|
|
Smoking
Jun 9, 2022 11:45:28 GMT
via mobile
Post by Lobster on Jun 9, 2022 11:45:28 GMT
www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-61718468Just read this plan to keep raising the smoking age by a year so that you'll eventually get people in their 30s, 40s and 50s being told they're too young to smoke. What a bloody stupid idea, and I say that as someone who has never smoked a cigarette! I think anti-smoking legislation has gone as far as it needs to now. We're at a point where it no longer affects anyone's quality of life apart from smokers themselves. Any further rules are just an infringement of people's personal choices and rights. Any other thoughts.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wortleyblue on Jun 9, 2022 12:14:48 GMT
As an ex smoker (gave up over 30 years ago) I know giving up is extremely difficult so anything to stop people starting has to be good but I think this idea is totally unworkable and would agree Lobster any further rules would be an infringement on peoples choices and rights. What we need is a concerted campaign to stop youngsters starting, continually raising the age of consent simply wont work after all we have underage smokers now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Tucker on Jun 9, 2022 13:09:41 GMT
I’d support something like this, as the aim should clearly be for an entirely smoke-free society. Incorrect to say it no longer affects other peoples quality of life too, given that young children etc. are often in homes with smokers, and it certainly would affect theirs.
Also causes massive costs and pressure to the NHS too.
In my experience too we have underage smokers because they get slightly older kids to buy them fags. This gradual increase cuts the possibility of this greatly.
|
|
|
|
Smoking
Jun 9, 2022 15:50:13 GMT
via mobile
Post by Firestick Frank on Jun 9, 2022 15:50:13 GMT
Socialist New Zealand are doing this.
It’s the right thing to do.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lobster on Jun 9, 2022 16:14:46 GMT
I’d support something like this, as the aim should clearly be for an entirely smoke-free society. I ncorrect to say it no longer affects other peoples quality of life too, given that young children etc. are often in homes with smokers, and it certainly would affect theirs. Also causes massive costs and pressure to the NHS too. In my experience too we have underage smokers because they get slightly older kids to buy them fags. This gradual increase cuts the possibility of this greatly. That's true but smoking indoors with children is all but illegal, and it is now illegal in cars with minors. I'd support stricter enforcement of that certainly.
Smoking isn't a good idea but I believe in a liberal society it should be up to individuals to make their own decisions, and indeed that should be the case with all drugs.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lobster on Jun 9, 2022 16:24:57 GMT
As an ex smoker (gave up over 30 years ago) I know giving up is extremely difficult so anything to stop people starting has to be good but I think this idea is totally unworkable and would agree Lobster any further rules would be an infringement on peoples choices and rights. What we need is a concerted campaign to stop youngsters starting, continually raising the age of consent simply wont work after all we have underage smokers now. I often think we're banging our heads against a brick wall by always going on about smoking being bad for you. For me, as big a deterrent as anything is the cost of it. Tell people what else they could be buying for the price of a 20-a-day habit.
I'm not sure those images on cigarette packets really work either. They're so graphic, they're hardly relatable, because most smokers don't end up with anything that visable.
|
|
|
|
Post by iandychesterfc on Jun 9, 2022 19:32:16 GMT
I'd be curious as to what the estimated cost is to the NHS vs how much is raised by taxing tobacco.
I'm sure i've read its a surplus, if not then taxes should raise to cover it. After that, leave people to choose how they want to live their lives ffs.
|
|
|
|
Post by iandychesterfc on Jun 9, 2022 19:40:59 GMT
FULL FACT it was who looked at this.
Do taxes on cigarettes bring in enough revenue to cover what smoking costs the government?
We know they bring in about £12 billion in direct tax revenues, although that doesn't count other contributions of the tobacco industry to total tax take (for instance income tax paid by employees).
And the cost side of this equation is even trickier to pin down.
Estimates suggest costs anywhere between £3 billion and £6 billion for NHS treatments in a given year. In the longer term the total cost might be lower, since some of those who die prematurely due to smoking might otherwise have gone on to cost the service even more money due to other health conditions.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lobster on Jun 9, 2022 22:53:19 GMT
FULL FACT it was who looked at this. Do taxes on cigarettes bring in enough revenue to cover what smoking costs the government? We know they bring in about £12 billion in direct tax revenues, although that doesn't count other contributions of the tobacco industry to total tax take (for instance income tax paid by employees). And the cost side of this equation is even trickier to pin down. Estimates suggest costs anywhere between £3 billion and £6 billion for NHS treatments in a given year. In the longer term the total cost might be lower, since some of those who die prematurely due to smoking might otherwise have gone on to cost the service even more money due to other health conditions. The same is supposedly true with alcohol. Yes, it's a considerable drain on healthcare and leads to a lot of crime, but the amount it brings in cancels that out many times over. Not surprising really when people base entire days, nights and holidays around drinking. Would towns even stay open after 8pm without booze? |
|
|
|
Post by Si on Jun 10, 2022 8:35:16 GMT
To be fair, kids these days seem more clued up about the risks of smoking, and the cost of them means that they aren't a worthy habit for them to take up. It used to be the trendy thing to spark a fag up, but most times I see people smoking outside a building on a cold wet day it just looks miserable. I'm not sure it needs any extra rules enforcing to be honest - and I'm sure any 30 year old who wants a fag can easily get hold of them even if in the eyes of the law they'd be too young, so it's not really enforceable either. Also opens the door for idiots to have a go at shopkeepers if they dared to ID fully grown adults for a pack of fags.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deva Chanter on Jun 10, 2022 14:57:17 GMT
FULL FACT it was who looked at this. Do taxes on cigarettes bring in enough revenue to cover what smoking costs the government? We know they bring in about £12 billion in direct tax revenues, although that doesn't count other contributions of the tobacco industry to total tax take (for instance income tax paid by employees). And the cost side of this equation is even trickier to pin down. Estimates suggest costs anywhere between £3 billion and £6 billion for NHS treatments in a given year. In the longer term the total cost might be lower, since some of those who die prematurely due to smoking might otherwise have gone on to cost the service even more money due to other health conditions. The same is supposedly true with alcohol. Yes, it's a considerable drain on healthcare and leads to a lot of crime, but the amount it brings in cancels that out many times over. Not surprising really when people base entire days, nights and holidays around drinking. Would towns even stay open after 8pm without booze? It also shows how utterly counter-productive it is to make drugs like cannabis illegal. Far less harmful than alcohol and cigarettes and yet all the money being raised buying it currently goes into the hands of dealers. Legalise it, regulate it, tax it. |
|
|
|
Post by iandychesterfc on Jun 13, 2022 9:02:33 GMT
The same is supposedly true with alcohol. Yes, it's a considerable drain on healthcare and leads to a lot of crime, but the amount it brings in cancels that out many times over. Not surprising really when people base entire days, nights and holidays around drinking. Would towns even stay open after 8pm without booze? It also shows how utterly counter-productive it is to make drugs like cannabis illegal. Far less harmful than alcohol and cigarettes and yet all the money being raised buying it currently goes into the hands of dealers. Legalise it, regulate it, tax it. personally agree. Professionally definitely disagree  |
|
