Will alcohol be next. I would think that would interfere with work more than anything else? But of course alcohol is much more socially acceptable. I hate when society pretends it doesn't do as much or more damage than any cigarette or joint.
2 things
1) alcohol metabolizes too quickly. Youd have to be a complete moron to fail a known alcohol test.
2) smokers are less productive (in general, not specific). Look out your window any day. Who actually takes that many breaks for that long a time?
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
All these reasons and excuses why it is ok to go after smokers, yet no one stated the obvious. STOP MAKING THE PRODUCTS.
The government has proven that the products are dangerous to our health.
The medical profession has proven that the products are dangerous to our health.
Society has concurred that the products are a danger to our health directly and second handed.
If a button falls off a toy and a child chokes to death, that toy is pulled from every store in the country. We have people dying everyday from tobacco related products and nothing is being done except blaming the user. Even with cocaine, heroin, crack, meth, and yes marijuana, the DEA and other law enforcement a) will destroy the product, b) will attempt to fine and prosecution more than just the user.
So what's problem!!! Why not go after the makers and ban the sale and use of these products in the US? If you're not going to go after the maker of these tobacco products because you hold the user responsible for their actions - in the case of the button,
the parent is fully responsible for the death of their child because the parent who brought the toy, saw the warning about small choking parts and still gave the toy to the child.
SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
Ironic how quickly this turned into a "government health care" controlled system argument when it was big business health care making the announcement. Maybe they know something the government doesn't know? Like how to increase profits by controlling health care costs for the home office and related affiliates, i.e. shareholders? Typically, "government" is 15 to 30 years behind "business" or "society" in advocating for societal change. But I love how "business" has the republicans and their ilk blaming "government."
Welcome to the Geisinger Health System
Founded in 1915, Geisinger is a physician-led health care system, dedicated to health care, education, research and service spanning 43 counties of 20,000 square miles and serving 2.6 million people.
And maybe those greedy physician's know a thing or two about "addiction" and the effect it has on profits and efficiency. I haven't heard any "government" policy/health plan/advocacy mention banning nicotine in the workplace. Although I have heard of public housing going smoke free. But then again the airlines, movie theaters, bars and restaurants, in some states, and property owners have banned smoking for years now. But Walmart will ask you to pay more for your health plan. So who is the socialist/Marxist/communist now?
Will alcohol be next. I would think that would interfere with work more than anything else? But of course alcohol is much more socially acceptable. I hate when society pretends it doesn't do as much or more damage than any cigarette or joint.
1) alcohol metabolizes too quickly. Youd have to be a complete moron to fail a known alcohol test.
2) smokers are less productive (in general, not specific). Look out your window any day. Who actually takes that many breaks for that long a time?
Ever hear of a three martini lunch
Plus if people are entitled to breaks, who cares what they do. Now if they're taking breaks without permission, that's a completely different story. If a person is entitled to a break simply because they smoke, then the other workers that don't take as many breaks for other reasons is foolish.
Next up, bathroom breaks should be looked into as well
I'm over working with smokers
In my workplace I'm entitled to 2 breaks in my 8 hours
20 morning tea or at 9.30 and 1/2 hour Lunch at 12.30( unpaid make up by working 1/2 hour longer)
But smokers. Go off whenever they like, they go in groups and stand and chat. Whilst I'm still working. Whew work as a team and have a large load of work to do every day. With them gone Myself and others have to carry that load. I call bludgers on these people
Recently we had a manager who said that smokers could have a break but you cannot break for a coffee in the same way. So we borrowed a few cigarettes walked off the job like the others and made a coffee. Handing the unused ciggy to the next non smoker Of course we got into trouble for being smartarses
I applaud that employers are saying no more. Your paid to work not stand around poisoning your lungs
I'm over working with smokers
In my workplace I'm entitled to 2 breaks in my 8 hours
20 morning tea or at 9.30 and 1/2 hour Lunch at 12.30( unpaid make up by working 1/2 hour longer)
But smokers. Go off whenever they like, they go in groups and stand and chat. Whilst I'm still working. Whew work as a team and have a large load of work to do every day. With them gone Myself and others have to carry that load. I call bludgers on these people
Recently we had a manager who said that smokers could have a break but you cannot break for a coffee in the same way. So we borrowed a few cigarettes walked off the job like the others and made a coffee. Handing the unused ciggy to the next non smoker Of course we got into trouble for being smartarses
I applaud that employers are saying no more. Your paid to work not stand around poisoning your lungs
I agree 100%. Over time smokers have decreased endurance. I never hire them to work on my farm.
whoa, slow down here people. There is a VERY big difference between types of smoking. Cigarette smokers taking breaks whenever they choose has always annoyed me but a company telling people they won't hire them if they are using a legal product on their own time, while not on the clock; well that is just plain wrong.
I smoke cigars. I don't do it at work, before work, or during any breaks. I smoke in my free time. Enjoying fine tobacco has been one of the greatest pleasures of my life. I can say with confidence that this is true of millions before me as well throughout it's discovery and use over the ages in the Americas. Tobacco isn't some evil product. In fact, some argue that quality tobacco with no additives smoked in moderation may actually have health benefits through relaxation, meditation and socialization. I've made countless friends sharing a smoke and my life is better for it. However because of people like most of you in this thread, I have to pay a 75% state tax plus additional city tax every time I want to buy a cigar in New York. That's some criminal shit. Sure, criticize the stuff with fiberglass and chemical additives designed to get you hooked (ie: cigarettes) all you want but don't be so hasty to call for the government to ban something people choose to do. After all, your choices could be next.
whoa, slow down here people. There is a VERY big difference between types of smoking. Cigarette smokers taking breaks whenever they choose has always annoyed me but a company telling people they won't hire them if they are using a legal product on their own time, while not on the clock; well that is just plain wrong.
I smoke cigars. I don't do it at work, before work, or during any breaks. I smoke in my free time. Enjoying fine tobacco has been one of the greatest pleasures of my life. I can say with confidence that this is true of millions before me as well throughout it's discovery and use over the ages in the Americas. Tobacco isn't some evil product. In fact, some argue that quality tobacco with no additives smoked in moderation may actually have health benefits through relaxation, meditation and socialization. I've made countless friends sharing a smoke and my life is better for it. However because of people like most of you in this thread, I have to pay a 75% state tax plus additional city tax every time I want to buy a cigar in New York. That's some criminal shit. Sure, criticize the stuff with fiberglass and chemical additives designed to get you hooked (ie: cigarettes) all you want but don't be so hasty to call for the government to ban something people choose to do. After all, your choices could be next.
I'm not a smoker but the tax thing bothers me as well in addition to the blanket judgement of all smokers as you mention. The guise of health concern to justify exhorbitant taxes is so false.
There are no health benefits from smoking. The tobacco with no additives does not mean much. Of the 4000 chemicals that enter your body with every puff , 95 % of the chemicals are created upon combustion of the tobacco.
During smoking, the blood vessels constrict, the heart rate increases, and the blood pressure rises.
That is not relaxation. It is just keeping the withdrawal symptoms at bay.
Smoking kills more people than wars,natural disasters, murders, fires, AIDS, and car accidents combined.
Of course smoking is something that should be banished in society. The workplace is a good place to start .
There are no health benefits from smoking. The tobacco with no additives does not mean much. Of the 4000 chemicals that enter your body with every puff , 95 % of the chemicals are created upon combustion of the tobacco.
During smoking, the blood vessels constrict, the heart rate increases, and the blood pressure rises.
That is not relaxation. It is just keeping the withdrawal symptoms at bay.
Smoking kills more people than wars,natural disasters, murders, fires, AIDS, and car accidents combined.
Of course smoking is something that should be banished in society. The workplace is a good place to start .
Nope.
"Banished from society"? This attitude is frightening. Why don't you ban abortion while your at it? Let's just make everyone's choices for them from now on. Sugar can be unhealthy. Salt can be too. Just when we should be going in the other direction with the drug war, we have people calling for tobacco to be added to the list. People should be allowed to do with their own body what they please.
Also, I would never claim that inhaling tobacco smoke (which I don't do directly) is "healthy". Tobacco is in no way a health product. I am simply stating that enjoying tobacco does relax me (placebo or not) and that it has increased the overall enjoyment of my life. To repeat, I am not talking about cigarettes. I have major issues with cigarettes and cigarette manufacturers.
I think to banish tobacco from society will be a long process. Along with dietary concerns, I think we need to make good choices easier to make. I agree with you that the drug war is a total failure, that causes more harm than good. I am all for freedom of choice. Adding cigarettes to the list will not help
I did not mean to imply stopping smoking through government intervention . If the govt. really cared they would not have directed millions of funds gained through tobacco co. lawsuits to other programs.
This is a very complicated issue that needs creative solutions This forum is great for learning. Thanks for your input
I think to banish tobacco from society will be a long process. Along with dietary concerns, I think we need to make good choices easier to make. I agree with you that the drug war is a total failure, that causes more harm than good. I am all for freedom of choice. Adding cigarettes to the list will not help
I did not mean to imply stopping smoking through government intervention . If the govt. really cared they would not have directed millions of funds gained through tobacco co. lawsuits to other programs.
This is a very complicated issue that needs creative solutions This forum is great for learning. Thanks for your input
No doubt, man. You seem like a reasonable dude. Thought you were implying government mandates. Happy to read you're not. Also, yes, I too have learned a lot on this board.
whoa, slow down here people. There is a VERY big difference between types of smoking. Cigarette smokers taking breaks whenever they choose has always annoyed me but a company telling people they won't hire them if they are using a legal product on their own time, while not on the clock; well that is just plain wrong.
I smoke cigars. I don't do it at work, before work, or during any breaks. I smoke in my free time. Enjoying fine tobacco has been one of the greatest pleasures of my life. I can say with confidence that this is true of millions before me as well throughout it's discovery and use over the ages in the Americas. Tobacco isn't some evil product. In fact, some argue that quality tobacco with no additives smoked in moderation may actually have health benefits through relaxation, meditation and socialization. I've made countless friends sharing a smoke and my life is better for it. However because of people like most of you in this thread, I have to pay a 75% state tax plus additional city tax every time I want to buy a cigar in New York. That's some criminal shit. Sure, criticize the stuff with fiberglass and chemical additives designed to get you hooked (ie: cigarettes) all you want but don't be so hasty to call for the government to ban something people choose to do. After all, your choices could be next.
As someone who smokes pot, already happened.
Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
whoa, slow down here people. There is a VERY big difference between types of smoking. Cigarette smokers taking breaks whenever they choose has always annoyed me but a company telling people they won't hire them if they are using a legal product on their own time, while not on the clock; well that is just plain wrong...
i agree with you here.
atm we have an television advertisement here for insurance thats able to be purchased over the phone. and the only question they apparently ask is do you smoke? and by answering no youll be sweet. and i think well thats got to be bullshit cause i dont smoke but if i tell you that of the 4 members of my mothers immediate family that have died have died of cancer im pretty certain you wont be thrilled and ill be hit with premiums accordingly. advertising is lies.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
All these reasons and excuses why it is ok to go after smokers, yet no one stated the obvious. STOP MAKING THE PRODUCTS.
The government has proven that the products are dangerous to our health.
The medical profession has proven that the products are dangerous to our health.
Society has concurred that the products are a danger to our health directly and second handed.
If a button falls off a toy and a child chokes to death, that toy is pulled from every store in the country. We have people dying everyday from tobacco related products and nothing is being done except blaming the user. Even with cocaine, heroin, crack, meth, and yes marijuana, the DEA and other law enforcement a) will destroy the product, b) will attempt to fine and prosecution more than just the user.
Great Point...If smoking was made illegal years ago we wouldn't have all the problems we have concerning smoking today. Alcohol is far worse then smoking but socially accepted.
So what's problem!!! Why not go after the makers and ban the sale and use of these products in the US? If you're not going to go after the maker of these tobacco products because you hold the user responsible for their actions - in the case of the button,
the parent is fully responsible for the death of their child because the parent who brought the toy, saw the warning about small choking parts and still gave the toy to the child.
why not have the policy that "you can work here if you're a smoker, you just can't be on our health insurance."
isn't that what this is about? the cost of health insurance? I can see why that is a concern, especially for small businesses.
I think that's a legitimate concern. It's not like they're discriminating based on religion or color or sex.
Why not just hire all women in that case? They live longer than men on average. Probably cost less in their lifetime's overall.
The whole thing is ridiculous. Most workers contribute to their health benefits. Why not adjust everyones' individually according to the decision of the insurer? To disqualify someone for employment for something they do in their own time should be illegal.
But this only highlights the problem with insurance in this country. Insurance should not be tied to employment! This entire thread must seem like it's from another planet to readers outside the US.
All these reasons and excuses why it is ok to go after smokers, yet no one stated the obvious. STOP MAKING THE PRODUCTS.
The government has proven that the products are dangerous to our health.
The medical profession has proven that the products are dangerous to our health.
Society has concurred that the products are a danger to our health directly and second handed.
If a button falls off a toy and a child chokes to death, that toy is pulled from every store in the country. We have people dying everyday from tobacco related products and nothing is being done except blaming the user. Even with cocaine, heroin, crack, meth, and yes marijuana, the DEA and other law enforcement a) will destroy the product, b) will attempt to fine and prosecution more than just the user.
Great Point...If smoking was made illegal years ago we wouldn't have all the problems we have concerning smoking today. Alcohol is far worse then smoking but socially accepted.
So what's problem!!! Why not go after the makers and ban the sale and use of these products in the US? If you're not going to go after the maker of these tobacco products because you hold the user responsible for their actions - in the case of the button,
the parent is fully responsible for the death of their child because the parent who brought the toy, saw the warning about small choking parts and still gave the toy to the child.
Total insanity.
Nanny-state insanity.
I'm shocked at how many of you aren't thinking through this argument further.
State run healthcare. This is only the beginning...
Funny you should say that, because in no country with state run healthcare that I know of does nicotine in a persons system determine their eligibility for employment.
whoa, slow down here people. There is a VERY big difference between types of smoking. Cigarette smokers taking breaks whenever they choose has always annoyed me but a company telling people they won't hire them if they are using a legal product on their own time, while not on the clock; well that is just plain wrong.
No kidding. As long as smoking cigarettes is legal, smokers should not be discriminated against. Any company singling out lifestyles for their employees would not be a company I'd ever want to work for. Talk about corporate kool-aid...
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: There is more personal freedom in China than there is in America.
wow, that's a scary thought.
all the talk about stopping cigs from being made or making them illegal makes me sick to my stomach. We need to go the complete opposite direction with our thinking.
That said, I can see why employers wouldn't want to hire smokers because their health care costs are so much more expensive, on average. I'm not contradicting myself here with my original statement, in fact I think I'm just extending the principle that we all have our civil liberties and freedom take make our own decisions, including companies.
Companies should be able to hire/fire ANYONE they choose without the nanny state getting involved. It should be up to the people to call out any companies that are discriminatory and with technology/communication as it is, those companies will be punished by the consumer for any unscrupulous practices.
edit; with all that being said, there is no way in hell that the contents of my bladder should EVER be tested by ANYONE. Drug testing should only be a practice for people operating heavy equipment, pilots, etc and ONLY if there is reasonable suspicion.
Everything not forbidden is compulsory and eveything not compulsory is forbidden. You are free... free to do what the government says you can do.
I have no problem with this kind of implementation. Health Benefits are costly for any company and they should have some input in the factors which determine the costs that impact it. We as a society should be rewarding/punishing people to be better individually take care of themselves in all aspects which in the long term can benefit or harm the great whole. For those of you who complain about Big Brother or "Nanny State" constantly involving themselves into "personal lives", perhaps you should have a look around society now - the reason they end up always getting involved is because society has become too dumb and selfish to manage on their own. Consumerism, self-interest and gluttony has become the mantras of our culture.. we are not competent enough to just hand over the keys to the car and hope we won't get into an accident. Our health care industry is a mess because we have repeatedly shown we cannot self-monitor ourselves. Big Brother has become a necessary evil because our society has deteriorated and the people within have become so irresponsible. Don't blame big brother...blame the society ..ie the people.
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
I have no problem with this kind of implementation. Health Benefits are costly for any company and they should have some input in the factors which determine the costs that impact it. We as a society should be rewarding/punishing people to be better individually take care of themselves in all aspects which in the long term can benefit or harm the great whole. For those of you who complain about Big Brother or "Nanny State" constantly involving themselves into "personal lives", perhaps you should have a look around society now - the reason they end up always getting involved is because society has become too dumb and selfish to manage on their own. Consumerism, self-interest and gluttony has become the mantras of our culture.. we are not competent enough to just hand over the keys to the car and hope we won't get into an accident. Our health care industry is a mess because we have repeatedly shown we cannot self-monitor ourselves. Big Brother has become a necessary evil because our society has deteriorated and the people within have become so irresponsible. Don't blame big brother...blame the society ..ie the people.
Just. plain. disturbing that ANYONE would think this way. May as well include any body with existing health issues, everyone who may look slightly overweight to obese, the disabled, etc. then when considering future employees.
Big Brother has become a necessary evil because our society has deteriorated and the people within have become so irresponsible. Don't blame big brother...blame the society ..ie the people.
that is some seriously dangerous thinking. I'm sorry but I don't even think it's necessary to elaborate.
:(
Everything not forbidden is compulsory and eveything not compulsory is forbidden. You are free... free to do what the government says you can do.
Kind of strange....why not just ban them from participating in their health plan?
that's what I said. You can't discriminate when it comes to hiring, but it is just a fact that it costs companies a lot of money if they hire smokers. Just make your health plan for non-smokers, or have a different (more expensive) plan for smokers.
Everything not forbidden is compulsory and eveything not compulsory is forbidden. You are free... free to do what the government says you can do.
These smoking policies are made to discrimante not only against smokers but against the poor. The poor have a higher chance of being a smoker than those in the upper or middle class. Another tool that is being employed by companies to discrimante against the poor is their credit. Once credit standing should have no bearing on their abilty to do a job. Its just another way to keep people down.
Would you guys think it'd be ok have tiered benefits plans cost-based on your personal health uses, issues or habits which effect your health?
Also, you fail to recognize or fully acknowledge that much of our healthcare issues are self-inflicted problems and not that of heredity. Our healthcare system is based not on preventative medicine and care, but instead the treating the results mostly of which are of people not taking care of themselves. Why is that you are very big on complaining about the notion of the group protecting the betterment of the whole instead of whining about the individual right to do x, y and z when everywhere in society we see time and again people are not responsible, hold zero accountability and want the rest of society to pull that weight? You can hate big brother's intrusiveness, but nowhere do I see any of you talking about the root problems, people not doing their part, and instead expecting the rest of society to accommodate their irresponsibility. This is a good part of why our system is collapsing, because people feel entitled to do as they please regardless of how it effects the rest around them..and in our system, it causes corruption, overspending, massive debts and punishes the masses who try and do the right thing but forces the system to make constant cutbacks as it slowly breaks apart. Immigration, healthcare, social security and several other areas are all in the same boat in this respect. We're inching towards the breaking point in which we can't accommodate the same level of services and care, while racking up the debts as a nation. It's not sustainable and anytime people talk like the conversation we're having, and someone brings up these kinds of points, they're shunned....yet it's the harsh reality we're facing.
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
I live in australia where we have had a healthcare system for a longtime and it has no effect on smoking policy at all
If I was an employer I would ask each applicant if they smoked . If they said yes they wouldn't be getting the job. Simple as that.
Sick of the bludging that comes with it. Completely regardless of health effects.
Every second smoker cannot motivate themselves to put their butts in bins either. It's disgusting
Comments
2 things
1) alcohol metabolizes too quickly. Youd have to be a complete moron to fail a known alcohol test.
2) smokers are less productive (in general, not specific). Look out your window any day. Who actually takes that many breaks for that long a time?
The government has proven that the products are dangerous to our health.
The medical profession has proven that the products are dangerous to our health.
Society has concurred that the products are a danger to our health directly and second handed.
If a button falls off a toy and a child chokes to death, that toy is pulled from every store in the country. We have people dying everyday from tobacco related products and nothing is being done except blaming the user. Even with cocaine, heroin, crack, meth, and yes marijuana, the DEA and other law enforcement a) will destroy the product, b) will attempt to fine and prosecution more than just the user.
So what's problem!!! Why not go after the makers and ban the sale and use of these products in the US? If you're not going to go after the maker of these tobacco products because you hold the user responsible for their actions - in the case of the button,
the parent is fully responsible for the death of their child because the parent who brought the toy, saw the warning about small choking parts and still gave the toy to the child.
Welcome to the Geisinger Health System
Founded in 1915, Geisinger is a physician-led health care system, dedicated to health care, education, research and service spanning 43 counties of 20,000 square miles and serving 2.6 million people.
http://www.geisinger.org/about/
http://disclosures.house.gov/ld/ldsearch.aspx
http://disclosures.house.gov/ld/ldsearch.aspx
http://disclosures.house.gov/ld/ldsearch.aspx
http://www.city-data.com/elec2/elec-DANVILLE-PA.html
And maybe those greedy physician's know a thing or two about "addiction" and the effect it has on profits and efficiency. I haven't heard any "government" policy/health plan/advocacy mention banning nicotine in the workplace. Although I have heard of public housing going smoke free. But then again the airlines, movie theaters, bars and restaurants, in some states, and property owners have banned smoking for years now. But Walmart will ask you to pay more for your health plan. So who is the socialist/Marxist/communist now?
Peace.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Ever hear of a three martini lunch
Plus if people are entitled to breaks, who cares what they do. Now if they're taking breaks without permission, that's a completely different story. If a person is entitled to a break simply because they smoke, then the other workers that don't take as many breaks for other reasons is foolish.
Next up, bathroom breaks should be looked into as well
In my workplace I'm entitled to 2 breaks in my 8 hours
20 morning tea or at 9.30 and 1/2 hour Lunch at 12.30( unpaid make up by working 1/2 hour longer)
But smokers. Go off whenever they like, they go in groups and stand and chat. Whilst I'm still working. Whew work as a team and have a large load of work to do every day. With them gone Myself and others have to carry that load. I call bludgers on these people
Recently we had a manager who said that smokers could have a break but you cannot break for a coffee in the same way. So we borrowed a few cigarettes walked off the job like the others and made a coffee. Handing the unused ciggy to the next non smoker Of course we got into trouble for being smartarses
I applaud that employers are saying no more. Your paid to work not stand around poisoning your lungs
I smoke cigars. I don't do it at work, before work, or during any breaks. I smoke in my free time. Enjoying fine tobacco has been one of the greatest pleasures of my life. I can say with confidence that this is true of millions before me as well throughout it's discovery and use over the ages in the Americas. Tobacco isn't some evil product. In fact, some argue that quality tobacco with no additives smoked in moderation may actually have health benefits through relaxation, meditation and socialization. I've made countless friends sharing a smoke and my life is better for it. However because of people like most of you in this thread, I have to pay a 75% state tax plus additional city tax every time I want to buy a cigar in New York. That's some criminal shit. Sure, criticize the stuff with fiberglass and chemical additives designed to get you hooked (ie: cigarettes) all you want but don't be so hasty to call for the government to ban something people choose to do. After all, your choices could be next.
I'm not a smoker but the tax thing bothers me as well in addition to the blanket judgement of all smokers as you mention. The guise of health concern to justify exhorbitant taxes is so false.
During smoking, the blood vessels constrict, the heart rate increases, and the blood pressure rises.
That is not relaxation. It is just keeping the withdrawal symptoms at bay.
Smoking kills more people than wars,natural disasters, murders, fires, AIDS, and car accidents combined.
Of course smoking is something that should be banished in society. The workplace is a good place to start .
Nope.
"Banished from society"? This attitude is frightening. Why don't you ban abortion while your at it? Let's just make everyone's choices for them from now on. Sugar can be unhealthy. Salt can be too. Just when we should be going in the other direction with the drug war, we have people calling for tobacco to be added to the list. People should be allowed to do with their own body what they please.
Also, I would never claim that inhaling tobacco smoke (which I don't do directly) is "healthy". Tobacco is in no way a health product. I am simply stating that enjoying tobacco does relax me (placebo or not) and that it has increased the overall enjoyment of my life. To repeat, I am not talking about cigarettes. I have major issues with cigarettes and cigarette manufacturers.
I did not mean to imply stopping smoking through government intervention . If the govt. really cared they would not have directed millions of funds gained through tobacco co. lawsuits to other programs.
This is a very complicated issue that needs creative solutions This forum is great for learning. Thanks for your input
No doubt, man. You seem like a reasonable dude. Thought you were implying government mandates. Happy to read you're not. Also, yes, I too have learned a lot on this board.
i agree with you here.
atm we have an television advertisement here for insurance thats able to be purchased over the phone. and the only question they apparently ask is do you smoke? and by answering no youll be sweet. and i think well thats got to be bullshit cause i dont smoke but if i tell you that of the 4 members of my mothers immediate family that have died have died of cancer im pretty certain you wont be thrilled and ill be hit with premiums accordingly. advertising is lies.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
why not have the policy that "you can work here if you're a smoker, you just can't be on our health insurance."
isn't that what this is about? the cost of health insurance? I can see why that is a concern, especially for small businesses.
I think that's a legitimate concern. It's not like they're discriminating based on religion or color or sex.
Why not just hire all women in that case? They live longer than men on average. Probably cost less in their lifetime's overall.
The whole thing is ridiculous. Most workers contribute to their health benefits. Why not adjust everyones' individually according to the decision of the insurer? To disqualify someone for employment for something they do in their own time should be illegal.
But this only highlights the problem with insurance in this country. Insurance should not be tied to employment! This entire thread must seem like it's from another planet to readers outside the US.
Total insanity.
Nanny-state insanity.
I'm shocked at how many of you aren't thinking through this argument further.
So is coffee.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: There is more personal freedom in China than there is in America.
Funny you should say that, because in no country with state run healthcare that I know of does nicotine in a persons system determine their eligibility for employment.
No kidding. As long as smoking cigarettes is legal, smokers should not be discriminated against. Any company singling out lifestyles for their employees would not be a company I'd ever want to work for. Talk about corporate kool-aid...
wow, that's a scary thought.
all the talk about stopping cigs from being made or making them illegal makes me sick to my stomach. We need to go the complete opposite direction with our thinking.
That said, I can see why employers wouldn't want to hire smokers because their health care costs are so much more expensive, on average. I'm not contradicting myself here with my original statement, in fact I think I'm just extending the principle that we all have our civil liberties and freedom take make our own decisions, including companies.
Companies should be able to hire/fire ANYONE they choose without the nanny state getting involved. It should be up to the people to call out any companies that are discriminatory and with technology/communication as it is, those companies will be punished by the consumer for any unscrupulous practices.
edit; with all that being said, there is no way in hell that the contents of my bladder should EVER be tested by ANYONE. Drug testing should only be a practice for people operating heavy equipment, pilots, etc and ONLY if there is reasonable suspicion.
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Just. plain. disturbing that ANYONE would think this way. May as well include any body with existing health issues, everyone who may look slightly overweight to obese, the disabled, etc. then when considering future employees.
that is some seriously dangerous thinking. I'm sorry but I don't even think it's necessary to elaborate.
:(
that's what I said. You can't discriminate when it comes to hiring, but it is just a fact that it costs companies a lot of money if they hire smokers. Just make your health plan for non-smokers, or have a different (more expensive) plan for smokers.
Also, you fail to recognize or fully acknowledge that much of our healthcare issues are self-inflicted problems and not that of heredity. Our healthcare system is based not on preventative medicine and care, but instead the treating the results mostly of which are of people not taking care of themselves. Why is that you are very big on complaining about the notion of the group protecting the betterment of the whole instead of whining about the individual right to do x, y and z when everywhere in society we see time and again people are not responsible, hold zero accountability and want the rest of society to pull that weight? You can hate big brother's intrusiveness, but nowhere do I see any of you talking about the root problems, people not doing their part, and instead expecting the rest of society to accommodate their irresponsibility. This is a good part of why our system is collapsing, because people feel entitled to do as they please regardless of how it effects the rest around them..and in our system, it causes corruption, overspending, massive debts and punishes the masses who try and do the right thing but forces the system to make constant cutbacks as it slowly breaks apart. Immigration, healthcare, social security and several other areas are all in the same boat in this respect. We're inching towards the breaking point in which we can't accommodate the same level of services and care, while racking up the debts as a nation. It's not sustainable and anytime people talk like the conversation we're having, and someone brings up these kinds of points, they're shunned....yet it's the harsh reality we're facing.
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
If I was an employer I would ask each applicant if they smoked . If they said yes they wouldn't be getting the job. Simple as that.
Sick of the bludging that comes with it. Completely regardless of health effects.
Every second smoker cannot motivate themselves to put their butts in bins either. It's disgusting