View Single Post
Old March 19th, 2009, 07:03 PM
Status: Offline
Hookah Newbie
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 97
Default Re: Comming Ban on Flavoured Tobacco

Originally Posted by Hajo Flettner View Post
The bill in question (or something similar) hasn't been around for 40 years since the rise of flavoured tobacco is a recent thing so I guess you're simply presuming that the tobacco industry has some strangle hold on Congress that it doesn't. It's pretty clear that you haven't been paying attention to the rhetoric used to promote the bill in question or the SCHIP tax scheme or else you'd have noted the "save the children" pablum. Still, if it makes you feel better to pretend that the people pushing this sort of thing aren't working for tobacco prohibition irregardless of what they have said so be it. As to the tobacco industry I suppose you think they were stunningly effective in beating the SCHIP tax scheme and equally brilliant at defeating smoking bans, that they haven't been forced to pay for anti-tobacco campaigns and that add restrictions never happened. I guess I just got confused when I thought that cigarette machines got banned because that wasn't supposed to happen either. A couple more victories like that the industry will cease to exist. But hey, the bill in question can't pass because, well, just because.
I was talking about tobacco bans in general, not flavored. They CERTAINLY don't have a stranglehold on Congress, but if the past is any proof of politics, it won't happen. The smoking populous of the US has been stalled at 21% since 2007, and admittedly, between 1990 and 2007 it dropped dramatically. I still don't think this bill is realistic in any manner, despite the save the children rhetoric. 1/5 of the U.S. population is not going to be stopped by a Congressional bill, not to mention the tobacco industry in the US alone has a minimum $2billion REVENUE yearly. That's minus every worker and executive's paycheck. It's like the drug war. They can try, but they won't succeed. Prohibition of tobacco in restaurants, public places, etc, has not shown any impact on tobacco sales at large. I don't deny the significant damage previous bills have done to smoker's rights. To be completely honest, I think most of these bills are plainly and simply beneficial. People should know the dangers of smoking and should be reminded of them. Tobacco companies should pay for those warnings. Tobacco should not be available to minors. I don't like that I can't smoke in restaurants, but it's only fair to non-smokers. The industry thrives irregardless.

Some Congressional officials are convinced that flavored tobacco appeals more to kids than non-flavored, I'm not. I think it's much more of the light in which we present adult topics to adolescents, and more importantly, the way Congress presents adult topics to citizens at large.

EDIT: I just realized I said it hasn't shown any impact on tobacco sales, what I meant was any truly significant impact. Came off as a bit foolish.
EDIT 2: To be completely honest, I'm probably not well read enough on the topic to be arguing about it, but hey, just my two cents.

Last edited by stolenbythesky; March 19th, 2009 at 07:09 PM.
Reply With Quote