• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

Smoking Doesn't Affect Anyone Else...

As a non-smoker, its easy for me to sit back and support this thing, but the way its being structured right now, I think it will backfire a lot more than it will do good. If you're taxing smokers at time of purchase for littering their cigarette butts, won't it only exacerbate their sense of entitlement of being able to litter their cigarette butts wherever they like?
 
TylerW said:
As a non-smoker, its easy for me to sit back and support this thing, but the way its being structured right now, I think it will backfire a lot more than it will do good. If you're taxing smokers at time of purchase for littering their cigarette butts, won't it only exacerbate their sense of entitlement of being able to litter their cigarette butts wherever they like?
Click to expand...

Not like it would be hard to guy buy smokes in DC or SSF. :|

Now if they taxed Newsome's coke habit- the city could make some money.:thumbup
 
weak_link said:
Haven't smoke cigarettes in years but I was always very conscientious about my butts. While in my car I'd keep a glass bottle with a screw off lid to keep them in rather than fling them out the window. On the street I'd put them out with my foot and rip the filter off and put it in a garbage can. It's not that hard to not be a slob if you try.
Click to expand...

/thread
 
Perhaps if people stopped littering it wouldn't be a problem. People used to throw their empty cans and bottles all over. Then they put a tax on them. Now people recycle them.

It's really not that hard. They should make people pay an extra 1/2 cent per cigarette for butt rebate. Then they can return the used butts and get their 10 cents back. The bums would make a killing, the city would clean up, and people would be able to give a pack of butts to a bum instead of money.

It's a win, win, laugh at the homeless guy situation.
 
mcarb said:
Perhaps if people stopped littering it wouldn't be a problem. People used to throw their empty cans and bottles all over. Then they put a tax on them. Now people recycle them.

It's really not that hard. They should make people pay an extra 1/2 cent per cigarette for butt rebate. Then they can return the used butts and get their 10 cents back. The bums would make a killing, the city would clean up, and people would be able to give a pack of butts to a bum instead of money.

It's a win, win, laugh at the homeless guy situation.
Click to expand...

Always thinking practically :laughing
 
mcarb said:
Perhaps if people stopped littering it wouldn't be a problem. People used to throw their empty cans and bottles all over. Then they put a tax on them. Now people recycle them.

It's really not that hard. They should make people pay an extra 1/2 cent per cigarette for butt rebate. Then they can return the used butts and get their 10 cents back. The bums would make a killing, the city would clean up, and people would be able to give a pack of butts to a bum instead of money.

It's a win, win, laugh at the homeless guy situation.
Click to expand...

But this will make homeless do something, be a productive members of society. Where is compassion in this?
 
TylerW said:
As a non-smoker, its easy for me to sit back and support this thing, but the way its being structured right now, I think it will backfire a lot more than it will do good. If you're taxing smokers at time of purchase for littering their cigarette butts, won't it only exacerbate their sense of entitlement of being able to litter their cigarette butts wherever they like?
Click to expand...

that's what I was thinking. I see this as legitimizing the act of throwing butts on the ground. "Hey, I paid for the right to litter, so I will exercize it." plus, it takes away one avenue of my elitist thinking towards other people...(j/k).
 
Why not tax the cigarette companies instead of the users. That way they will be encouraged to figure out a more environmentally sound filter/butt.

One that doesn't hang around for 10 years in the land fills.
 
TylerW said:
If you're taxing smokers at time of purchase for littering their cigarette butts, won't it only exacerbate their sense of entitlement of being able to litter their cigarette butts wherever they like?
Click to expand...

I can't wait for someone to contest a littering ticket on the basis that the city already charged them for it's removal. Keep those receipts, smokers! :thumbup

RRR70 said:
SF wanted to save money and they removed buttload of garbage cans. Now they bitch about liter. I am not defending people that trow shit on the ground. It just that city gobment is full of idealistic retards.
Click to expand...

And I think this is a big part of it...SF isn't exactly a place where shopkeepers put out trash cans for public use. With no public receptacles, they are encouraging the problem.

weak_link said:
Haven't smoke cigarettes in years but I was always very conscientious about my butts. While in my car I'd keep a glass bottle with a screw off lid to keep them in rather than fling them out the window. On the street I'd put them out with my foot and rip the filter off and put it in a garbage can. It's not that hard to not be a slob if you try.
Click to expand...

+1 -- I only smoke a pipe or occasional cigar these days but I was always very careful with what I did with mine. Didn't smoke in the car, didn't smoke in the house, and carefully put them out, then threw away the filter separately.

Taxing those that are being responsible is just going to infuriate them and make them feel like doing the right thing is a wasted effort.
 
for every butt they tax I'm going to pitch 3 untaxed ones on the ground. I'm a spiteful asshole like that :D
 
Yeah, I was thinking of just walking through the city, and every butt I see in an ashtray, Im going to walk 5 paces and then throw it on the ground. Just so that person is getting their monies worth.
 
mcarb said:
Smokers in general are the most inconsiderate people around. I never understood the concept of "I'll just toss this anywhere. Hey look an ashtray three feet away, oh well I'm gonna throw it on the ground anyway."

I don't really have any sympathy for smokers. So what, SF removed trashcans. Does that make you toss your hamburger wrapper on the ground? No. You look for a garbage can. Then why the cig butt?

SF is smart about this. Instead of trying to further legislate where and how you can smoke (which I disagree with fully), they are saying "fine, we understand you pleople are too stupid and inconsiderate to take care fo yuor garbage. We'll charge you for the cleanup."
Click to expand...

You know it is of my opinion that you relax and use a little more discretion before making comments like this. How can you generalize a whole group of people whether their affiliation is by ethnicity, belief, or lifestyle as "most inconsiderate" and "stupid". It's that kind of thinking and attitue that continues to act as a catalyst at harboring bitterness between different groups.
Learn to have a little more compassion my friend.
 
It is damn hard to find a trash can in Tokyo, yet there is no litter.

People in that city actually take a little bit of pride in where they live and take care of their trash, without government funded garbage bins. :|
 
wazzuFreddo said:
It is damn hard to find a trash can in Tokyo, yet there is no litter.

People in that city actually take a little bit of pride in where they live and take care of their trash, without government funded garbage bins. :|
Click to expand...

Exactly.

My mother would have smacked me senseless for dumping rubbish on the ground, simply because there wasn't a trash-can within hands-reach.
 
RRR70 said:
Then they should charge all the fast food joints, take-out places, markets.
Click to expand...

Well they should! Maybe it's reasonable.
Some countries do it in Europe ! (kind of... they require the fast-food joints to take back every piece of can or trash bought from there)
 
Sure sure, but making it harder to find places to put your trash is not going to encourage compliance.

I'm not trying to justify it -- but from a practical standpoint, making things harder to do discourages them.
 
Perhaps they could spend a few bucks for ashtrays. Would that make it better?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top