|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
djsmnc
Joined: 20 Jan 2003
Location: Dave's ESL Cafe
|
 Posted: Tue Dec 26, 2006 7:01 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| SPINOZA wrote: |
Sorry, missed this.
Obviously, tobacco companies may invest in what they choose to.
Nobody in their right mind would against tobacco on the grounds that political parties one is averse to profit from it.
I really can't comment on the US because I know nothing about the tobacco industry there (can Americans please comment?) but in my country tobacco ploughs in billions to the state, which is invested back into society - doctors, nurses, policemen, firemen, roads, hospitals, houses, pensions, services. It simply follows that staunchly anti-smoking whiners are to be despised as state parasites. |
Well, it's pretty much the same in the US. If there were no tobacco industry there, a portion of the south would be impoverished.
I smoke to support southern agriculture and education in the US |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Demophobe
Joined: 17 May 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 8:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SPINOZA wrote: |
| ernie wrote: |
| so if i smoke 20 doobies a week, i can claim i'm not a pothead? or is this another strawman argument? |
If you smoke 20 doobies per week, you're a complete braindead loser....but we probably could've guessed that anyway. |
QFT. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jellyteecha
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 8:02 am Post subject: smoking is good for you |
|
|
I'm sort of thinking along the same lines as Hollywoodaction. Blowing yourself up with semtex prevents cancer,heartattacks,veneral disease, aids and many many other nurological and bodily diseases. Let's get real here man, smoking it causes cancer and getting run over by a truck hurts like hell and in no-way makes you healthier. Oddly enough I am a smoker and I like it but I'm not gonna say it's good for you. Thos is called dillusion and can be treated at your local nut house for a few dollars.
Jellyteecha |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ernie
Joined: 05 Aug 2006
Location: asdfghjk
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 7:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| what if i'm in cambodia and they're practically GIVING the stuff away? how many arm-sized doobies do i have to smoke in a week before being considered a 'pothead'? post your opinions and i will test them... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hanson
Joined: 20 Oct 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 6:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
SPINOZA wrote:
| Quote: |
| Oh dear me....the either/or fallacy. |
Then, responding to ernie,
| Quote: |
| If you smoke 20 doobies per week, you're a complete braindead loser....but we probably could've guessed that anyway. |
Now, SPINOZA, you've clearly contradicted yourself here, no?
Smoking 20 doobers a week, in and of itself, certainly does not make someone a loser, just like someone who drinks heavily on weekends doesn't make someone a loser. It's what you do outside of those vices that decides whether or not you are a loser. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SPINOZA
Joined: 10 Jun 2005
Location: $eoul
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 8:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I was needlessly harsh on dope-heads, you're quite right. Marryjoanna, when consumed occasionally (once per week max), has very positive effects - heightened creativity, thoughts you've never thought before, quite mystical. However, with repeated use, these effects cease. The regular weed smokers I've come across never fail to be lazy, anti-social, morbid individuals. Mind you, I do not support its prohibition. People have an overly-rosey view of weed in my book (and, much worse, the legalization and state provision of heroin is much more of a moral urgency than allowing useless pot-heads to toke legally), but the fact that smoking is the biggest killer (10,000 per day average worldwide) yet is tolerated, legal, taxed, extremely profitable to society and actually pays for the damage it causes (plus billions profit) means there's no justification for the prohibition of pretty much anything. Why this is not immediately clear to all I've no idea.
However, I see no contradiction on the either/or fallacy grounds. To do so, one should at least be still in discussion about smoking, where the either/or fallacy previously occurred (had I committed an either/or fallacy on cannabis, it'd make me a hypocrite, not self-contradictory). Also, one should present an either/or argument. One should present a falsely limited number of options (two). I did not. I presented one. Whilst definitely a fallacy (more options are available than I suggested), it is not an either/or. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SPINOZA
Joined: 10 Jun 2005
Location: $eoul
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 8:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
More on vile anti-smoking sissies......
When I was with a Daves poster in Itaewon once after a soccer game, one of his female friends asked me to put my cigarette out (I was enjoying a drink, unusually for a wednesday evening, so I had a social cig). Of course, I refused, and we had an argument. Staunchly anti-tobacco sissies (a) cause social disharmony and (b) contribute to state losses because tobacco is now so socially unacceptable in countries like Canada (where she's from) and Britain it's going to inevitably result in fewer packs of smokes being bought.
In the Republic of Spinland (of course an autocracy) people like that b*tch are to be despised, ostracized, dehumanized and perhaps jailed. They are economy-drainers, totally unpleasant personally, and generally quite useless garbage.
It gets worse. Next time, I saw this same high-pitched, whiney-voiced, ridiculously-tall tw*t in Hongdae. She was complaining vociferously about her gin and tonic not being to her satisfaction (in English - no Korean was attempted whatsoever; it was simply assumed that a bartender in Hongdae can understand her grotesque whining). She was very rude too. A shocking amount of anti-smoking whiners are like this 'woman'. It's absolutely maddening how we not merely tolerate them, but actually make laws likely to be of detriment to the state purse to satisfy their sensory-offensive noise. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hanson
Joined: 20 Oct 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 9:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SPINOZA wrote: |
| I was needlessly harsh on dope-heads, you're quite right. Marryjoanna, when consumed occasionally (once per week max), has very positive effects - heightened creativity, thoughts you've never thought before, quite mystical. However, with repeated use, these effects cease. The regular weed smokers I've come across never fail to be lazy, anti-social, morbid individuals. Mind you, I do not support its prohibition. People have an overly-rosey view of weed in my book (and, much worse, the legalization and state provision of heroin is much more of a moral urgency than allowing useless pot-heads to toke legally), but the fact that smoking is the biggest killer (10,000 per day average worldwide) yet is tolerated, legal, taxed, extremely profitable to society and actually pays for the damage it causes (plus billions profit) means there's no justification for the prohibition of pretty much anything. Why this is not immediately clear to all I've no idea. |
For the first part of this paragraph, I'll have to concede that regular pot-smoking definitely causes lack of motivation (laziness), but I've known many regular pot users who've accomplished more than most. Anit-social? Well, perhaps to you because you didn't share a kinship with them with regards to smoking. Pot smokers are extremely social with their own kind; they just don't want to leave the house sometimes... Morbid? I've laughed more with my pot-smoking friends than any other group of friends - for obvious reasons.
For the second part of your paragraph, I have to agree that prohibition is silly. Why people don't see that legalization of Mary Jane would in fact add to state revenues, much like the revenues from tobacco. Seems to be a money-maker for the state - especially when you factor in added revenue from tourism (think Amsterdam) and all its snowball, downstream revenues.
| SPINOZA wrote: |
| However, I see no contradiction on the either/or fallacy grounds. To do so, one should at least be still in discussion about smoking, where the either/or fallacy previously occurred (had I committed an either/or fallacy on cannabis, it'd make me a hypocrite, not self-contradictory). Also, one should present an either/or argument. One should present a falsely limited number of options (two). I did not. I presented one. Whilst definitely a fallacy (more options are available than I suggested), it is not an either/or. |
I was just pokin a little fun at the fact that you pretty much painted all ganja users with that ever-so-wide "loser" paintbrush.
Happy New Year, Spinner |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SPINOZA
Joined: 10 Jun 2005
Location: $eoul
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 9:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
HNY!
Again, I associate laughter with occasional use. Heavy toking leads to these excellent experiences ceasing, with increased tolerance. I guess it may affect everyone differently.
Great and recent article on marryjoanna prohibition in the US to anyone interested or unsure about whether drug prohibition should end:
http://www.mapinc.org/newsleap/v06/n1750/a06.html?233 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
