On the particular moment of Thu, 6 Dec 2007 18:47:50 -0000 in relation
to Mary's disappointingly immaculate rumpy pumpy, "Andy Pandy"
put forth:
>
>"Doesn't Frequently Mop"
>wrote in message news:nr5el3dt8ub0ufidi9jposfv3f7lehalbk@4ax.com...
>> I think that cigarettes should be banned, because they have no
>> benefits, and numerous risks.
>
>Really? Non smokers would have to pay more tax if they were banned,
>since cigarette tax vastly outweighs the cost of treating smoking
>related diseases (in the UK at least), and they save money in
>pensions, treating age related diseases etc as smokers die younger.
>
>So there's a couple of benefits.
That's one benefit, not two.
Here, let me give you a starting point. Please read it before going
any further:
http://gea2000.org/tobacco/wb/wb03.shtml
>I guess some people want to ban tourism, as travel produces CO2 and
>they don't see any benefits. But some people are closed minded like
>that.
>
>> I'm guessing a cogent response won't come to this.
>
>Tough. You've got 2.
Nothing you have offered has been convincing nor believable,
considering it's based for the most part on fantasy.
--
---
DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com
---
-- |