• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.

Boycott Scotts Due to Smoking Policy

Jump to latest Follow Reply
plum diamonds buckeye planet
Sort by date Sort by votes
BuckeyeNation27 said:
Uh, not even close? I'm playing the "it's stupid to say 'why even try, it's only one company. you won't make a difference'" card.
Click to expand...

Ok, but I was addressing the stated goal of the Scotts policy, not some vision of how things can be better if everyone does the same. They say that this policy will lower their costs and I'm saying it won't. Whether they help lead a revolution that ultimately makes a difference 20 years down the road is irrelevant.
 
Upvote 0
Dryden said:
Those in poorer health and at higher risks for recurring, expensive medical procedures should pay a disproportionately higher percentage of their employer's health plan costs from their salary.
Click to expand...

I agree, because I'm in excellent health. But the health insurance company doesn't even try to determine how healthy I am, they just go ahead and ding me for having an occasional cigar.
 
Upvote 0
Dryden said:
The point is that Scott's is telling their employees that they cannot smoke at home either.

Those in poorer health and at higher risks for recurring, expensive medical procedures should pay a disproportionately higher percentage of their employer's health plan costs from their salary. This is not the issue here, though.
Click to expand...

Dryden - Mr. Incognito would've had to have read the entire thread to realize this. Surely, we couldn't have expected that of him?

By the way, Guy, I'm not familiar with the smoking habits of all the posters here, but it seems to me that there are several non-smokers who disagree with Scotts on this one. Are they as 'dumb' as your smokers?
 
Upvote 0
PrincessPeach said:
Dryden - Mr. Incognito would've had to have read the entire thread to realize this. Surely, we couldn't have expected that of him?

By the way, Guy, I'm not familiar with the smoking habits of all the posters here, but it seems to me that there are several non-smokers who disagree with Scotts on this one. Are they as 'dumb' as your smokers?
Click to expand...


There you go again...expecting responsible posts from Mr. "Undercover."
 
Upvote 0
Damn, don't you guys have jobs :)

I have to agree with AKAK that I know a hell of a lot more old smokers than I do old fat asses.

Regarding public smoking in Ohio, I think that's another freedom issue. The OWNER of the establishment should choose whether to allow smoking. If non-smokers have a problem with that, then don't go there. Things will work themselves out based on geographical location. If the owner decides he is losing business then he changes the policy to suit the customers accordingly.

I think the whole "if you smoke it will kill you" is bullshit based on junk science. You get a small group of people wanting to control the habits and/or activities of others and they slowly start to change society's perception. I think it really does boil down to "when it's your time - it's your time".

For example, smokefreeohio.org. They guys are just a bunch of nazi's in disguise. What would these people do if suddenly there were no more legal cigarettes in Ohio? They would move onto something else and hammer away at it for years and years until they eventually got their way. I would love to see people holding signs that read "get a life" outside the smokefree organization. :)
 
Upvote 0
dwimmer38 said:
Damn, don't you guys have jobs :)

I think the whole "if you smoke it will kill you" is bullshit based on junk science. You get a small group of people wanting to control the habits and/or activities of others and they slowly start to change society's perception. I think it really does boil down to "when it's your time - it's your time".
Click to expand...

Perhaps your argument/position would be better supported by statistics and facts than erroneous and opinionated banter. I'd love to see some data in support of your argument. I doubt you'll be able to produce, but I could be wrong.

That's the great thing about science -it's all peer reviewed before it's accepted and for the most part, it's opinion free.
 
Upvote 0
Dryden said:
The point is that Scott's is telling their employees that they cannot smoke at home either.
Click to expand...

It's not like employers don't have an interest in your personal habits outside of work whether it's smoking or something else. For example, your employer may have a very big interest in your driving habits outside of work. Let's assume you may have a car furnished by your employer or have access to company cars. If you're the type that speeds and has 6 pts or more on your license, your employer may be forced to pay higher premiums (price tiering can vary as much as 30%), deal with higher deductibles, have a tougher payment plan, exclude you from coverage altogether (even if you use your own car at work) and take away all of your access to company vehicles, or lose coverage altogether. Depending on how important this is, you could get canned b/c your company can't afford your expense while waiting 3 years for tickets to fall off your license. This happens all of the time (I know b/c I'm the ass at the insurance company that raises rates and demands individuals with crappy records be excluded).

Face it, whether you like it or not (and no one likes it) your boss will always have a massive interest in what you do one your own time.

For example, smokefreeohio.org. They guys are just a bunch of nazi's in disguise. What would these people do if suddenly there were no more legal cigarettes in Ohio?
Click to expand...

I imagine the first thing they'd do is change their name.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top