3 ms·
> Unless you're already addicted, nearly anything under $5 is more luxurious than a cigarette. Completely subjective. I'm not sure the purpose of your post. Ar
by kodablah 9y ago
> Unless you're already addicted, nearly anything under $5 is more luxurious than a cigarette.
Completely subjective. I'm not sure the purpose of your post. Are you telling everyone what is more luxurious to them or just giving your singular opinion for yourself? Assuming the latter, it appears to add little to the discussion.
- chc 9y agoI'm offering a reasoned analysis of what the actual effects of smoking a cigarette are and whether those things are widely considered luxurious. If you're addicted, sure, smoking offers a great luxury in taking the money off your back for a while. If you're not addicted and don't have some other physical need (e.g. untreated mental illness), it offers a pretty mild buzz and a lot of negatives. But regardless, wouldn't this be more appropriate as a reply to the parent, who made the initial claim that cigarettes are luxurious and didn't present any reasons for it?
- lukas099 9y agoThe assertion which GP responded to -- that cigarettes are luxurious -- is completely subjective as well.