Company fires all employees who smoke!

[Mrs. Tuberski]

Originally posted by Dissident
and I used to think Ming was cool.

smoking is disgusting, no way around it.

Hence why it is called a nasty habit. Having said that if you dont want to be around smoke then by all means dont be. I know that if i didnt want to be around whinny a** crybabies i wouldnt be there. (not that i am calling you one I am not)

[Asher]

Originally posted by Dissident
and I used to think Ming was cool.

smoking is disgusting, no way around it.

Smoking is disgusting, stupid, and pointless.

The people who take up smoking are usually idiots who tried to "be cool" or fit in, because they lack self-confidence or any kind of substantive personality to make people like them.

[Mrs. Tuberski]

Originally posted by Asher

Smoking is disgusting, stupid, and pointless.

The people who take up smoking are usually idiots who tried to "be cool" or fit in, because they lack self-confidence or any kind of substantive personality to make people like them.

Speaking for myself I dont need a smoke to be cool. I could give rats A** what people think of me. I try to be nice and treat others the way they want to be treated. I started smoking because I was tired of dealing with whinny a** doctors driving me crazy cause they sucked at their job and it helped blow off steam. Since i work in a job that i cant always take 15 min to go get a smoke i can go for 8 or plus hours with out a smoke doesnt mean that i dont enjoy that smoke once i get it. and I went 3 times for 10 months not smoking when i was pregnant.

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by Dissident
I can't believe smokers are complaining about us complaining about second hand smoke!

It's ****ing smoke! You aren't supposed to breath that stuff.

While I think what the company did was wrong, I can care less. I hate being forced to breath smoke at my job. Yes I have the option of moving to a state that does not allow smoking everywhere, but this is where I grew up. Everyone I know lives here. It was tough for me living back east where I knew no one.

My city is unique, because it's like a smoker's paradise. I think most of the people who move to my city are smokers. We have the highest smoking rate in the country. You can smoke anywhere you like. Even with little kids running around.

You aren't forced to breath second hand smoke, you chose the job.

If you don't want to breathe it find a new job.

I don't know of one smoker that woiuld quit because you can't leave your hometown.



The majority of the money in the casinos is genereated by smokers, which pays you. Deal with it.

ACK!

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by Asher

Smoking is disgusting, stupid, and pointless.

The people who take up smoking are usually idiots who tried to "be cool" or fit in, because they lack self-confidence or any kind of substantive personality to make people like them.

I have never tried to make people like me, or "be cool". The idiot part however........


Bastard..........

ACK!

[Mrs. Tuberski]

HOly hell you live in a state that has legalized prostitution for ever and b**** bout smoke? In this land of std's

[Ming]

Originally posted by Asher

Smoking is disgusting, stupid, and pointless.

The people who take up smoking are usually idiots who tried to "be cool" or fit in, because they lack self-confidence or any kind of substantive personality to make people like them.

I could be equaling insulting by posting what some people think about gays... but I'm not the kind of ass that you are. Take your know nothing generalizations and cram it.

MING TO Ming... "discuss the topic, not the posters..."
Ming TO MING... "But he started it with his insulting crap"
MING to Ming... "That's no excuse, enough with the personal crap... and don't worry, if continues to post insults like that again... he's toast"
Ming to MING... "OK"

[Boris Godunov]

Equating gays or a minority group to the smokers isn't really possible. Smoking is an activity--by definition, smokers smoke, and it's a very unhealthy thing to do. The same can't be said of gays. Gays aren't always promiscuous or engage in high-risk behavior--such behavior isn't necessary for one to be gay. One could even be celibate and be gay. One can't not smoke and be a smoker (double negative ho!).

But obesity certainly is relevant. As would be other classes of behavior--such as, say, motorcycle riders or drinkers. So the question really boils down to how much right a company has to control the private behavior of employees under the guise of limiting their health costs. Some might argue that companies who are required by law to provide health benefits for their employees should be able to mitigate that expense by making sure it only hires people who do not engage in risky behavior, be it smoking, drinking, overeating, etc.

[Zoid]

Originally posted by alva

Originally posted by Kamrat X
If the smokers should pay the true price of smoking, a pack of cigarettes should cost about 40 $ according to a study made by the Duke University of Durham, NC

No problem, let's make hamburgers cost 40$ too then, shall we.

Well, why not? The idea of a "fat tax" has actually been discussed in Sweden due to the increasing number of fat school children...

[Mrs. Tuberski]

My answer is when does the company become my life, and get to decide what i do with it.(my life) Like I stated before Texas is a right to work state the company ca fire me if the dont like my shoes they will on the other hand have to pay my unemployment comp and give a positive recommendation all in all it comes back to the company and shines on them.

[Dis]

Originally posted by Mrs. Tuberski
HOly hell you live in a state that has legalized prostitution for ever and b**** bout smoke? In this land of std's

std's aren't a problem. Despite what the catholic church would have you believe, condoms do work.

[Ming]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Equating gays or a minority group to the smokers isn't really possible. Smoking is an activity--by definition, smokers smoke, and it's a very unhealthy thing to do. The same can't be said of gays. Gays aren't always promiscuous or engage in high-risk behavior--such behavior isn't necessary for one to be gay. One could even be celibate and be gay. One can't not smoke and be a smoker (double negative ho!).

In this situation, you can equate gays to smokers. The issue is "groups at high health risks". And the facts are the facts... GAYS are a higher health risk... PERIOD!

And you can talk all you want about how not all are promiscuous or engage in high risk behaviour, but the same is true about smokers. Not all get sick, it is not automatic that they get cancer, it really depends on the amount they smoke and many other factors that can't be documented. Why some people get cancer and others don't can't be predictied!

Gays have higher rates of aides...
Smokers have higher rates of cancer...

In both cases, it's NOT automatic, and varies by the individual.

In this case, if a company is firing a WHOLE group of individuals because of potential higher insurance outlays due to that specific group being a higher health risk... they could just as well pick on ALL gays... ALL fat people... ALL women... All people with high blood presure... the list goes on. I feel as outraged that they are picking on smokers as you would probably feel if it were gays.

[Dis]

give it up Ming. normally you are sensible. But defending smokers is not sensible.

[Dis]

rah is even worse.

Let's take a well known example. Jonny Carson. He died just a few days ago. Though his case is different because he's a millionaire, and paid for all his own treatments (though it is possible NBC health coverage paid for them).

He did not die young. He lived to 79 years old!. Because of his private life, it's hard to say how long he has been treated for emphasyma. It could have been years.

[Mrs. Tuberski]

Originally posted by Dissident
give it up Ming. normally you are sensible. But defending smokers is not sensible.

Ming doesnt have to defend the smokers. The man actually believes in the right of all people whetehr you be a smoker or not i have the right to smoke as yuou have the right not to. He, i beleive is also trying to say that it doesnt matter whether u smoke or your gay both are choosing a high risk life style that has consequences. Hence why he says not all gays get aids just as not all smokers get cancer.