Nations Levy Airline 'AIDS Tax' on Passengers

Sharing bodily fluids is a direct choice & one that is clearly marked as preventable.

A 6-year-old with Lymphoma is not a choice. A life-long non-smoker with lung cancer is not a choice. A bladder cancer patient didn't ask for it.
 
Neither did a transfusion patient who got unlucky. :shrug:

Face it. You made a bad analogy. I called you on it.
 
The transfusion patients (a thing of the past) are the exceptions, not the rule.
 
Dude, you're worse than flav about backing off when you're wrong. Now you're simply arguing percentages. My principle is valid.

How about someone who gets it from a cheating spouse? Are they culpable as well?
 
Anyway...

Smoking is a choice. That part is not in disagreement. Smoking kills is the disagreement. Second-hand smoke is almost lunacy in it's descriptions.

1. PPM is the level to any 'dose' of carcinagens in cigarette smoke.
2. Inhalation of said carcinagens is key to how much risk is involved.

AIDS comes from fluid contact between an infected person and a non-infected person, whether it be from a cheating spouse or a dirty needle. While you can't be sure about the risk from the 'cheating spouse', you can be sure about the risk from a dirty needle. Even more certain is if the infected person tells you that they are infected (some don't). Exceptions will always exist to every rule, but nobody argues for the re-introduction of slavery.
 
Gato_Solo said:
Anyway...

Smoking is a choice. That part is not in disagreement. Smoking kills is the disagreement. Second-hand smoke is almost lunacy in it's descriptions.

1. PPM is the level to any 'dose' of carcinagens in cigarette smoke.
2. Inhalation of said carcinagens is key to how much risk is involved.

AIDS comes from fluid contact between an infected person and a non-infected person, whether it be from a cheating spouse or a dirty needle. While you can't be sure about the risk from the 'cheating spouse', you can be sure about the risk from a dirty needle. Even more certain is if the infected person tells you that they are infected (some don't). Exceptions will always exist to every rule, but nobody argues for the re-introduction of slavery.
Click to expand...

Actually, The point of the conversation was, wether or not unaffected people should be charged a fee to support people who don't look out for themselves.

And as for slavery .... Not everyone's against it. I personally would much favour it over jail time in Club Fed. Slavery not based on race or creed, but on behavior.
 
Professur said:
Actually, The point of the conversation was, wether or not unaffected people should be charged a fee to support people who don't look out for themselves.
Click to expand...

I smoke. My life insurance costs me more, so I pay more. Since my health insurance is covered until I retire, I don't worry about it yet. More importantly...even though I smoke, I have yet to be sick from anything 'smoking related'. The only injuries I've had were due to muscle strain in my lower back, and the most time I had off from work outside of leave and weekends has been 48 hours. Since everyone likes to talk about smokers being ill more often, please explain to me why so many non-smokers get more time off for illness than I do (there are two people down right now for 2 days).

prof said:
And as for slavery .... Not everyone's against it. I personally would much favour it over jail time in Club Fed. Slavery not based on race or creed, but on behavior.
Click to expand...

And, yet, most people will not argue for it...anyhow...increased risk is the matter here...not choice. If you engage in behavior known to be risky, then you should bear the cost of such behavior. If someone subjects you such behavior without your permission, then they should bear the cost of any problems associated with it. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Personal responsibility would make this argument moot. To noone in particular, grow up, and pay for your own risks.
 
Gato_Solo said:
increased risk is the matter here...not choice. If you engage in behavior known to be risky, then you should bear the cost of such behavior. If someone subjects you such behavior without your permission, then they should bear the cost of any problems associated with it. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Personal responsibility would make this argument moot. To noone in particular, grow up, and pay for your own risks.
Click to expand...

In this, we completely agree.
 
Since everyone likes to talk about smokers being ill more often, please explain to me why so many non-smokers get more time off for illness than I do (there are two people down right now for 2 days).
Click to expand...

surely you don't suggest that you're a typical, average smoker. Or that your physical regime is anything resembling that of the average American.

But, as you said: you pay more for health insurance, by virtue of the choice you made. This, IMO, is a good thing. The point of the conversation is that people aren't. And that a foreign gov't has the nerve to impose a tax for that purpose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top