Smoking
And on it goes...
By 2008, the UK could be a largely smoke-free zone. The government has said it will introduce a smoking ban in almost all public places in England.
2008? Largely? Almost? Zone? I am still waiting for 2006 and completely smoke-free country. How many have to die before this happens?
Let ‘em die. The health of the people? Too much power and money are at stake. It is so clear that nobody in government could give a shit. Government is the beneficiary. The ‘custodians’ of our tax revenue. There’s more money brought in (a lot more) through tax than is expended on the aftercare. Remember, those smokers still alive and nearing retirement are contributing more cash to the Government. When you retire - if you’re fortunate enough to stay alive, but in inevitable poor health - you wouldn’t survive very long and you’d be cheap to look after for a short time only. It used to be ‘to die before you get ill’. That hasn’t changed much, whatever the spin. Sadly, the tobacco industry (legally peddling their poison) is always on the lookout for new markets. If not the kids, the younger the better as the expected lifespan is greater though you’ll still die young, of course, then China, perhaps. A growing market and becoming wealthier. Watch the cost go up in these countries over the next few years. Cynical, but true.
There’s still a lot of talk about greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide (quite rightly in my view), but nothing about the deadly smoke being released into the atmosphere. Maybe not as much as exhaust fumes from cars, but which is the more poisonous? Like trying to determine whether cyanide or arsenic is the more poisonous. Who cares? They both kill!
And by the way: when you stop working you contribute a lot less tax. So. Less in and you won’t be missed. Those working pay more tax (unless you’re on benefits, of course, and that’s got to be paid for somehow).
Always ask yourself: who benefits? You will find all the answers. Who would eat through a plate full of horse manure to find and eat a garden pea (a carrot would maybe more appropriate)? A smoker. That’s what smokers do. Only a small amount of nicotine exists in tobacco to begin with and this small amount decreases and is just about completely destroyed by the heat of burning. Certainly this is complete at the point of burning. What do you imagine is left in that ash? But that is not quite all. There is still hope for the smoker. Still something left of what you paid for. Just behind the red-hot part at the tip. A trace survives and is released to be inhaled from that fire from Hell.
That’s the con! You buy something in an original form, set light to it, change it and essentially destroy it and remain happy! Like buying a car, crashing it and still be content with a wrecked vehicle. The really strange logic of the deluded.
Consider this: the smouldering (red heat) tobacco completely destroys the nicotine. The heat generated as the cigarette burns, but not enough to completely decompose the nicotine (the most addictive alkaloidal substance known to Man - more addictive than crack heroin and at least as dangerous) releases the nicotine trace in the stream of fumes containing a lot of carcinogenic compounds, mostly unidentified. Result: a little closer to death, but non-smokers do not get the nicotine. They get the poisonous cloud exclusively not being kept in the lungs of the addicted. Take out the garden pea and give away the horse manure! And for free! Very generous!
Has anybody ever wondered why non-smokers do not get addicted to smoking (through passive smoking)? Any comments should be written now on your (early) death certificate, please. Sort of cart-horse scenario.
Those pompous, arrogant Forest people breathtakingly (!) talk of choice. The minority push their rights to kill themselves openly and in a very public way. OK. I really couldn’t give a shit about that. But I do care about the people, and that includes the innocent children too young to make a choice and are forced to inhale their parents’ smoke, who must suffer the poisonous atmosphere.
The high blood pressure caused by hardened arteries. They should be elastic to operate properly. Not like a plank of wood. A wrecked heart. Destroyed. High levels of carbon monoxide gas - that’s lethal! The body is an aerobic system and very, very complex. It needs oxygen to work properly. So, very sensibly smokers take in all these poisons and now include carbon monoxide and exclude oxygen. Really smart people, these smokers. Such delusion.
This is a little like the alcoholic trying to find answers to problems at the bottom of a bottle. Wrong place and not very clever. Isn’t it amazing how so much money is made (by governments) through the legal sale of lethal substances? There are no upsides to cigarette smoking and arguably none from alcohol. There are those that say alcohol in small doses is good for you. Absolute crap. BIG time.
It’s really quite amazing how smokers delude themselves into believing they enjoy smoking. I would suggest the truth is more like they cannot break the addiction and so attempt to convince themselves that they actually enjoy a cigarette. It’s the addict’s fix. And hypocritically, they would (maybe) pour scorn on a drug taker. How would you describe smoking if it’s not drug taking? This is the denial.
Wake up. Before you die. It’s probably too late anyway, so don’t bother. Keep smoking. Keep spending. What’s it like to be so cynically used? I am quite fascinated by the possible answers to that one.
By 2008, the UK could be a largely smoke-free zone. The government has said it will introduce a smoking ban in almost all public places in England.
2008? Largely? Almost? Zone? I am still waiting for 2006 and completely smoke-free country. How many have to die before this happens?
Let ‘em die. The health of the people? Too much power and money are at stake. It is so clear that nobody in government could give a shit. Government is the beneficiary. The ‘custodians’ of our tax revenue. There’s more money brought in (a lot more) through tax than is expended on the aftercare. Remember, those smokers still alive and nearing retirement are contributing more cash to the Government. When you retire - if you’re fortunate enough to stay alive, but in inevitable poor health - you wouldn’t survive very long and you’d be cheap to look after for a short time only. It used to be ‘to die before you get ill’. That hasn’t changed much, whatever the spin. Sadly, the tobacco industry (legally peddling their poison) is always on the lookout for new markets. If not the kids, the younger the better as the expected lifespan is greater though you’ll still die young, of course, then China, perhaps. A growing market and becoming wealthier. Watch the cost go up in these countries over the next few years. Cynical, but true.
There’s still a lot of talk about greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide (quite rightly in my view), but nothing about the deadly smoke being released into the atmosphere. Maybe not as much as exhaust fumes from cars, but which is the more poisonous? Like trying to determine whether cyanide or arsenic is the more poisonous. Who cares? They both kill!
And by the way: when you stop working you contribute a lot less tax. So. Less in and you won’t be missed. Those working pay more tax (unless you’re on benefits, of course, and that’s got to be paid for somehow).
Always ask yourself: who benefits? You will find all the answers. Who would eat through a plate full of horse manure to find and eat a garden pea (a carrot would maybe more appropriate)? A smoker. That’s what smokers do. Only a small amount of nicotine exists in tobacco to begin with and this small amount decreases and is just about completely destroyed by the heat of burning. Certainly this is complete at the point of burning. What do you imagine is left in that ash? But that is not quite all. There is still hope for the smoker. Still something left of what you paid for. Just behind the red-hot part at the tip. A trace survives and is released to be inhaled from that fire from Hell.
That’s the con! You buy something in an original form, set light to it, change it and essentially destroy it and remain happy! Like buying a car, crashing it and still be content with a wrecked vehicle. The really strange logic of the deluded.
Consider this: the smouldering (red heat) tobacco completely destroys the nicotine. The heat generated as the cigarette burns, but not enough to completely decompose the nicotine (the most addictive alkaloidal substance known to Man - more addictive than crack heroin and at least as dangerous) releases the nicotine trace in the stream of fumes containing a lot of carcinogenic compounds, mostly unidentified. Result: a little closer to death, but non-smokers do not get the nicotine. They get the poisonous cloud exclusively not being kept in the lungs of the addicted. Take out the garden pea and give away the horse manure! And for free! Very generous!
Has anybody ever wondered why non-smokers do not get addicted to smoking (through passive smoking)? Any comments should be written now on your (early) death certificate, please. Sort of cart-horse scenario.
Those pompous, arrogant Forest people breathtakingly (!) talk of choice. The minority push their rights to kill themselves openly and in a very public way. OK. I really couldn’t give a shit about that. But I do care about the people, and that includes the innocent children too young to make a choice and are forced to inhale their parents’ smoke, who must suffer the poisonous atmosphere.
The high blood pressure caused by hardened arteries. They should be elastic to operate properly. Not like a plank of wood. A wrecked heart. Destroyed. High levels of carbon monoxide gas - that’s lethal! The body is an aerobic system and very, very complex. It needs oxygen to work properly. So, very sensibly smokers take in all these poisons and now include carbon monoxide and exclude oxygen. Really smart people, these smokers. Such delusion.
This is a little like the alcoholic trying to find answers to problems at the bottom of a bottle. Wrong place and not very clever. Isn’t it amazing how so much money is made (by governments) through the legal sale of lethal substances? There are no upsides to cigarette smoking and arguably none from alcohol. There are those that say alcohol in small doses is good for you. Absolute crap. BIG time.
It’s really quite amazing how smokers delude themselves into believing they enjoy smoking. I would suggest the truth is more like they cannot break the addiction and so attempt to convince themselves that they actually enjoy a cigarette. It’s the addict’s fix. And hypocritically, they would (maybe) pour scorn on a drug taker. How would you describe smoking if it’s not drug taking? This is the denial.
Wake up. Before you die. It’s probably too late anyway, so don’t bother. Keep smoking. Keep spending. What’s it like to be so cynically used? I am quite fascinated by the possible answers to that one.
posted by Louis Brothnias at 7:22 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home