I wish cigarette smokers, marijuana smokers, and vapers didn’t blame each other for intrusive laws

[Boobs]

Honestly just utterly amazing how people here are believing that smoking is somehow a primary cause of poverty (?) rather than, you know, the institutional nature of poverty. But of course what else can we expect from Marin suburbanites for whom drug use might be the only way to fall downwards, and that's not even a guarantee at that.

Maybe if they were as vociferous in their support for a genuine poverty-reduction program as they are for getting off by shaming folks who smoke, there'd be a lot fewer lives "thrown down the gutter."

[Alcibiades]

Honestly just utterly amazing how people here are believing that smoking is somehow a primary cause of poverty (?) rather than, you know, the institutional nature of poverty. But of course what else can we expect from Marin suburbanites for whom drug use might be the only way to fall downwards, and that's not even a guarantee at that.

Maybe if they were as vociferous in their support for a genuine poverty-reduction program as they are for getting off by shaming folks who smoke, there'd be a lot fewer lives "thrown down the gutter."

Of course smoking is not a primary cause of poverty. Rather, it exacerbates existing health inequalities.

[Boobs]

Honestly just utterly amazing how people here are believing that smoking is somehow a primary cause of poverty (?) rather than, you know, the institutional nature of poverty. But of course what else can we expect from Marin suburbanites for whom drug use might be the only way to fall downwards, and that's not even a guarantee at that.

Maybe if they were as vociferous in their support for a genuine poverty-reduction program as they are for getting off by shaming folks who smoke, there'd be a lot fewer lives "thrown down the gutter."

Of course smoking is not a primary cause of poverty. Rather, it exacerbates existing health inequalities.

No one saying it doesn't. But it's an incredibly pathetically liberal approach to attempt to blame societal class health inequalities on individual choices like smoking rather than the government failing its citizens by not providing adequate healthcare. (Leaving alone the fact that medical poverty probably amplifies drug use.)

[Former President tack50]

Looking forward to hearing about the future $11/hr cashier job at CVS, which is virtually all that a poli-sci degree alone will get you these days sans actual political involvement. It's literally the most worthless degree financially-speaking on the face of the planet.

Good thing I'm going to law school next year then!

Wait, the US don't have an "actual" Law degree? (like we do and presumably many other places)

What is the point of a separate law school compared to regular college just teaching you law?

[Alcibiades]

Honestly just utterly amazing how people here are believing that smoking is somehow a primary cause of poverty (?) rather than, you know, the institutional nature of poverty. But of course what else can we expect from Marin suburbanites for whom drug use might be the only way to fall downwards, and that's not even a guarantee at that.

Maybe if they were as vociferous in their support for a genuine poverty-reduction program as they are for getting off by shaming folks who smoke, there'd be a lot fewer lives "thrown down the gutter."

Of course smoking is not a primary cause of poverty. Rather, it exacerbates existing health inequalities.

No one saying it doesn't. But it's an incredibly pathetically liberal approach to attempt to blame societal class health inequalities on individual choices like smoking rather than the government failing its citizens by not providing adequate healthcare.

Well I’m completely with you on this. I wouldn’t say smoking is really a result of poor individual choices, but rather an incredibly manipulative and skilled industry. Smoking nonetheless doesn’t help health problems, and anti-smoking policies are proven to improve public health.

[parochial boy]

I find it interesting that you've connected all of the substances discussed in this thread (alcohol, vaping, cigarettes, and marijuana) with poverty. I mean, I suppose it's true that poor people are more likely to use these things, but the rate among wealthy teenagers is probably not accurately reflected in the statistics simply because they're less likely to get caught. When I think of potheads or cokeheads, I don't think of poor people just trying to distract themselves from the doldrums of life. I think of the wealthy, entitled children of suburban families who completely squander their good education, stable upbringing, and money on drugs. However you slice it, cigarettes and weed are a waste. They waste money, time, and lives. And strutting around acting as though you're a defender of the poor and downtrodden because you want to make sure they can keep self-medicating and dulling their pain is frankly outlandish.

Jonny mate, this post says... far more about your own social background and the way it distorts how you perception the world than it does about what the world actually is.

And then, the idea that being poor is some frightful horror that people would need to find way of self medication to deal with is, um, kind of reminiscent of the 19th century philanthropist who is absolutely horrified of what those awful people in the slums are doing to themselves with gin and laudanum

[The Righteous Tip of the Abundance Spear]

And then, the idea that being poor is some frightful horror that people would need to find way of self medication to deal with is, um, kind of reminiscent of the 19th century philanthropist who is absolutely horrified of what those awful people in the slums are doing to themselves with gin and laudanum

My phrasing there was clearly referring to how Griffin is portraying this.

[Devout Centrist]

Honestly just utterly amazing how people here are believing that smoking is somehow a primary cause of poverty (?) rather than, you know, the institutional nature of poverty. But of course what else can we expect from Marin suburbanites for whom drug use might be the only way to fall downwards, and that's not even a guarantee at that.

Maybe if they were as vociferous in their support for a genuine poverty-reduction program as they are for getting off by shaming folks who smoke, there'd be a lot fewer lives "thrown down the gutter."

Of course smoking is not a primary cause of poverty. Rather, it exacerbates existing health inequalities.

Unfortunately, public policy on tobacco exacerbates poverty among smokers; it does little to actively reduce it.

[Alcibiades]

Honestly just utterly amazing how people here are believing that smoking is somehow a primary cause of poverty (?) rather than, you know, the institutional nature of poverty. But of course what else can we expect from Marin suburbanites for whom drug use might be the only way to fall downwards, and that's not even a guarantee at that.

Maybe if they were as vociferous in their support for a genuine poverty-reduction program as they are for getting off by shaming folks who smoke, there'd be a lot fewer lives "thrown down the gutter."

Of course smoking is not a primary cause of poverty. Rather, it exacerbates existing health inequalities.

Unfortunately, public policy on tobacco exacerbates poverty among smokers; it does little to actively reduce it.

Well, I would argue to the contrary. A big part of the reduction in smoking rates has been improved knowledge of its deadliness, but studies have shown that gov’t measures have played a significant role as well.

[Adam Griffin]

And then, the idea that being poor is some frightful horror that people would need to find way of self medication to deal with is, um, kind of reminiscent of the 19th century philanthropist who is absolutely horrified of what those awful people in the slums are doing to themselves with gin and laudanum

My phrasing there was clearly referring to how Griffin is portraying this.

Again, you were simply pivoting and covering, trying to make it sound like "I actually think of rich people when I think about drug use!" after some of the reprehensible comments you made prior: something I don't think even your defenders would believe after reading the extent of what you wrote. After all, income quintiles in this country in virtually every MSA are rigid, whether you use substances or not.

Instead of thinking about the dynamic like this:



Try thinking about it like this:




Anyway, I'm done here: I need to go dust off my many leather-bound law degrees and chainsmoke 8 packs of cigarettes before bedtime!

[Devout Centrist]

Well, I would argue to the contrary. A big part of the reduction in smoking rates has been improved knowledge of its deadliness, but studies have shown that gov’t measures have played a significant role as well.

The problem isn't so much smoking bans or anti-tobacco advertisements, but things like punitive cigarette taxes and healthcare premium penalties for smoking. Demand for tobacco is fairly inelastic, so increasing the price of tobacco isn't going to reduce the rate of smoking all that much. What it will do is push more and more people into poverty.

[The Righteous Tip of the Abundance Spear]

And then, the idea that being poor is some frightful horror that people would need to find way of self medication to deal with is, um, kind of reminiscent of the 19th century philanthropist who is absolutely horrified of what those awful people in the slums are doing to themselves with gin and laudanum

My phrasing there was clearly referring to how Griffin is portraying this.

Again, you were simply pivoting and covering, trying to make it sound like "I actually think of rich people when I think about drug use!" after some of the reprehensible comments you made prior:

Ah, I see. When you make deliberately offensive comments, it's because you are engaging in clever facetious rhetoric, whereas when other people hurt your feelings they are obviously reprehensible sadists. Your unyielding standards for fair discussion never cease to impress.

[Adam Griffin]

And then, the idea that being poor is some frightful horror that people would need to find way of self medication to deal with is, um, kind of reminiscent of the 19th century philanthropist who is absolutely horrified of what those awful people in the slums are doing to themselves with gin and laudanum

My phrasing there was clearly referring to how Griffin is portraying this.

Again, you were simply pivoting and covering, trying to make it sound like "I actually think of rich people when I think about drug use!" after some of the reprehensible comments you made prior:

Ah, I see. When you make deliberately offensive comments, it's because you are engaging in clever facetious rhetoric, whereas when other people hurt your feelings they are obviously reprehensible sadists. Your unyielding standards for fair discussion never cease to impress.

Your desire to personally attack me has led you to think that you actually succeeded, when in reality, I'm just calling you out for your classist behavior. It's a thing of mine, after all.

Let's just be honest: you are likely a virgin and got overly triggered by a comment that has gotten more likes in this thread than any other one thus far - and one not intended to target any particular person.

Even if it weren't facetious, being a virgin doesn't mean you belong to a protected group or are locked into some lifelong misery that robs you of opportunity or equality like poverty or racial inequality often guarantees. I wouldn't have any more pity for your average virgin than I would for an avowed incel based solely on that (normal).

[The Righteous Tip of the Abundance Spear]

And then, the idea that being poor is some frightful horror that people would need to find way of self medication to deal with is, um, kind of reminiscent of the 19th century philanthropist who is absolutely horrified of what those awful people in the slums are doing to themselves with gin and laudanum

My phrasing there was clearly referring to how Griffin is portraying this.

Again, you were simply pivoting and covering, trying to make it sound like "I actually think of rich people when I think about drug use!" after some of the reprehensible comments you made prior:

Ah, I see. When you make deliberately offensive comments, it's because you are engaging in clever facetious rhetoric, whereas when other people hurt your feelings they are obviously reprehensible sadists. Your unyielding standards for fair discussion never cease to impress.

Your desire to personally attack me has led you to think that you actually succeeded, when in reality, I'm just calling you out for your classist behavior. It's a thing of mine, after all.

Let's just be honest: you are likely a virgin and got overly triggered by a comment that has gotten more likes in this thread than any other one thus far - and one not intended to target any particular person.

Ah yes, the esteemed Socratic method of accusing your opponent of not getting any puss.

[Zohranism is OUR future]

Honestly just utterly amazing how people here are believing that smoking is somehow a primary cause of poverty (?) rather than, you know, the institutional nature of poverty. But of course what else can we expect from Marin suburbanites for whom drug use might be the only way to fall downwards, and that's not even a guarantee at that.

Maybe if they were as vociferous in their support for a genuine poverty-reduction program as they are for getting off by shaming folks who smoke, there'd be a lot fewer lives "thrown down the gutter."

Good news is...I do support anti-poverty programs.

[SWE]

Literally have never seen this anywhere in the real world or online, so I just assume you're spending time in weird niches.

Also, don't mind the Authoritarians of Atlas who will inevitably respond! Most well-educated teenage and 20-something virgins who don't know how to have fun have never experimented with any of these substances.

There are ways to have fun that don’t include tobacco and marijuana.

And almost all of them are even better high

[Santander]

What a bizarre argument going on here...