Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Uk Debate Mk 2, the UK's liveliest political and social debate site.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Wtf?; Rolling Tobacco
Topic Started: Dec 27 2016, 06:29 PM (143 Views)
ranger121
Member Avatar
Administrator
[ *  *  *  * ]
OK, it does appear that the Government/NHS/Health-Nazis conspiracy to rid this country of the scourge of the tobacco plant is running out of steam.

Horrendously stupid tax rises putting packets of cigs up past the £10 mark and putting ugly pictures on the packets clearly is NOT a deterrent to the determined smoker.

Severely restricting the places where one can consume tobacco hasn't worked either.

Their current wheeze is to cover the whole of the packet with a photograph of what is described as 'lung surgery' and the blatant lie that 'smoking causes 9 out of 10 lung cancers'.

The brand name is limited to a very small legend on the packet, barely noticeable, and more to the point the Government has introduced a minimum sale of 30g, compared to the usual 25g, which has increased the price from around £8/9 to £11.50 a go.

1. If I posted pictures like those on this packet on the net, various websites would delete the pix and no doubt ban me.

2. We've had these silly pictures and health warnings on packets for years. It does absolutely nothing to convince the average smoker to beg the NHS for forgiveness and ask for help to quit. Pictures of cancerous mouths and other bloody body parts don't make people quit because guess what? People say, "It won't happen to me, and if it does, it's my fault, my responsibility, and nobody is forcing me to smoke."

3. Why introduce a minimum size pack? Is it to increase the price via the back door? What possible benefit does it have?

I have no doubt that my mate up the road will be booking a trip to Belgium very soon. 50g for £9 is now a frigging GREAT deal.


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
But the public demand that they are seen to be doing something
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ranger121
Member Avatar
Administrator
[ *  *  *  * ]
Sales of tobacco pouches and cigarette cases is the place to be on eBay.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Curious Cdn
Member Avatar
Frozen Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
50g for £9 is now a frigging GREAT deal.


Holy cripes that's a lot of money for cigarettes!
Edited by Curious Cdn, Dec 27 2016, 08:58 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ranger121
Member Avatar
Administrator
[ *  *  *  * ]
Curious Cdn
Dec 27 2016, 08:57 PM
50g for £9 is now a frigging GREAT deal.


Holy cripes that's a lot of money for cigarettes!
It certainly is.

Transport across the channel or North Sea and road costs plus a tiny margin quickly inflates the price from €5 to £9.

;-)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jessamy Bride
Member Avatar
Regular Pub Goer
[ *  *  * ]
On a pragmatic note.....I suppose someone has worked all the figures out.

ie the loss in tax revenue as people give up ....the increase in NHS costs as more people live longer and require more care.

Not a smoker but don't really like the way that smokers are mad to be social paraiahs.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
johnofgwent
Member Avatar
It .. It is GREEN !!
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Dec 27 2016, 08:41 PM
But the public demand that they are seen to be doing something
DO they ?

DO they REALLY ?

As with the EU referendum debate, where I never actually met anyone who said they were voting to remain, I have yet to meet, face to face,a single person who thinks we have not gone too far with our tobacco nazism.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
johnofgwent
Member Avatar
It .. It is GREEN !!
[ *  *  *  * ]
Jessamy Bride
Dec 27 2016, 11:34 PM
On a pragmatic note.....I suppose someone has worked all the figures out.

ie the loss in tax revenue as people give up ....the increase in NHS costs as more people live longer and require more care.

Not a smoker but don't really like the way that smokers are mad to be social paraiahs.
Au Contraire

As I pointed out several times on here, I came across a documentary programme done a while ago in which the guys who work out what Norwich Union's private pension fund premiums should be, sat down and did some calculations ...

According to them at the time of the report, which was I admit when Norwich Union was still Norwich Union, not Aviva...:-

1) People like me who are overweight but still able to walk at least a mile or two around a town centre with a hill or two (and that was a critical caveat) will probably die between three to five five years earlier than they would if they were not so obese, and their main drain on the NHS will be a knee, or a hip replacement in their near-retirement or post-retirement years. As such they were expected to be a net drain on the NHS of between 10 and 20% more than they would be through costs of just getting old until they died.

Smokers will die at least ten ad often more years earlier than they otherwise would, many will die long before their retirement pensions are exhausted, some before they even start paying out, thus bringing a nice little bonus of 40% of the fund to the treasury, and the tax paid at the time of the report by smokers covered I cannot recall now if it were four fold, or more than that, the cost to the NHS of treating not just the diseases suffered by smokers, but ***EVERYONE*** treated for that disease, be they smoker or not.

And the main drain upon the NHS ? The joggers, the gym goers, the exercise fanatics. While many would indeed end up the fittest looking corpse in the cemetery when their time came, the fact is most of these people would, thanks to their "healthy" lifestyle, live to a ripe old age, but do so for at least a decade, maybe more, as a demented vegetable, consuming vast amounts of NHS resource, as their bodies would take years to succumb to the dementia their brains would suffer.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
johnofgwent
Dec 27 2016, 11:53 PM
Jessamy Bride
Dec 27 2016, 11:34 PM
On a pragmatic note.....I suppose someone has worked all the figures out.

ie the loss in tax revenue as people give up ....the increase in NHS costs as more people live longer and require more care.

Not a smoker but don't really like the way that smokers are mad to be social paraiahs.
Au Contraire

As I pointed out several times on here, I came across a documentary programme done a while ago in which the guys who work out what Norwich Union's private pension fund premiums should be, sat down and did some calculations ...

According to them at the time of the report, which was I admit when Norwich Union was still Norwich Union, not Aviva...:-

1) People like me who are overweight but still able to walk at least a mile or two around a town centre with a hill or two (and that was a critical caveat) will probably die between three to five five years earlier than they would if they were not so obese, and their main drain on the NHS will be a knee, or a hip replacement in their near-retirement or post-retirement years. As such they were expected to be a net drain on the NHS of between 10 and 20% more than they would be through costs of just getting old until they died.

Smokers will die at least ten ad often more years earlier than they otherwise would, many will die long before their retirement pensions are exhausted, some before they even start paying out, thus bringing a nice little bonus of 40% of the fund to the treasury, and the tax paid at the time of the report by smokers covered I cannot recall now if it were four fold, or more than that, the cost to the NHS of treating not just the diseases suffered by smokers, but ***EVERYONE*** treated for that disease, be they smoker or not.

And the main drain upon the NHS ? The joggers, the gym goers, the exercise fanatics. While many would indeed end up the fittest looking corpse in the cemetery when their time came, the fact is most of these people would, thanks to their "healthy" lifestyle, live to a ripe old age, but do so for at least a decade, maybe more, as a demented vegetable, consuming vast amounts of NHS resource, as their bodies would take years to succumb to the dementia their brains would suffer.
The revenue that the treasury receives from tobacco and alcohol consumption/purchasing is no small amount, should everyone stop both of the "oh so very bad nasty habits" where do you suppose the chancellor would look next for the monies to replace that revenue?

I wonder what the do gooders and lifestyle fucking know alls would say then when they are hit in the pocket because they have got their way?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
johnofgwent
Dec 27 2016, 11:40 PM
Steve K
Dec 27 2016, 08:41 PM
But the public demand that they are seen to be doing something
DO they ?

DO they REALLY ?

As with the EU referendum debate, where I never actually met anyone who said they were voting to remain, I have yet to meet, face to face,a single person who thinks we have not gone too far with our tobacco nazism.

Maybe they give you a wide berth John

When the topic comes up I see many that keep quiet or say they like pubs now (of course they still rarely actually go to them).

It's the endless cycle of tabloid inspired public will that promotes simplistic solutions to far more complex issues. Heroin use, Dangerous Dogs, Drink Driving, Fat kids, Lung Cancer etc etc the pressure builds on politicians to do something. So they do the most obvious 80% solution. Still leaves huge issues. And if you make too many 20% of society think it's against them then fairly soon over 50% just hate all government.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Rich
Dec 28 2016, 01:17 AM
johnofgwent
Dec 27 2016, 11:53 PM
Jessamy Bride
Dec 27 2016, 11:34 PM
On a pragmatic note.....I suppose someone has worked all the figures out.
ie the loss in tax revenue as people give up ....the increase in NHS costs as more people live longer and require more care.
Not a smoker but don't really like the way that smokers are mad to be social paraiahs.
Au Contraire
As I pointed out several times on here, I came across a documentary programme done a while ago in which the guys who work out what Norwich Union's private pension fund premiums should be, sat down and did some calculations ...
According to them at the time of the report, which was I admit when Norwich Union was still Norwich Union, not Aviva...:-
1) People like me who are overweight but still able to walk at least a mile or two around a town centre with a hill or two (and that was a critical caveat) will probably die between three to five five years earlier than they would if they were not so obese, and their main drain on the NHS will be a knee, or a hip replacement in their near-retirement or post-retirement years. As such they were expected to be a net drain on the NHS of between 10 and 20% more than they would be through costs of just getting old until they died.

Smokers will die at least ten ad often more years earlier than they otherwise would, many will die long before their retirement pensions are exhausted, some before they even start paying out, thus bringing a nice little bonus of 40% of the fund to the treasury, and the tax paid at the time of the report by smokers covered I cannot recall now if it were four fold, or more than that, the cost to the NHS of treating not just the diseases suffered by smokers, but ***EVERYONE*** treated for that disease, be they smoker or not.
And the main drain upon the NHS ? The joggers, the gym goers, the exercise fanatics. While many would indeed end up the fittest looking corpse in the cemetery when their time came, the fact is most of these people would, thanks to their "healthy" lifestyle, live to a ripe old age, but do so for at least a decade, maybe more, as a demented vegetable, consuming vast amounts of NHS resource, as their bodies would take years to succumb to the dementia their brains would suffer.
The revenue that the treasury receives from tobacco and alcohol consumption/purchasing is no small amount, should everyone stop both of the "oh so very bad nasty habits" where do you suppose the chancellor would look next for the monies to replace that revenue?
I wonder what the do gooders and lifestyle fucking know alls would say then when they are hit in the pocket because they have got their way?
I think many people have already been hit, try adding 20% VAT onto a heavy car repair bill. £500 becomes £600.

Edited by C-too, Dec 28 2016, 08:31 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lewis
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
ranger121
Dec 27 2016, 06:29 PM
OK, it does appear that the Government/NHS/Health-Nazis conspiracy to rid this country of the scourge of the tobacco plant is running out of steam.

Horrendously stupid tax rises putting packets of cigs up past the £10 mark and putting ugly pictures on the packets clearly is NOT a deterrent to the determined smoker.

Severely restricting the places where one can consume tobacco hasn't worked either.

Their current wheeze is to cover the whole of the packet with a photograph of what is described as 'lung surgery' and the blatant lie that 'smoking causes 9 out of 10 lung cancers'.

The brand name is limited to a very small legend on the packet, barely noticeable, and more to the point the Government has introduced a minimum sale of 30g, compared to the usual 25g, which has increased the price from around £8/9 to £11.50 a go.

1. If I posted pictures like those on this packet on the net, various websites would delete the pix and no doubt ban me.

2. We've had these silly pictures and health warnings on packets for years. It does absolutely nothing to convince the average smoker to beg the NHS for forgiveness and ask for help to quit. Pictures of cancerous mouths and other bloody body parts don't make people quit because guess what? People say, "It won't happen to me, and if it does, it's my fault, my responsibility, and nobody is forcing me to smoke."

3. Why introduce a minimum size pack? Is it to increase the price via the back door? What possible benefit does it have?

I have no doubt that my mate up the road will be booking a trip to Belgium very soon. 50g for £9 is now a frigging GREAT deal.


I don't smoke but totally agree with you. Such punitive taxes only increase smuggling and I read recently that more than 60% of rolling baccy is smuggled in.
Edited by Lewis, Dec 31 2016, 10:34 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Lewis
Dec 31 2016, 10:32 PM
ranger121
Dec 27 2016, 06:29 PM
OK, it does appear that the Government/NHS/Health-Nazis conspiracy to rid this country of the scourge of the tobacco plant is running out of steam.

Horrendously stupid tax rises putting packets of cigs up past the £10 mark and putting ugly pictures on the packets clearly is NOT a deterrent to the determined smoker.

Severely restricting the places where one can consume tobacco hasn't worked either.

Their current wheeze is to cover the whole of the packet with a photograph of what is described as 'lung surgery' and the blatant lie that 'smoking causes 9 out of 10 lung cancers'.

The brand name is limited to a very small legend on the packet, barely noticeable, and more to the point the Government has introduced a minimum sale of 30g, compared to the usual 25g, which has increased the price from around £8/9 to £11.50 a go.

1. If I posted pictures like those on this packet on the net, various websites would delete the pix and no doubt ban me.

2. We've had these silly pictures and health warnings on packets for years. It does absolutely nothing to convince the average smoker to beg the NHS for forgiveness and ask for help to quit. Pictures of cancerous mouths and other bloody body parts don't make people quit because guess what? People say, "It won't happen to me, and if it does, it's my fault, my responsibility, and nobody is forcing me to smoke."

3. Why introduce a minimum size pack? Is it to increase the price via the back door? What possible benefit does it have?

I have no doubt that my mate up the road will be booking a trip to Belgium very soon. 50g for £9 is now a frigging GREAT deal.


I don't smoke but totally agree with you. Such punitive taxes only increase smuggling and I read recently that more than 60% of rolling baccy is smuggled in.
One has to wonder how much (if any) contraband comes in with the so called asylum seekers.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Fully Featured & Customizable Free Forums
Learn More · Register Now
« Previous Topic · General Discussions · Next Topic »
Add Reply