welshbairn Posted June 26, 2014 Share Posted June 26, 2014 Does that go for everything, from alcohol, tobacco to heron or crystal meth? No, anyone eating heron is a monster. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Moonster Posted June 26, 2014 Share Posted June 26, 2014 Does that go for everything, from alcohol, tobacco to heron or crystal meth? Don't really want to go down this road again on here but yes, banning these things hasn't worked/isn't working. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Nooka Posted June 26, 2014 Share Posted June 26, 2014 The only way we will know for sure is if they ring fence the tax from tobacco products and use it only to treat smokers on the NHS. I’d fully expect this to run at a surplus so all smokers should get a tax rebate every year whilst the greetin faced smoke Nazis will probably have to pay an excess for their treatment. Happy days! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted June 26, 2014 Share Posted June 26, 2014 The only way we will know for sure is if they ring fence the tax from tobacco products and use it only to treat smokers on the NHS. I’d fully expect this to run at a surplus so all smokers should get a tax rebate every year whilst the greetin faced smoke Nazis will probably have to pay an excess for their treatment. Happy days! Wait, don't us non smokers pay our NI? or does the ring fence money from tobacco only come from smokers in employments who don't already claim benefits? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Nooka Posted June 26, 2014 Share Posted June 26, 2014 (edited) Wait, don't us non smokers pay our NI? or does the ring fence money from tobacco only come from smokers in employments who don't already claim benefits? I never mentioned anything about NI contributions, there are many people that seem to think smokers take more from the NHS than they put in this would prove that one way or the other and lets not get into the unemployed wasters argument, they would be a burden whether they smoked or not. I'm confident that the £6.00 tax on every pack of cigarettes I buy would more than cover a lifetime of NHS bills. And that is without taking into consideration the myriad of other taxes I pay. Is there any other product where over 75% of the cost is tax? Edited June 26, 2014 by Tommy Nooka 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McB Posted June 26, 2014 Share Posted June 26, 2014 Leaving aside the fact that there is no way that this - even if voted in favour of by the BMA - will become government policy (see the dragging of feet re. plain cigarette packing etc.) it's a blatantly stupid idea. Prohibition of something doesn't stop people wanting it, or stop people finding out ways to get their hands on it, or stop people fucking themselves up with it. Whilst as a non-smoker I supported the ban on smoking in enclosed public places I can't get my head around this. Inform people that cigarettes can f**k you up, give them resources to stop smoking if they want to, and then leave them to it. Prohibition is not the answer. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lou Brusch Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 Next we'll be banning x-rays for cats with black fur 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invergowrie arab Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 The tax revenue argument is a weird one. People aren't going to stash the money they save from not smoking under their mattresses, it will still get spent and bring in tax revenue. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 Is there any other product where over 75% of the cost is tax? Yes. Your mum. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LinkinFighter Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 I'd ban tobacco and alcohol tomorrow if I had the chance. I think that report is spot on with regards productivity actually but obviously as a smoker you feel differently. Yeah driving it underground and letting the gangsters sell it on the black market will help greatly. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falcor Roar Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 Yeah driving it underground and letting the gangsters sell it on the black market will help greatly. I agree, the war on other illegal drugs is going really well too. I think the role of modern governments should be to restrict peoples personal liberties and to make little effort to try to control unimportant and completely stable things like say the economy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsr Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 People can smoke if they want but it should be their own responsibility to make sure it doesn't negatively impact anyone else. Ideally they should ask if anyone in the vicinity minds if they smoke, and move elsewhere if someone objects. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsr Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 Just out of interest, would those people who think passive smoking is harmless be happy to leave their newborn child next to a crowd of smokers for say half an hour? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweet Pete Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 Smoking's no' very popular on here, is it? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lou Brusch Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 Smoking's no' very popular on here, is it? Aye, only because all us über health fanatics are the ones that are biting 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottsdad Posted July 30, 2021 Share Posted July 30, 2021 Let's ban the sale of tobacco to anyone born after 2005 Guardian article - plus a bonus bump of an old thread. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tamthebam Posted July 30, 2021 Share Posted July 30, 2021 I take it all those patient 2000s kids can now get lung cancer as they're 21. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin_Nevis Posted July 30, 2021 Share Posted July 30, 2021 1 hour ago, scottsdad said: Let's ban the sale of tobacco to anyone born after 2005 Guardian article - plus a bonus bump of an old thread. Is that even an article? It looks like some moonhowler's letter in 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miguel Sanchez Posted July 30, 2021 Share Posted July 30, 2021 New Zealand is trying to do something similar: An end to cigarettes? New Zealand aims to create smoke-free generation | New Zealand | The Guardian Quote New Zealand has announced a suite of proposals aimed at outlawing smoking for the next generation and moving the country closer to its goal of being smoke-free by 2025. The plans include the gradual increase of the legal smoking age, which could extend to a ban on the sale of cigarettes and tobacco products to anyone born after 2004, making smoking effectively illegal for that generation. Also under consideration was a significant reduction in the level of nicotine allowed in tobacco products, prohibiting filters, setting a minimum price for tobacco, and restricting the locations where tobacco and cigarettes can be sold. “We need a new approach,” Associate Health Minister Dr Ayesha Verrall said on Thursday, announcing the changes. “About 4,500 New Zealanders die every year from tobacco, and we need to make accelerated progress to be able to reach that goal [of Smokefree 2025]. Business-as-usual without a tobacco control program won’t get us there.” Good. Get it and smokers to f**k. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.