Tanning tax

Originally posted by utherpendragon
its always less controversial when whites are affected. After 400 years of committing oppression,slavery and genocide they deserve what they get.

well, they do don't they?

its not like all that history of oppression should be ignored.

Originally posted by Wajoma
Cut people that smoke lose from universal guvamint mandated healthcare. They have made a choice that increases the risk of cancer. You should note that point KN and refrain from blatant exaggeration. "Smoking increases the risk of cancer" not "smoking causes cancer" someone might accuse you of being misleading (you seem so concerned about that on ano ...[text shortened]... sequences of busybody bureaurat meddling, so bleedin obvious.

Forget the race angle.

Cut people that smoke lose from universal guvamint mandated healthcare. They have made a choice that increases the risk of cancer

ridiculous.
they pay tax just like everybody else, and therefore should have access to healthcare regardless of their circumstances.

Of course not only people that smoke should be exempt from universal guvamint mandated healthcare, but anyone that puts their health at risk should be given the choice.

ok then, since you're going to discriminate against smokers why not do the same to people who drive cars, or who do extreme sports, or enjoy mccdonalds?
after all aren't they "putting their health at risk"?

Originally posted by wolfgang59
Well I am European and I am a socialist.

But I dont see how taxing anti-social behaviour, or behaviour which costs society money, can be seen as infringing personal freedom.

And the sex industyr is taxed like any other industry - I believe the girls in the shop windows in Amsterdam give you a VAT receipt if you ask.

Well I am European and I am a socialist.

no suprise there.


I dont see how taxing anti-social behaviour, or behaviour which costs society money, can be seen as infringing personal freedom.

how the hell is it anti-social behavior? nobody is forcing anyone to breath the smoke of their cigarettes or anything like that.
doesn't everything "cost society money" in one way or another?
but thats what it boils down to, limiting individuals' freedom to do what they want with their own body.

And the sex industyr is taxed like any other industry - I believe the girls in the shop windows in Amsterdam give you a VAT receipt if you ask.

Im sure it is, but you shouldn't have absurd tax rates in an attempt at destroying their business, which is what is happening to the tobacco industry for example.

Originally posted by generalissimo
[b]Cut people that smoke lose from universal guvamint mandated healthcare. They have made a choice that increases the risk of cancer

ridiculous.
they pay tax just like everybody else, and therefore should have access to healthcare regardless of their circumstances.

Of course not only people that smoke should be exempt from universal guva ...[text shortened]... treme sports, or enjoy mccdonalds?
after all aren't they "putting their health at risk"?[/b]

This is why some people (e.g. Wajoma) are so against universal health care. It changes one's individual decisions to risk one's health for pleasure into "anti-social behavior" that authorized gunmen suppress with fines or violence and imprisonment if need be.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
This is why some people (e.g. Wajoma) are so against universal health care. It changes one's individual decisions to risk one's health for pleasure into "anti-social behavior" that authorized gunmen suppress with fines or violence and imprisonment if need be.

Even without universal health care, getting cancer for no apparant reason costs society money. It just costs even more if there is no easily accessible health care.

Originally posted by generalissimo
[b]Cut people that smoke lose from universal guvamint mandated healthcare. They have made a choice that increases the risk of cancer

ridiculous.
they pay tax just like everybody else, and therefore should have access to healthcare regardless of their circumstances.

Of course not only people that smoke should be exempt from universal guva ...[text shortened]... extreme sports, or enjoy mccdonalds?
after all aren't they "putting their health at risk"?

Not so ridiculous, if their taxation is reduced as well as losing access to the state health care system.

This would be the same for people that indulge in other risky behaviours. Either get inline and live your life according to nanny state or look after yourself and have your taxation decreased by an amount that corresponds with the reduced services. Everyone is happy or they only have themselves to blaim.

I suspect given the posting habits of some here at RHP they spend far too much time at their puter instead of out getting exercise. Clearly a health risk that should be regulated.

Originally posted by generalissimo
[b]Cut people that smoke lose from universal guvamint mandated healthcare. They have made a choice that increases the risk of cancer

ridiculous.
they pay tax just like everybody else, and therefore should have access to healthcare regardless of their circumstances.

Of course not only people that smoke should be exempt from universal guva ...[text shortened]... extreme sports, or enjoy mccdonalds?
after all aren't they "putting their health at risk"?

why not do the same to people who drive cars, or who do extreme sports, or enjoy mccdonalds?
after all aren't they "putting their health at risk"?

Now you are beginning to talk sense! Cars must be insured so that in effect is the 'tax' which offsets any damage to society (in terms of accidents). Petrol is heavily taxed to reflect environmental damage and wear n tear on roads. The idea of taxing McDonalds is under discussion. Why not tax fatty, sugary, salty foods which produce obese potato couchs and and increase the costs of my National Health System?

As for extreme sports - I believe there has been a voluntary fund for climbers to contribute to Mountain Rescue. It makes sense: why should I contribute to rescuing recreational seamen or help pay for pot-holers stuck underground???

Originally posted by generalissimo
[b]Well I am European and I am a socialist.

no suprise there.


I dont see how taxing anti-social behaviour, or behaviour which costs society money, can be seen as infringing personal freedom.

how the hell is it anti-social behavior? nobody is forcing anyone to breath the smoke of their cigarettes or anything like that.
doesn't ev ...[text shortened]... destroying their business, which is what is happening to the tobacco industry for example.[/b]

Well I am European and I am a socialist.

no suprise there.

I'm not surprised you are not surprised ... but thanks for letting us all know.