This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Turkey
Pages: 1 ... 858687 8889 ... 270
2581
« on: May 06, 2016, 06:55:38 PM »
You can't just equate doing something in the public sphere with doing something in the private sphere. I don't even think people should be able to drink on park benches. Why shouldn't someone be able to do whatever the fuck they want to their own body on a park bench? Does location even matter in regards to smoking since its negative effects on others are cumulative rather than immediate, like a drunken car crash? You don't need anything bigger than a pistol or a hunting rifle.
Why shouldn't anybody be able to own anything they want? It's only when they harm someone else that they've done something wrong, right? Isn't the potential to harm someone never a justification for prohibiting somebody's expression of choice?
2582
« on: May 06, 2016, 06:35:07 PM »
The right to choose what you put into your own body is more important than the institution of insurance.
I don't care about insurance. It's widely known that smoking negatively affects others. Where does the right to "do whatever the fuck you want to your body" end in regards to others' same right? Do you also think that people should be allowed to drink and drive?
2583
« on: May 06, 2016, 05:09:45 PM »
No one is physically affected by cigarette smoke who doesn't choose to partake in it.
This is blatantly false. The impact on the medical system has no doubt denied many people access to critical care in the same way we've seen at the VA and other overburdened systems, and at the very least imposes huge fiscal and labor costs on society. http://www.nber.org/papers/w7979.pdfThe literature on the health economics of smoking presents two principal facts: that smoking increases health care costs, and that restrictions on smoking lead to reductions in smoking prevalence and intensity. Some researchers have hypothesized that these two facts, in combination, allow the inference that restricting smoking will lower health care costs. For a variety of reasons, however, observed associations between smoking and health care use on the one hand, and regulations and smoking on the other, do not imply a casual effect of the restrictions on health care. This paper extends the literature by examining whether cigarette tax increases lead to lower health care costs. Using data from the 1991 and 1993 National Heath Interview Surveys, it first reproduces the principal results in the literature on smoking, taxes, and health care utilization, and then estimates the effects of tobacco taxes on health care. The results indicate that once one controls for endogenous quits, the health care benefits of smoking cessation are greater than previously believed. There is weak evidence that tax increases lead to higher cessation rates. In combination, these results suggest that, in addition providing a source for funding excess health care costs, tax increases may lower health care costs (for given longevity) directly by inducing smokers to quit. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10860294Smoking is the leading preventable cause of death in the United States. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimate that smoking kills approximately 419,000 people in the United States each year. Cigarette smoking is the nation's leading cause of premature mortality, and is responsible for one-third of all deaths among working-age Americans. Smoking cigarettes is both psychologically and physiologically addictive. Smoking is an important risk factor for cardiovascular diseases, especially coronary artery disease, stroke, carcinoma of the lung, chronic bronchitis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and emphysema. It also increases the risk for peripheral vascular disease and is associated with cancers of the larynx, oral cavity, esophagus, pancreas, and urinary bladder. Smoking by pregnant women can cause adverse health effects on their babies, like low birth weight and preterm delivery; increases the risk of miscarriage; and has also been found to be an important cause of sudden infant death syndrome. Careless smoking also can cause severe burn injuries and death. Many of these adverse effects of smoking occur in "second-hand" smokers. http://www.cancer.org/research/infographicgallery/tobacco-related-healthcare-costsHonestly it's fucking insane that a grown adult needs to have the societal burdens of tobacco abuse spelled out for him.
2584
« on: May 06, 2016, 04:59:36 PM »
I'm moving there soon, and the two places I was most interested in suddenly dropped out a few days before we plan to go see houses. If anyone lives there and knows of any prospective homes for rent around NAS Norfolk ($1,200-1,800/mo), let me know.
Or if not, just talk about places I should visit when I'm there.
2585
« on: May 06, 2016, 04:57:07 PM »
we can do WHATEVER the fuck we want to to ourselves
Cigarette usage has a tangible, significant, negative impact on the state of the entire global economy, health, and wellbeing of the population. Arguing that addiction is some manifestation of your self-professed human right to "do whatever the fuck we want to ourselves" is dangerous and naive. that's a problem with the current medical system That's how insurance works. Lots of people making themselves fatally sick leads to a larger burden on the rest of society.
2586
« on: May 06, 2016, 04:48:38 PM »
Choice and consent are all, and they're certainly more important than public health.
Doesn't my right to do what I want with my body end when it affects others' same right? Cigarettes produce a tangible, significant impact on the health of others, the cost of their healthcare, the efficiency of the labor force, the subsequent cost of a reduced labor force due to early medical retirements through social security and other welfare, and numerous other ways. It'd be all fine and dandy if our choices affected only ourselves, but that's something that just isn't reflected in reality. Also: moral crime Come on.
2587
« on: May 06, 2016, 04:36:42 PM »
The idea that everyone should be able to do anything they want to themselves is noble and all, if you don't consider the millions of people literally killing themselves because of one of the most potent chemical addictions available, with immense ramification on the healthcare industry and labor force of the country.
Doesn't matter. Human rights trump social climate.
You're treating addiction as some romanticized consequence of choice. The reality is that companies probably shouldn't have a right to market products like cigarettes, and it's only by longstanding corruption that it's been allowed to continue.
2588
« on: May 06, 2016, 04:17:19 PM »
The idea that everyone should be able to do anything they want to themselves is noble and all, if you don't consider the millions of people literally killing themselves because of one of the most potent chemical addictions available, with immense ramification on the healthcare industry and labor force of the country.
2589
« on: May 06, 2016, 12:54:03 PM »
Next time on Twitch: streamer accidentally records himself committing genocide in Ethiopia, apologizes and claims it was just a late April Fool's prank.
2590
« on: May 05, 2016, 05:51:15 PM »
He's gone hollow.
2591
« on: May 05, 2016, 02:45:42 PM »
The only thing Trump's got going for him is that he's not an evil fuck
I think he's trying to say that Trump is an evil fuck to his own accord. He wasn't groomed by the machine.
Trump is just as much part of the establishment and so called "elite" as Hillary is, if not more so.
He's an outsider to the Republican party. Of course he's part of the "elite", definitely more so than the Clintons (though their influence is in different areas). Clinton is the epitome of the democratic establishment; the notion that she was put in the positions of power she had, and did the things she did because of an apparent plan to make her the democratic nominee for this election cycle is more worrying than Trump just being a rich asshole that bought his way to the nomination.
This guy is a fucking maniac, and a stupid one at that. He's far, FAR more dangerous than "keep the status quo" Hillary will ever be.
If you can't see that I don't know what to say to you.
I'm not really comparing the two. The only comment I made about Trump was that at least he's not a cog of the political party machine (or wasn't until recently). A Trump presidency is worrying, but the fact that the parties have the ability to do what they've done with Hillary is equally concerning in a different way. Democrats basically had zero choice of their candidate for this election, and that's terrifying.
2592
« on: May 05, 2016, 11:51:05 AM »
I'm neutral to this, but I'd prefer the recreational sale of cigarettes to be banned entirely someday.
I'd love to know what could be considered a "medicinal" use for normal cigarettes.
Still, this is a good thing. I can't think of any reason why people smoke them in the first place, not like there's any health benefits or mind-altering enjoyment coming out of them.
Medicinal usage would be to wean addicts off post-regulation, like in a methadone clinic. I wouldn't even go so far as to ban tobacco, but cigarettes ought to go.
2593
« on: May 05, 2016, 11:30:53 AM »
The only thing Trump's got going for him is that he's not an evil fuck
I think he's trying to say that Trump is an evil fuck to his own accord. He wasn't groomed by the machine.
Trump is just as much part of the establishment and so called "elite" as Hillary is, if not more so.
He's an outsider to the Republican party. Of course he's part of the "elite", definitely more so than the Clintons (though their influence is in different areas). Clinton is the epitome of the democratic establishment; the notion that she was put in the positions of power she had, and did the things she did because of an apparent plan to make her the democratic nominee for this election cycle is more worrying than Trump just being a rich asshole that bought his way to the nomination.
2594
« on: May 05, 2016, 08:37:18 AM »
I'm neutral to this, but I'd prefer the recreational sale of cigarettes to be banned entirely someday.
2595
« on: May 04, 2016, 07:39:03 PM »
The only thing Trump's got going for him is that he's not an evil fuck
..."groomed by his political party for more than 10 years to win this election."
"Trump is not evil"
That's not what I said, though.
Oh ok. Thanks for clearing that up.
Anytime, pal
2596
« on: May 04, 2016, 07:36:39 PM »
The only thing Trump's got going for him is that he's not an evil fuck
..."groomed by his political party for more than 10 years to win this election."
"Trump is not evil"
That's not what I said, though.
2597
« on: May 04, 2016, 07:34:46 PM »
The only thing Trump's got going for him is that he's not an evil fuck
..."groomed by his political party for more than 10 years to win this election."
2598
« on: May 04, 2016, 06:51:35 PM »
The only thing Trump's got going for him is that he's not an evil fuck groomed by his political party for more than 10 years to win this election.
2600
« on: May 04, 2016, 04:01:13 PM »
Kasich dropped out.
Fuck this election.
2601
« on: May 04, 2016, 02:01:04 PM »
Sure, but too often people mistake a falsehood for an opinion.
2602
« on: May 04, 2016, 01:59:10 PM »
It's not a phase that humanity should "grow out of", it's just the basis of physical attraction among our species.
Seems like something to grow out of to me.
Species can't just grow out of basic biological instincts. We ignore it almost entirely publicly, already.
2603
« on: May 04, 2016, 01:44:40 PM »
Is it really that difficult to figure out why sexual organs and sexualized body parts are considered inappropriate for public settings?
If our answers are simplistic, not really. When trying to identify what precedents contribute to our codifications of norm the depth of inquiry can actually contribute to the conversation, however.
What exactly does this contribute to the conversation? The "precedents [which] contribute to our codifications of norm(s)" are the sex-selection of certain traits among mates. We don't find large breasts and full hips attractive because the media says so, the media says so because we find those traits attractive. It's not a phase that humanity should "grow out of", it's just the basis of physical attraction among our species.
2604
« on: May 04, 2016, 01:39:21 PM »
By "original plan" they mean one of many varying possible plotlines. I'm pretty glad that the original trilogy wasn't extended into 9 movies focusing on a character that barely had any significance to the series.
2605
« on: May 04, 2016, 11:34:34 AM »
Is it really that difficult to figure out why sexual organs and sexualized body parts are considered inappropriate for public settings?
2606
« on: May 03, 2016, 09:50:52 PM »
People that sent the guy hatemail are pathetic, tbh. He didn't cast shitty actors, come up with the concept or write storyboards, or cover it in terrible mid-2000s CGI vomit.
Yeah the dialog sucked ass but he didn't singlehandedly destroy the movie.
2607
« on: May 03, 2016, 09:12:46 PM »
So can we agree that those cunting Snakemen with chains during the Ancient Wyvern bit are the real bosses of the battle?
You mean the magic chain axes that can go through walls, floors, or ceilings, and are like 100 feet long? Yeah fuck those.
How do you even deal with this in-game? Can you anticipate them at all?
Pull the mobs nearby, then rush when he's alone and try to stun-lock him until he dies or bait him off the bridge. Or throw an alluring skull and run.
Alright, that sounds much more like the souls I know. Is this a scenario where you have to think a bit outside the box for a solution, or is it pretty apparent from the in-game situation?
It's just a bad encounter, programming-wise. The chain clips through walls and floors; it's not like the ghosts of New Londo that had a reason for their ambushes. It's unlikely that somebody without prior knowledge of the enemy would survive their first time against one because of how badly it's designed. And it's just a big enemy, not even a mini-boss.
2608
« on: May 03, 2016, 08:39:06 PM »
>skipping bosses in a Souls game
>Challenge runs
Kind of defeats the purpose of a challenge if you're just going to puss out on a boss fight.
2609
« on: May 03, 2016, 08:30:38 PM »
So can we agree that those cunting Snakemen with chains during the Ancient Wyvern bit are the real bosses of the battle?
You mean the magic chain axes that can go through walls, floors, or ceilings, and are like 100 feet long? Yeah fuck those.
How do you even deal with this in-game? Can you anticipate them at all?
Pull the mobs nearby, then rush when he's alone and try to stun-lock him until he dies or bait him off the bridge. Or throw an alluring skull and run.
2610
« on: May 03, 2016, 06:11:01 PM »
So can we agree that those cunting Snakemen with chains during the Ancient Wyvern bit are the real bosses of the battle?
You mean the magic chain axes that can go through walls, floors, or ceilings, and are like 100 feet long? Yeah fuck those.
Pages: 1 ... 858687 8889 ... 270
|
Show Posts