attribute postions someone doesn't have to them, like that I am arguing someone has a moral obligation, and post meaningless links like an article on coronary heart disease that mentions nothing next to nothing about lung cancer and nothing at all about smoking, in response to a statement made about smoking and lung cancer, and you are evidentally too stupid to realize you do that.

And you do it all the time Blake. Because you are a fucking idiot.




and I get a kick out of putting grossly opinionated, ignorant, name calling honks like you in their place

But you're too fucking stupid to put anyone in their place Blake, you just don't realize it. Which is why you get called stupid.




......especially when they try pass off half truths as fact.

What half truths have I attempted to pass off as fact? You're the one telling me I am arguing that somone has a moral obligation to hire someone.

You realize you attributed that position to me when I said very clearly that someone should be able to hire or not hire whoever they want, in fact I totally defended the right to bigoted hiring processes, it's the stupidity behind doing so, and the refusal to admit it is discrimination and bigotry I am speaking out on...and shit like that is why I call you stupid blake. Not for any other reasons involving your capacity to present a challenging question. You are the one using half truths...in fact you use total non-truths and totally irrelevant links.

[whottt]

no one here is judging you personally for wanting to smoke a cigarette.
False...



Katy doesn't have to hire you though for it, and I don't blame her.

Link to me saying she did? Idiot?




where does smoking rank in those categories?

It doesn't, because smoking in and of itself doesn't cause death.




this is what would be known as an unhealthy way to lose weight.
Yet still healthier than the condition itself. What's your next great insight, that radiation treatement is the unhealthy way to treat cancer?




faulty logic, but I guess it helps you to justify your smoking habit



"April 16, 2008 --...In what is being lauded as a significant finding, research presented at the American Academy of Neurology's 60th Anniversary Annual Meeting this week in Chicago shows that smoking and drinking are among the most important preventable risk factors for Alzheimer's disease.....

http://www.webmd.com/alzheimers/news/20080416/drinking-smoking-up-early-alzheimers


"The observation that smokeless tobacco users also have a lower risk of Parkinson's disease suggests that the most likely candidates are not compounds generated by combustion, but rather constituents of the tobacco leaves."

SOURCE: Neurology, March 6, 2007.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSCOL06339920070320

So like I was saying, smoking tobacco prevents Parkinson's disease, thanks for the link, but it really wasn't necessary, I already knew that. In fact I the told you that. And I am betting you were totally unaware of it prior to me doing so...




With the new classification on smoking causing colorectal cancer, 17 cancers are now attributed to smoking.

http://health.usnews.com/articles/health/healthday/2009/12/03/smoking-exposure-now-linked-to--colon-breast.html?PageNr=2


Link to me saying smoking isn't linked to any cancer? I said nothing of the kind. Why did you post an irrelevant link blake? You do that all time you idiot. It's the main reason why I call you an idiot.




nicotine is what increases the brain function.

Nooooooooooooo? Fucking seriously? Damn, and to think all these years I've been thinking it's smoking cowshit that does it.




so you'd apparently rather die of lung cancer or a heart attack than Parkinson's or Alzheimers.

to each their own.

Yes, which is why I said to each their own.

I don't see much purpose in continuing to live when my brain is gone, otoh I can see why that wouldn't have much of an impact on you at all.






well by God, if the good presidents were all smokers then why the hell don't we stick a picture of joe camel on our currency instead of some weird pyramid with an eye?

Because that would be fucking stupid. Nontheless, all the good Presidents were smokers.





first it's the race card, then the bigot card, then the POTUS card, and now the Nazi card....

seriously, what's left?



You left out the you are a fucking idiot card, Nazi.



smokers do stink

Depends on whether or not you find the smell offensive. Some people in fact love the smell.


And I know plenty of non-smokers that I think fucking stink, no smoke needed.




and you won't get taxed if you grow your own tobacco.

No, I will however continue to be discriminated against by bigoged Nazi idiots though. Too stupid to realize they are bigoted Nazi diots.

[whottt]

no, it really isn't.

It would never cross my mind that if I hired David Robinson in my company that he would steal from me....

Oh well I am sure a klansman wouldn't think twice about hiring a white guy over a black guy and it would never cross his mind that the white guy might steal from him.

I guess that means the klansman is not a bigot.

Goddman you are a fucking idiot.



but if he were to start smoking, I'd probably wonder if somewhere down the road if I was going to take a hit on my insurance costs.

So fire him because he started smoking blake. You totally have the right to be a bigot and punish an innocent man that may otherwise be an exceptional employee who makes 10 times more money for you than he costs in insurance, for actions of an insurance company. Replace him with a non-smoker, who might miss steal, miss work, and destroy your company, but hey he's a nonsmoker so therefore he's better. Do it...

Be proud of it.

Because it's so fucking intelligent.






keep dropping the race and bigot cards though......it's like you're a kid in a candy store.

Keep being totally unaware of your bigoted(stupid) thought processes...and I will.

[polandprzem]

:lmao

whottt is smoking and thinking he has benefits in health out of it


Also smokers discrimination?
gmafb


fuckin smokers thinks they can admire me by spoiling my air. shit

And playing this 'stay away then' card?
WTF? You are here interfering me not the other way!

And then if you compare smokers to gays and obesse? You are wrong.

[Sportcamper]

You can’t smoke indoors in Cali & you can’t ask an applicant if they smoke…(At least where I work)……Many of our clients smoke, so in our newest building we have made brandy & cigar lounges with big screen TV’s & out door fire places…

Some people spend more time in the lounge smoking cigars & drinking brandy than they do indoors supervising their projects….It has been one of the smartest things we have done to incorporate a relaxed environment for our clients…

[phxspurfan]

:wakeup

[polandprzem]

You can’t smoke indoors in Cali & you can’t ask an applicant if they smoke…(At least where I work)……Many of our clients smoke, so in our newest building we have made brandy & cigar lounges with big screen TV’s & out door fire places…

Some people spend more time in the lounge smoking cigars & drinking brandy than they do indoors supervising their projects….It has been one of the smartest things we have done to incorporate a relaxed environment for our clients…

Why do not obesse have their place with tv and eating? /sarcasm

[I. Hustle]

Fags smoke

[ATRAIN]

Fags smoke

Pole Smoker

[Blake]

Because there's no such thing as a white genetic code or a black genetic code and if you had even a cursory knowledge of genetics you would understand that.

even someone like me with less than a cursory knowledge of genetics knows that "genes influence skin color".

In your obvious genetic expert opinion, is the quoted statement true or false?


There is noracial genetic code and any attempts to create a criteria for one would result in all non-blacks and a lot of blacks being classified as one race, and like 200 different black races. You could have two Africans that live 5 miles apart that are identical in physical appearance classified as different races.

All races have differences in skin tone and facial features and hair type within the race, at the gentic level, it's not that blacks all look alike or orientals all look alike, it's that we all look alike.

You see, idiot, I can tell you have only a rudimentary knowledge of genetics and have never been remotely close to a genetics class in your life. I can tell this by the way you posed the question, I know I'm right, and I'm calling you an idiot while I'm making the correct assessment, not because you asked a clever question, but because you asked one that reveals beyond all doubt you have little or no understanding of how it works and think you can substitute willfull obstinance in it's place. And you will never be able to do so.

I don't anticipate you will stop doing this anytime soon...so more than likely you will continue to be called an idiot by me, for that reason.

There is no such thing as a racial genetic code, the concept of race was not born from science, but rather some idiots that extrapolated a bunch of non-physical differences into differences in skin tone and facial features.


I can tell you you have a little more than a rudimentary knowledge of reading comprehension since I never brought up the word "race."

You did that all on your own, jeenyus.


I changed one word...this is where you apply different and inequal standards to smokers and minorities to prove how unbigoted you are blake...go ahead, do it. Apply those different standards.

The difference for one, is that you can quit being a smoker. A Black person cannot quit being Black.

but then you are indirectly claiming you are smarter than me in genetics so if it's possible for some people to be born with a cigarette attached to their lips, let me know.



For the record you idiot, I've made no arguments of moral obligations to hire anyone, you're just an idiot. Who doesn't know what a moral obligation is, or what I am arguing, and thinks he does.

so to be clear, you are saying it's ok then for an employer to not hire a smoker because of insurance concerns as long as that same employer is consistent and doesn't hire Blacks for fear they might steal?


Oh yes there are.

No there aren't. Smoke in and of itself has no health benefits.


Good god you are seriously without a doubt the stupidest person on this forum.

you are without a doubt one of the most entertaining.


I am not misusing the word bigot, and I'm not dropping the race card. You are just stupid.

Yes you are. Discrimination is not the same thing as bigotry.

You just changed one word "smoker" to "Black", remember? It's actually right here on this page.

You are just forgetful.


No, you are beyond stupid.

Oh I'm sticking to the topic, and I'm insulting you. I'm not insulting you because of the challenging arguments you present, I'm insulting you because you are fucking stupid. I'm right, while I'm insulting you.

It may not seem fair but hey...we aren't all equal, some of us better than others.

it's like you are a kid in a candy store!


Dude, there is nothing special about you being on my ignore list. There are lots of idiots just like you on my ignore list. You're about as rare as hydrogen. As are these types of arguments between myself and those types of individuals.

Na, when a person has to stoop down to directly and incessantly insulting people and putting other posters on their ignore list, it means they are getting owned. Just my opinion.


Maybe I should do what you do and post a totally unrelated link and stupidly think I have countered something you said?

Nah, only a fucking idiot does something like that, so instead I'll just say, my bad, I got the PCT's wrong. Damn that was difficult. See how a non-stupid person deals with that blake? I hope you were paying close attention.

You got some PCT facts wrong which throws your argument off a bit more.

I paid very close attention to that.


Noooooooooooooooooooooooooo! What was your first clue? The part where I said I smoke and don't like it when people discriminate against smokers like me?

Right, that was my first clue.


Amazingly enough, very few people do like being discriminated against.

Believe it or not blake, fat people don't like it, gay people don't like it, women don't like it, blacks don't like it...

True, very few people like to be discriminated against. They usually get pissy.


And based on your reaction in this thread, stupid people don't like it either.

na, I'm not pissy and dropping bigot bombs like you.


Then never post another response to me again. Prove it or shut up. You keep posting to me even though you are ingnore telling me how little you care...you prove it.

Posting to responses on a general message board hardly qualifies as me caring about you.......no matter how much you might wish I did.


You don't have the ingelligence to engage in a debate, you are too stupid to do so. You simply attribute postions someone doesn't have to them, like that I am arguing someone has a moral obligation, and post meaningless links like an article on coronary heart disease that mentions nothing next to nothing about lung cancer and nothing at all about smoking, in response to a statement made about smoking and lung cancer, and you are evidentally too stupid to realize you do that.

you being the jeenyus and all, I figured you would know there is a link to smoking and a myriad of health problems beyond lung cancer.


A population-based prospective cohort study of 19782 men and 21500 women aged 40–59 years between 1990–1992 and 2001 was conducted to examine the relationship between smoking status and the risk of coronary heart disease (CHD).

Results
A total of 260 incidences of CHD were confirmed among men, including 174 myocardial infarctions (MI). The numbers among women were 66 and 43, respectively. The multivariate relative risk [95% confidence interval (CI)] for current smokers versus never-smokers in men after adjustment for cardiovascular risk factors, several life style factors and public health centre was 2.85 (1.98, 4.12) for total CHD and 3.64 (2.27, 5.83) for MI. These respective risks in women were 3.07 (1.48, 6.40) and 2.90 (1.18, 7.18). Among men, a dose-dependent relationship was observed between the number of cigarettes and the risk of MI. The population-attributable risk per cent (95% CI) of CHD was 46% (34, 55) in men and 9% (0, 18) in women. Smoking cessation, however, led to a rapid decline in the CHD risk within 2 years.

Conclusion
Smoking raises the risk of CHD significantly in both sexes of middle-aged Japanese, with large public health significance especially in men. Smoking cessation would have an immediate effect on risk reduction.

http://www.escardiocontent.org/periodicals/ejcpr/article/S1741-8267(03)13210-0/abstract

you really don't know how to connect dots, do you.



But you're too fucking stupid to put anyone in their place Blake, you just don't realize it. Which is why you get called stupid.

eh. I may or may not be book smarter than you. It doesn't really matter. In cases like this, I let real experts and web links put posters like you in their place.


What half truths have I attempted to pass off as fact? You're the one telling me I am arguing that somone has a moral obligation to hire someone.

"Smoking has healthy attributes" is a half truth.


You realize you attributed that position to me when I said very clearly that someone should be able to hire or not hire whoever they want, in fact I totally defended the right to bigoted hiring processes, it's the stupidity behind doing so, and the refusal to admit it is discrimination and bigotry I am speaking out on...and shit like that is why I call you stupid blake. Not for any other reasons involving your capacity to present a challenging question. You are the one using half truths...in fact you use total non-truths and totally irrelevant links.



you said it's the stupidity and the refusal to admit it's discrimination and bigotry.....

if there is no moral obligation involved and the odds are that a smoker or a Black person will cost you money down the road, how exactly is it stupid?

I'll be paying close attention to your response.

[katyon6th]

So, my client made an offer to one of my candidates this afternoon and she accepted. She starts 12/14. And she's black.

[Blake]

Oh well I am sure a klansman wouldn't think twice about hiring a white guy over a black guy and it would never cross his mind that the white guy might steal from him.

I guess that means the klansman is not a bigot.

Goddman you are a fucking idiot.

klansman are usually always bigoted.

Not hiring a smoker is discriminatory.

Goddman you really don't have a dictionary, do you?


So fire him because he started smoking blake. You totally have the right to be a bigot and punish an innocent man that may otherwise be an exceptional employee who makes 10 times more money for you than he costs in insurance, for actions of an insurance company. Replace him with a non-smoker, who might miss steal, miss work, and destroy your company, but hey he's a nonsmoker so therefore he's better. Do it...

Be proud of it.

Because it's so fucking intelligent.


If he has proven he makes 10 times more money than what he costs in insurance, then why do you want to fire him and replace him with a non-smoker than might not make that 2 times what he costs in insurance?

You're not very good at math.


Keep being totally unaware of your bigoted(stupid) thought processes...and I will.

I'm fairly certain you will drop the race card again.

I'm also fairly certain you will still say that not hiring a smoker is bigotry.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

There is no way I'd spend that much time using all those quote tags.

[Blake]

There is no way I'd spend that much time using all those quote tags.

yeah, the work/reward factor really just isn't there to justify doing it any more in a thread like this.

[polandprzem]

So, my client made an offer to one of my candidates this afternoon and she accepted. She starts 12/14. And she's black.

No can be ! :wow

[ashbeeigh]

So, my client made an offer to one of my candidates this afternoon and she accepted. She starts 12/14. And she's black.

:wow


lol.

[whottt]

even someone like me with less than a cursory knowledge of genetics knows that "genes influence skin color".

In your obvious genetic expert opinion, is the quoted statement true or false?


That's not what you asked.






I can tell you you have a little more than a rudimentary knowledge of reading comprehension since I never brought up the word "race."

You did that all on your own, jeenyus.


Oh my bad...Mr. non-bigot, allow me to restate:

There is no such thing as a white genetic code, a white man genetic code, a black genitic code or a black man genetic code.


Damn, deja-vu.




The difference for one, is that you can quit being a smoker. A Black person cannot quit being Black.

And why should you have to Nazi?



but then you are indirectly claiming you are smarter than me in genetics

I am not indirectly claiming any such thing, I am very much directly claiming it.




so if it's possible for some people to be born with a cigarette attached to their lips, let me know.

There is substantial evidence a person can be genetically pre-disposed to it, as there is with a great many addictions. And I already answered that question for you Blake.





so to be clear, you are saying it's ok then for an employer to not hire a smoker because of insurance concerns as long as that same employer is consistent and doesn't hire Blacks for fear they might steal?

You're an idiot.





No there aren't. Smoke in and of itself has no health benefits.


Uh yes there are.







you are without a doubt one of the most entertaining.

Oh I'm glad you're entertained, because being stupid sucks pretty badly, and it's nice to know you can at least get some entertainment.




Yes you are. Discrimination is not the same thing as bigotry.

And I never said it was, you're just an idiot who thinks I said that, you do that a lot....it's why I tell you you are stupid a lot.




You just changed one word "smoker" to "Black", remember? It's actually right here on this page.

You are just forgetful.

And you don't know what the race card is. I illustrated a parallel to racial discrimination, I didn't claim the smoker was a victim of racial discrimination.








Na, when a person has to stoop down to directly and incessantly insulting people and putting other posters on their ignore list, it means they are getting owned. Just my opinion.

Blake, I am putting you down because you are stupid, and I don't mean stupid in terms of education or because you haven't taken a genetics class.

I am putting you down because you attribute statements and positions to people they don't have, attempt to tell them they are arguing things they are not, and attempt to do things like argue on genetics when you have little or no understanding of them.

It's not all equal Blake...you see I have taken several genetics course and my degree just so happens to be in anthropology, and I am about to enter grad school. I am not arguing from a postion of ignorance, on the subject of genetics, on the subject of evolution, I am not doing it when I argue on religion, I am not doing it when I argue on race or ethnicity either....I may not be all knowing or anything, but I at least have some form of base. You OTOH, near as I can tell, don't even google for the basics of subjects you enter into arguments on before doing so.

And you know what? I'm not arguing from a positon of ignorance when I argue on smoking either. I've been both a non-smoker and smoker you see.


You otoh are likely totally ignorant on every one of these subjects except for being a non-smoker and think it's not a factor, you think it's something you can work around by posting irrelevant links or leaving parts of quotes out of statements. And you think you can do it by attributing positions to people they do not have.

You also take jokes made by comedians on color and attempt to use them as the foundation of a genetics debate.

That is why I call you names Blake.



You got some PCT facts wrong which throws your argument off a bit more.

I paid very close attention to that.

Oh well did you also pay attention to the fact that I answered your black and white genetic code question directly and you left that out when you quoted me?

Is it deliberate? Or is it accidental? Which one is it, are you a stupid bigot or just a naturally and inherently dishonest person?









Posting to responses on a general message board hardly qualifies as me caring about you.......no matter how much you might wish I did.

I don't...I actually hope you realize that any discourse between us is going to be a verbally absusive exchange that accomplishes absolutely nothing of great import aside from you becoming knowledge by virtual osmosis, which is actually what you want whether you realize it or not.It'll actually improve my opinion of you once you come to that realization that is what is going to happen every single time, untile you either stop doing it, or stop arguing with me....

I admit, I do not know if you do it on purpose or deliberately, I do not know if it's genetic, or something you can cease to do...if it's accidental and something you cannot control, them I am sorry, but you are still the one instigating the argument 90% of the time. I suggest you stop attempting arguments.




you being the jeenyus and all, I figured you would know there is a link to smoking and a myriad of health problems beyond lung cancer.

And or couse I do know that. It's rather obvious and common knowledge, that probably some 4 year old can parrot.

However that doesn't mean there are no health benefits from it.

Why does your brain work that way...

I mean, that because there are negatives, there can be no positives? Or no exceptions? Even when they are pointed out to you. Again, that is the bigoted mind at work. That is exactly how it works and it is why the term bigot is so very applicable.

And I know exactly what the word bigot means as should be blatantly obvious to anyone reading a post of mine, especially in this thread.




you really don't know how to connect dots, do you.

Of course I do, but you're an idiot.





eh. I may or may not be book smarter than you. It doesn't really matter.

It's got nothing to do with book smarts...and everything to do with personal honesty. Being honest with yourself about what you know and what you don't. Pretty stupid to not be honest with yourself, because the only person that lie is going to totally fool, is you. It's entirely your problem and entirely not mine.




In cases like this, I let real experts and web links put posters like you in their place.

Well, I'm about to begin work on my graduate degree in a field that encompasses history, genetics, race, religion, ethnicity, culture, architecture, invention, and drug use, both recreational and religious, over the course of the entire history of man. Not to mention the causes of gender, racial, ethnic and religious, ineaqulity, persecution and discrimination. And war.

I am glad it gives me a pretty good overview for arguments I frequently find myself embroiled in on this particular message board(but that's because those are the ones I choose to involve myself in because of my base of knowledge), unlike yourself.

It's good that I get some use of out of that knowledge...because it pays for shit.








"Smoking has healthy attributes" is a half truth.

No it isn't.






you said it's the stupidity and the refusal to admit it's discrimination and bigotry.....

if there is no moral obligation involved and the odds are that a smoker or a Black person will cost you money down the road, how exactly is it stupid?

I'll be paying close attention to your response.


Because statisical generalizations are pretty much useless in evaluations of individuals...because there will be exceptions to those statistical generalizations...and they lead to overwhelmingly bad judgements.


They lead to what I like to call, iconic, historic stupidity of epic proportions. Defining stupidity for all time. Being the standard by which all other stupidity is measured.

As I said initially, the oldest person who ever lived(that can be proved to be the oldest) was a smoker, and it's not a half truth.


I imagine her Doctor entering a reverse mortgage agreement in which he agreed to pay her $500 a month for the rest of her life for ownership of her house upon her death, probably was going with what the stats said about smokers, not to mention aging, similar to the same stats insurance companies use to dictate discrimination to employers, with her 85 year old smoking ass, at the time he entered that agreement with her...


I imagine he felt incomparably stupid 30 years later as he was dying, years before she would die, having paid her $180,000...for absolutely nothing.



That is why it's stupid, especially when it comes to business Blake...and I already answered it when I answered your Drob analogy. Much like I answered in the very first post I made before you even made a post to me in this thread. You just didn't get it. Idiot.

[mookie2001]

blake got ruined so bad by whottt it has to be timvp logged on as blake

[whottt]

There is no way I'd spend that much time using all those quote tags.




yeah, the work/reward factor really just isn't there to justify doing it any more in a thread like this.



Boy are you guys fucking lazy, I feel sorry for your employers.

And it's never worth it to argue with me blake...all the non-idiots realize that immediately, and most of the idiots do to...eventually.

[whottt]

"Smoking has healthy attributes" is a half truth.


Why don't we meet and see which one of us can inhale the most smoke without becoming incapacitated...it'll matter in a fire...a leading cause of death, usually due to smoke inhalation.

[polandprzem]

blake got ruined so bad by whottt it has to be timvp logged on as blake

By calling him an idiot and saying he has degree or something?

:lol

Pretty much laughable

[polandprzem]

Why don't we meet and see which one of us can inhale the most smoke without becoming incapacitated...it'll matter in a fire...a leading cause of death, usually due to smoke inhalation.

:lmao

[whottt]

:lmao

What's so funny about it? You evidentally can't even handle walking past a smoker...you think you can handle being in a room full the real stuff?

I mean are you seriously doubting that? Go find a friend that smokes and take the same size drag off a cigarette he does, then tell me who coughs worse.

Go smoke a whole pack, then tell me who is better off...you will be puking your guts up, he will not.

The fire isn't going to give a shit that you don't like smoke or that you think you are healthier you see.

What's your next big laugh, that a non-drinker can handle alcohol better than a drinker?

All things considered, if I had to choose between two drivers of equal caliber when sober who had just drank a bottle of wadka, an alcoholic, or a non-alcoholic, I'm going with the alcoholic every fucking time. And I don't drink either.

And BTW, the second oldest person who ever lived? A Japanese man who drank black rice wine, pretty much every day of his life.


But that's not my favorite...my favorite is this man:

http://www.danagluckstein.com/images/0408/LacandonElderChanKinViejo.jpg


That is Chan Kin, the last true Mayan...you see that jet black hair he has? He is over a hundred years old in that photo.


He smoked, the real tobacco, the black stuff, the stuff that will make you hallucinate. He also ingested toad poison, every day for a hundred years or so. He had no health insurance, no medical doctor...he lived in near total isolation from the perfect saccharine world you and your ILK seek to build.


He also fathered a child at the age of 96.

I know Poland, you already knew that didn't ya.

That's why your opinion is not going to change one bit...

[mookie2001]

maybe in poland

[polandprzem]

How stupid it is is beyond me.

It's like training smoking because you want to inhalate more smoke because you can be in a situation like 'fire', smoke whatever.
What a crap whottt.
It's make as much sense as if you would have to run because some gang members are chaseing you. You would get caught not Blake because blake is jogging every day and is not smoking. See the point?

Fuck - do not tell me about alcohol :) I'm from Poland you know nothing about alcohol. And also some people can drink more some can not. And it can be a huge diference and not because some ppl are training drinking.

And what the fuck longliving got to do with smoking?
Smoking can shortrn your life but many people are eating good stuff not smoking but get the genetic disease.
Smoking justincreasing the risk of having a cancer and other shit.

I can't walk by smokers? I do it mostly evey day, and fuck whottt If we have met in a park on a party in your house and I would spread gas I mean farts all the time, you would be happy smelling it probably. Yes?
The poblem is I hate that smell and it's insuling me when somebody is not respecting my freedome having a 'clean' air.

I thought you had degree or something :rolleyes

[ORION]

i don't smoke

[whottt]

How stupid it is is beyond me.

It's like training smoking because you want to inhalate more smoke because you can be in a situation like 'fire', smoke whatever.
What a crap whottt.

That's not why I smoke, you and your ILK are saying there are no health benefits to it, and I just pointed one out. That is not why I smoke. I do not smoke so that I will not get Parksons or Alzheimers either. But ya'll are saying there are no health benefits from it...

Ya'll are wrong, I am not.




It's make as much sense as if you would have to run because some gang members are chaseing you. You would get caught not Blake because blake is jogging every day and is not smoking. See the point?

Fuck - do not tell me about alcohol :) I'm from Poland you know nothing about alcohol. And also some people can drink more some can not. And it can be a huge diference and not because some ppl are training drinking.

And what the fuck longliving got to do with smoking?

Well since the oldest person who ever lived was a smoker, perhaps there is a connection?

I mean the lung cancer stats from Japan are different than those of the rest of the world, or were at some point, perhaps it is not simply smoking in and of itself that is the problem, but a combination of factors including smoking.

I am can pretty much tell you that the way to a short life above and beyond all others is not being overweight, or an alcoholic, or a drug addict, or a sex addict...

It's trying to live a life you hate, in a job you do not truly want, in a marriage you do not truly want to be in. That is what'll kill you faster than anything else. In that situation, if you smoke or drink, they'll be guns, they won't be what pulls the trigger.





Smoking can shortrn your life but many people are eating good stuff not smoking but get the genetic disease.

Maybe because in trying to avoid everything people tell you is bad for you, they go against their own hearts, maybe because all that stuff that everyone says is so bad for you, is not all bad.




Smoking justincreasing the risk of having a cancer and other shit.

You get cancer when you have a weak immune system, nothing weakens your immune system more than supressing yourself.


Cancer is a natural process that breaks the body down after you die, everyone is going to get it, if not alive, then when they are dead. The problem is when you get it when you are alive...so it stands to reason that you need to make sure you are alive, and that your body knows it. And yes that still won't be enough.





I can't walk by smokers? I do it mostly evey day, and fuck whottt If we have met in a park on a party in your house and I would spread gas I mean farts all the time, you would be happy smelling it probably. Yes?
The poblem is I hate that smell and it's insuling me when somebody is not respecting my freedome having a 'clean' air.

I thought you had degree or something :rolleyes

Oh well,. I hate it when people feel entitled to tell me shit like I am going to lung cancer or what a filthy habit is...cuts both ways. That's a shitty thing to do so I must be shitty to them back.

In my country Poland, the non-smokers get 95% of the space, and still they bitch...they are clearly the assholes, not I.

[polandprzem]

That's not why I smoke, you and your ILK are saying there are no health benefits to it, and I just pointed one out. That is not why I smoke. I do not smoke so that I will not get Parksons or Alzheimers either. But ya'll are saying there are no health benefits from it...

Ya'll are wrong, I am not.

Seriously what health benefit is it?
What does it cause for human body to be more healthy?





Well since the oldest person who ever lived was a smoker, perhaps there is a connection?
nope


I mean the lung cancer stats from Japan are different than those of the rest of the world, or were at some point, perhaps it is not simply smoking in and of itself that is the problem, but a combination of factors including smoking.
There are so many aspects (for human long living) that noody can tell why the guy was living that long. It's envoirnment, way of living , genetics and milion more.

But you can't tell me that puting the smoke into your system is good or giving you health benefits. It's like saying that drinking poison in small samples every day makes you healthier just because one day somebody might want to kill you by poisoning you. Your body will not respse so dramaticly to that poison that the doctors can save you.
Wow give me some poison.




I am can pretty much tell you that the way to a short life above and beyond all others is not being overweight, or an alcoholic, or a drug addict, or a sex addict...

It's trying to live a life you hate, in a job you do not truly want, in a marriage you do not truly want to be in. That is what'll kill you faster than anything else. In that situation, if you smoke or drink, they'll be guns, they won't be what pulls the trigger.

You are right but still they will be the guns that can fire.






Maybe because in trying to avoid everything people tell you is bad for you, they go against their own hearts, maybe because all that stuff that everyone says is so bad for you, is not all bad.

I know where you heading







Oh well,. I hate it when people feel entitled to tell me shit like I am going to lung cancer or what a filthy habit is...cuts both ways. That's a shitty thing to do so I must be shitty to them back.

In my country Poland, the non-smokers get 95% of the space, and still they bitch...they are clearly the assholes, not I.


I'm not telling you that. Do whatever you want. Smokers can smoke I don't really care.
The thing for example is when they come to my house and they are allowed to smoke. Fricking bad smell everywhere! But some people are going out my house taking a break for a little puff :) They are respecting me I assume. Or saying how big of a jackass I am. But whatever. I'm not forcing then to anything why they (you) are forceing me to smell that shit?
At work it's even worse. I give an ashtrey with a big smile. 'Yes ofcourse you can spread that shit in here and make me inhalate all that stuff.' :)


btw. yes - stress can be the worst thing to your body, and I have plenty. And like you said I'm one of the guys that do not live like thjey would like to.

[whottt]

Seriously what health benefit is it?
What does it cause for human body to be more healthy?





nope


There are so many aspects (for human long living) that noody can tell why the guy was living that long. It's envoirnment, way of living , genetics and milion more.

But you can't tell me that puting the smoke into your system is good or giving you health benefits. It's like saying that drinking poison in small samples every day makes you healthier just because one day somebody might want to kill you by poisoning you. Your body will not respse so dramaticly to that poison that the doctors can save you.
Wow give me some poison.



You are right but still they will be the guns that can fire.







I know where you heading







I'm not telling you that. Do whatever you want. Smokers can smoke I don't really care.
The thing for example is when they come to my house and they are allowed to smoke. Fricking bad smell everywhere! But some people are going out my house taking a break for a little puff :) They are respecting me I assume. Or saying how big of a jackass I am. But whatever. I'm not forcing then to anything why they (you) are forceing me to smell that shit?
At work it's even worse. I give an ashtrey with a big smile. 'Yes ofcourse you can spread that shit in here and make me inhalate all that stuff.' :)


btw. yes - stress can be the worst thing to your body, and I have plenty. And like you said I'm one of the guys that do not live like thjey would like to.



Oh well I wouldn't expect you to let people smoke in your house. Fuck, I don't even smoke inside whereever I am living.

Unlike strike, I love smoking a cig when it's cold and shivery. In fact when I go outside to take a piss I will actually go outside in barefeet just to enhance the shivery feeling.

[whottt]

Here: 80% of the women with this particular gene develop breast cancer:

Women with the gene who smoke have a decrease of over 54% in incidence of getting breast cancer over women who don't.

Maybe that's what draws those women to smoke in the first place?

http://www.forces.org/evidence/files/brea.htm


It's like I said, when I was a teen I got addicted to meth amphetamine,. I got busted went to rehab, the doctor examined me and diagnosed me with a condition that...guess what, they prescribe methamphetamine for. Sometimes you just know...


Another example Reagan was a heavy smoker, smoking protects against Alzheimers, what happened when he quit? He developed Alzheimers. Maybe he knew it on some level and that was why he smoked in the first place.

90% of shcizophrenics smoke...maybe there is a reason they are drawn to it.


What I know is this: It's been part of human existence forever.

And please don't say smoking is the bad way to use tobacco, chewing and dipping is much more harmful.

[polandprzem]

Oh well I wouldn't expect you to let people smoke in your house. Fuck, I don't even smoke inside whereever I am living.

Unlike strike, I love smoking a cig when it's cold and shivery. In fact when I go outside to take a piss I will actually go outside in barefeet just to enhance the shivery feeling.

Well I'm not living alone, and this house it not my house now. My mom sometimes allows her friends to smoke, but thay all know I hate it and mostly we joking about it.

btw. Is it common in your envoirnement that people say
"You've got to die on sooomething ..."
or
"Ohh I got to go and feed the cancer" (going on a cig)
?

Umm you piss outside? :D

[whottt]

I haven't pissed indoors(*unless i absolutely have too) since 1995 or so. I don't know why...it just feels good. And why waste the water?

[polandprzem]

All woman with breast cancer or tumor I know were not smoking.

All those % can kiss my ass




And please don't say smoking is the bad way to use tobacco, chewing and dipping is much more harmful.

I got diferent opinion on that and still I think that humans did not find a right answers.



I just try not to put too much of anything into my system.

I eat better then worse I do not smoke and hardly drink ...

I got to go

[Blake]

Boy are you guys fucking lazy, I feel sorry for your employers.

And it's never worth it to argue with me blake...all the non-idiots realize that immediately, and most of the idiots do to...eventually.

na, I know you like to accuse me of putting words in your mouth, but you being the hypocrite and all think that I'm debating to change your mind.

since you are so determined and feel so strongly about this subject, I'm waiting aroung to see if there's something you will post that will change my mind.

All I've seen from you is "you're a bigot, I'm right, I'm smarter, and I'm working in this field". All pissy fluff and no substance to back up your claims.

I've done my share of research on the subject of the dangers of smoke, and you have shown no real evidence to the contrary. Your ass does not count as a legitimate source not matter how many degrees you might claim you have.

so at this point, unless you can show some hard evidence or even some of your own research on the subject, there is no point in me asking for any more information from you unless I want more biased rants that are riddled with misinformation and half truths.

[Sportcamper]

All I know is that polandprzem makes me laugh...:lol

[whottt]

na, I know you like to accuse me of putting words in your mouth, but you being the hypocrite and all think that I'm debating to change your mind.

since you are so determined and feel so strongly about this subject, I'm waiting aroung to see if there's something you will post that will change my mind.

All I've seen from you is "you're a bigot, I'm right, I'm smarter, and I'm working in this field". All pissy fluff and no substance to back up your claims.

I've done my share of research on the subject of the dangers of smoke, and you have shown no real evidence to the contrary. Your ass does not count as a legitimate source not matter how many degrees you might claim you have.

so at this point, unless you can show some hard evidence or even some of your own research on the subject, there is no point in me asking for any more information from you unless I want more biased rants that are riddled with misinformation and half truths.


Blake you are absolutely right. I have totally failed to prove that there actually no negative effects of smoking and they are complete and total fabrication, which is something I have claimed throughout this thread. Masterful argument on your part. Consider me bested. And impressed.

You are now my favorite poster :tu

Unfortunatley I will not longer be able to engage in these sorts of intellectual exchanges with you as I am now posting exclusively at Spurs Report. Personally? I hope you bring your brilliant mastery of communication to Spurs Report so we can continue this sort of high level debate. Look forward to seeing you there soon :tu Back home

[marini martini]

Unfortunatley I will not longer be able to engage in these sorts of intellectual exchanges with you as I am now posting exclusively at Spurs Report. Personally? I hope you bring your brilliant mastery of communication to Spurs Report so we can continue this sort of high level debate. Look forward to seeing you there soon :tu Back home


NnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooo!!!:cry :cry:depressed:cry:cry:depressed


Let's just drop Blake off at the pool!!!:ihit:ihit:ihit

[Blake]

Blake you are absolutely right. I have totally failed to prove that there actually no negative effects of smoking and they are complete and total fabrication, which is something I have claimed throughout this thread. Masterful argument on your part. Consider me bested. And impressed.

no, you failed to show positive effects of smoke. Almost all combustible matter is carcinogenic when burned at low levels, such as cigarettes are.

Adding vitamin C to cigarettes and claiming theyre healthy would be an example of the half truths you've been providing.


You are now my favorite poster :tu

that's most likely a full lie.


Unfortunatley I will not longer be able to engage in these sorts of intellectual exchanges with you as I am now posting exclusively at Spurs Report. Personally? I hope you bring your brilliant mastery of communication to Spurs Report so we can continue this sort of high level debate. Look forward to seeing you there soon :tu Back home

na, I'm not going back to SR any time soon.....most likely never.....and last I checked it was a ghost town. Have fun :tu

[Blake]

NnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooo!!!:cry :cry:depressed:cry:cry:depressed


Let's just drop Blake off at the pool!!!:ihit:ihit:ihit

there's a pool?

I doubt whottt's leaving over anything Ive said or done.

[polandprzem]

All I know is that polandprzem makes me laugh...:lol

Oh there it is

My benefit of being in the forum :)

[Sportcamper]

polandprzem-The lounge for fat people….Good Post…:tu

[bus driver]

are like coffee drinkers they LOVE TO TALK (especially to me) :bang

and why do they get all these breaks during the work day to smoke?

[jdev82]

i work at a dairy queen, and when one of our soft serve machines blew a belt, it belched thick black smoke at the customers, on the food, and into our lungs. what did we do? we finished the order, opened the window and went on with our fucking lives like men. all these liberal anti smoking nuts. you know what i personally to escape the smoke? went on a smoke break. i smoke a pipe, and if my employer fired me for that, he knows id beat his ass. smokers are people too. im a damn good worker, and i smoke. i guess that doesnt really matter in the argument because we dont get health benies at dq. fml. lol

[marini martini]

i work at a dairy queen, and when one of our soft serve machines blew a belt, it belched thick black smoke at the customers, on the food, and into our lungs. what did we do? we finished the order, opened the window and went on with our fucking lives like men. all these liberal anti smoking nuts. you know what i personally to escape the smoke? went on a smoke break. i smoke a pipe, and if my employer fired me for that, he knows id beat his ass. smokers are people too. im a damn good worker, and i smoke. i guess that doesnt really matter in the argument because we dont get health benies at dq. fml. lol

Yeah Blanco H.S.!!!!:toast

[jacobdrj]

I do not smoke. I do not like being around people who smoke. I do not hang out with smokers when I can avoid it. I do believe in the safety of workers. But the safety rights of workers on a job you choose to do, such as a cook in a bar, comes after the rights of the owner of the establishment to have an establishment whose function is, in part or in whole, to cater to smokers.

If this were some kind of engineering firm, for example, smoking itself would have no bearing on the work, and therefore the safety of the non-smokers (and even the smokers themselves) trumps an individuals right to smoke.

[Blake]

i work at a dairy queen, and when one of our soft serve machines blew a belt, it belched thick black smoke at the customers, on the food, and into our lungs. what did we do? we finished the order, opened the window and went on with our fucking lives like men.

DQ....That's what I love about Texas.