Man Made Global Warming

[CWMV]

Originally Posted by MD_Titus

it's not about finding out that smoking is dangerous, it's about TREATING THE DISEASES ASSOCIATED WITH IT. palliative care, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, lost working hours, hospital care... these things are all a massive drain on the health system so paying for the increased cost through taxation of the people who cause the increased expenditure is, basically, pretty fair. non-smokers are not contributing to the care of those who put themselves at risk. that some non-smokers also contract these diseases through no fault of their own and will benefit from advances in treatment or prevention is not a bad thing. how can you fail to make this simple connection? the state also explicitly lays out how they will spend this increased revenue, and that it will almost entirely go towards research for smoking - and in a small part non-smoking - related diseases and smoking cessation. put a burden on the health system by your activity, be it driving without a seatbelt and paralysing yourself or engaging in a demonstrably risky habit, and it seems fair that you contribute to the cost through taxation. as less people smoke the income from lower taxes is reduced, but the costs do not appreciably decrease in providing cancer care units.


nasa is a highly politicised agency and always has been, in that it was originally conceived for the dick waving contest the USA and USSR were engaging in. it continues to be a tool for politicians, ala bush and obama saying they are going to do big and exciting things with it.

Wait a minute, now shouldn't the person being treated be the one to pay for his care, via the cost of his health insurance over the years? Why is it the states responsibility (read yours and mine) to take care of these people? Its really not.

My grandfather in law had a wonderfully simple way of describing the only obligations of the federal government: Protect the country and deliver the mail.
I think we should probably get towards cutting everything that doesn't fit into those two areas, and leave the rest to the people and what they wish to do via their state legislatures. You sacrifice too much by letting one central government decide for so many people. Smaller govt=better representation. I believe there were some really great fellows who had a similar idea back in the late 1700's.
I mean why is there this big push to just give all power to the state. Seriously the last people we should be granting MORE power to.

We had a similar ballot proposition that just failed here in California, proposition 29.
The state, in their grand wisdom, wanted to set up so many programs and their associated bureaucracies with this additional cigarette tax (and not for the state of california. Funds would have been spent in other states and countries) that a mere 20% of the funds received would have actually gone into any type of research.
Ya, lets give these types more power and money. Its bound to turn out well.

The whole NASA thing you have going there is just incomprehensible. Were a species that needs to expand and explore, and that's what they do.