Arizona county to ban employees who smoke


Readers!
 
Scroll down to read this post.
 
For many reasons, mostly political but partly ethical, I do not use Google, Facebook, Twitter. They practice corrupt business policies, while targeting conservative websites for censoring, facts repeatedly confirmed by news stories and by my sense that Facebook has taken action to prevent my readers from recommending Behind the Black to their friends.
 
Thus, I must have your direct support to keep this webpage alive. Not only does the money pay the bills, it gives me the freedom to speak honestly about science and culture, instead of being forced to write it as others demand.

 

Please consider donating by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar below.


 

Regular readers can support Behind The Black with a contribution via paypal:

Or with a subscription with regular donations from your Paypal or credit card account:


If Paypal doesn't work for you, you can support Behind The Black directly by sending your donation by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman, to
 
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652

 

You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage. And if you buy the books through the ebookit links, I get a larger cut and I get it sooner.

Put ’em in concentration camps! Pima County, which includes Tucson, Arizona, is considering banning the employment of any smokers.

Already employed smokers will be charged 30 percent more for their health insurance. The regulations will apply only to government employees.

I say, why waste time with this nonsense. Anyone who smokes is obviously the scum of the Earth, and should be rounded up and sent to camps, either to be re-educated, or to be killed if they can’t reform themselves. America is now an enlightened place, where freedom and individual responsibility have been replaced with the much deeper wisdom of the state!

Share

6 comments

  • Pzatchok

    You know the insurance industry would already charge what it thinks is appropriate for smokers if Obama care had not interfered and forced some sort of cost leveling.

    But since a local government thinks it can change the insurance rates of its members then what if someone proposed that all women pay more. They have been proven to use doctors at a higher rate than men. And their procedures cost more over their lifetimes.

    How about Blacks for their increased rate of heart problems.

    Can we give people who prove they exercise reduced rates?

    The Left should have realized that as soon as they took over an industry (health care) they would have to start acting like the owners and bosses of that industry and thus start taking all the blame for things people didn’t like about it.
    Basically everything they accused those industries of doing and being.
    Now they are the bad guys.

    The republicans should use the lefts own tactics against them now. Call them everything those greedy owners have been called for the last 50 years.

  • Cotour

    In a market I think it can be argued that it is reasonable for an employer or an insurance company to charge an appropriate increased premium cost to those who CHOOSE to partake in certain activities such as smoking, motorcycle riding, flying ultra lights etc. It can be strongly argued from a business model perspective that these individuals statistically increase the costs of purchasing insurance through their chosen activities, and insurance is about spreading risk evenly among the participants.

    But, as Pzat points out the government has overtaken the market and now controls it. In other words they now defacto “own” the people who need to participate in the system as it has been reformed and have positioned themselves to now dictate what people can or can not do. This is where we have fallen to, to a point where the people have allowed the government to see the people as “their” property. (Shame on the people)

    Using this logic the government can now tell the people, based on the governments subjective point of view whats “best” for them. Maybe the testimony of Mr Gruber will help in rectifying this condition in his enlightening Congress tomorrow on the subject of Obamacare and how it came to be.

  • Cotour

    PS: It is plain to any reasonable human being that smoking specifically is a dirty, filthy and unhealthy activity that is strongly promoted to the people through multimedia, romanticized, sexualized imagery by multinational corporations that see profits over people as being primary.

    The people ultimately have THEE responsibility to understand this and understand that they have a responsibility to themselves and their families related to how they are consciously and unconsciously manipulated both by corporations and government.

  • David M. Cook

    Pima county should be restricted from ever receiving ANY funds collected through tobacco taxes. Perhaps if they lose revenue they will come to their senses. Bureaucrats usually respond when you remove their money source.

  • Pzatchok

    I quit smoking cigarets over 12 years ago, but I will break down once in great while and have a fine cigar with a few adult beverages.
    Mainly on my birthday.

    As with all things in life, moderation.

  • Cotour

    Let me clarify: The daily smoking or chewing of tobacco products as an accepted part of ones lifestyle is specifically a dirty, filthy and unhealthy habit. Moderation in most things is a perfectly reasonable choice.

    I can only assume that you agree with my other observations regarding the broad spectrum of manipulation that tobacco and smoking exist within.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *