WhiteRoseKillie Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Yes it is but thanks for your input. Just one of the various summaries available online. Feel free to have a wee rant about the Exchange report - it certainly gave me a laugh. The only way they could try and make the cost to the country (country, note, not NHS - even ASH can't twist figures higher than half the revenue income) more than the income was by factoring in potential productivity lost through smokers dying earlier - without, of course, factoring in the savings on pensions/benefits and the cost of treating age-related disorders. 2.9bn lost in productivity because of cigarette breaks! Because no non-smoker ever has a break, or sits around talking bollox - ever. Just think about that figure. 2.9bn. All down to dirty smokers. Where are all these places where smokers get extra breaks? If anything, there's a massive decrease in places such as my work, where no smoking has been the rule for years - we can't even take tobacco onsite. Oh, and on our other wee favourite - alcohol-related treatment costs the NHS more than tobacco does, when you compare like-to like figures. By which I mean the real figures related to treatment, not nonsense like the Exchange piece I referred to above: and I've never seen anyone get a kicking from some thug in a Lambert-fuelled rage. I've always said - as a smoker - grow some fucking balls and ban tobacco. There's nothing more annoying than some pissed-up wee know-all banging on about the damage caused by tobacco smoking. You want to make the country healthier? Ban alcohol, and internal combustion engines while you're at it. Both of which cause more health concerns directly, and a shitload more indirectly, than cigarettes ever have. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Cost to the NHS (According to ASH) is £2.7bln. Tax revenue from tobacco > £12bln. So in all fairness your original statement is just wrong, the NHS cost is far less than the tax revenue. A 2010 study put the total cost of smoking at £13.74 bln but included items such as £4.1bln in lost productivity from early death and did include any savings from early death such as State pension, long term care, reduced un-employment benefits etc. So a rather biased study by all accounts. Beat me to it, Strichener, but that Exchange report is fucking laughable. 30% of the cost to the country caused by smokers is due to them being dead. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 The best doctor I ever had was struck off the register for basically handing methadone out to drug addicts when he wasn't entitled to do so or something like that. Can't judge a book by its cover. Dr Charles Miller was a fine doctor, and here's such an example: Link. Every doctor I've seen since seems to follow a paint by numbers catalogue of questions rather than actually looking into your symptoms. I don't care how they look tbh, as long as they look after me in the correct manner. PS. I'm not a drug addict or addicted to methadone! ^^^ addicted to methadone. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 I am a healthcare professional in a private hospital God help the rich! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mid-table Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Pete was into all kind of shit tbf.It was all just research for an, as yet, unpublished book though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 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. But you would of course first admit that you are wrong when stating that it costs the NHS more to treat than is raised in taxes. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lex Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Great idea. Anything that reduces the likelihood of me getting a waft of someones second hand cigarette smoke is a winner in my book. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross. Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 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. Aye, but you're a polis, you're bound to be a heavy handed, authoritarian c**t.... Seriously though, prohibition doesn't solve a thing. Attitudes need to change but banning booze and fags won't do that, all it will do is open up yet another black market and leave the exchequer several billion poorer. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Disagree when you take into account health problems such as colds/ flu/ strokes etc that brings up the cost. I refer you to the link in my post #46. Feel free to come up with a list of diseases that non-smokers are immune to, to go along with the extra breaks smokers get in order to lower productivity. Don't forget those sneaky smokers who fiddle the country by dying earlier as well! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Disagree when you take into account health problems such as colds/ flu/ strokes etc that brings up the cost. Of course you will have some research to back up this assertion that the cost is greater than the tax take? Even the anti-smoking gestapo known as ASH cannot justify a statement like this. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 This is brilliant news. Anything that cuts down on the number of smelly minks invading my space with their foul stench is a winner in my book. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gav-ffc Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Smoking is disgusting. Stop selling them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 (edited) I wouldn't ban smoking, but I would make sure any smokers are shunned from society. Banned from voting, banned from public transport, banned public events including public services, after death banned from being buried within a cemetery, bodies carted off to some island and left in a landfill. etc... Edited June 25, 2014 by Enrico Annoni 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audaces Fortuna Juvat Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 So, you're undecided? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hillonearth Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 A lot of folk do a lot of things I don't agree with and offend me to some extent, but ultimately they're free to make their own decisions and their own mistakes as long as it's within the law. I'd be more concerned with the Nuremberg Laws Reenactment Society type stuff in this thread than somebody sparking up a fag in front of me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audaces Fortuna Juvat Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 I hate smoking, but it's up each individual if they want to smoke. As long as they stand well away from me! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mid-table Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 I think it's a great idea, but how are the shopkeepers going to know who was born after 8pm and who was born before? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killiepiemuncher Posted June 26, 2014 Share Posted June 26, 2014 Only way to stop it is make fags £20+ a pack. With and here's the clever part, every 100th cig manufactured should have a wee bit of C4 TNT in it. Just enough to blow a couple of fingers or a nose off. Make it a wee bit more interesting for smokers, a wee gamble. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Moonster Posted June 26, 2014 Share Posted June 26, 2014 I'd ban tobacco and alcohol tomorrow if I had the chance. Why just specifically these two? Isn't there an obesity problem? Should we ban tasty, fatty foods too? Banning alcohol worked a treat the last time, what would you do differently this time? If people enjoy smoking until their lungs give up then let them do it. If people want to drink themselves into oblivion then let them do it. If people want to eat themselves into an early grave then let them do it. If any of these people want help to stop doing any of the above then we should be there to help them. I don't think the government (or anyone for that matter) should be able to dictate what me or you put into our bodies. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted June 26, 2014 Share Posted June 26, 2014 Why just specifically these two? Isn't there an obesity problem? Should we ban tasty, fatty foods too? Banning alcohol worked a treat the last time, what would you do differently this time? If people enjoy smoking until their lungs give up then let them do it. If people want to drink themselves into oblivion then let them do it. If people want to eat themselves into an early grave then let them do it. If any of these people want help to stop doing any of the above then we should be there to help them. I don't think the government (or anyone for that matter) should be able to dictate what me or you put into our bodies. Does that go for everything, from alcohol, tobacco to heron or crystal meth? 0 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.