Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: j_b who wrote (8392)	10/9/1998 10:17:00 AM
From: Machaon	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 67261

OT****smoking and addiction << ... you can't force people to take care of their health, and you shouldn't take away their responsibility for doing so.* >> I agree with this. But, also, we need a strong Surgeon General, etc. in order to enlighten the pubic on health hazards and benefits. Unfortunately, when we lost Elders, due to head-in-sand conservatives, we lost a gifted spokesman. << I guess I just have a problem with the idea that the cigarette companies need to play "fair". No one else does >> You know the typical answer to this. Let's take this one step further. A food company wants to place high levels of mercury in candy. Should they be allowed to do this? A water company wants to save money by not cleaning up waste water before they recycle it back into our drinking water. Another company wants to put crack cocaine in Spam. Worse than the above, a company wants to put a very addictive substance, nicotine, in a product that causes cancer and other lung and heart diseases. These products will be readily available to children. Should we allow this to happen? HEY! Get to work! Regards, Bob