[bide_your_time]

Think of it as a knob head tax

[EonBlueApocalypse]

(Original post by DaveSmith99)
Which is more than covered by the tax and duty on tobacco.

I might be wrong because I haven't done any research but surely if this was the case then getting people to stop drinking and smoking wouldn't be within the government interest; I know the government can be stupid at times but this is basic maths here.

[Ari Ben Canaan]

(Original post by DaveSmith99)
Which is more than covered by the tax and duty on tobacco.

You're not taking into account the non-monetary effects of smoking. I'm an asthmatic... Whenever I used to get too close to a proverbial 'chimney' I would get an asthmatic attack.

That led to increased healthcare bills for myself and the fact that I, as a child, could not swim and eat certain foods.

Will your taxes and duties give me back my childhood ?

There's a lot more social effects on the people around you... So think about it.

[illusionz]

(Original post by tehFrance)
You realise that the NHS is basically paid for many times over by smokers, right?

That's just not true lol.

[Pride]

(Original post by wilko1991)
It's totally ****. I've been forced to quit because of the ridiculous costs of smoking. I am so jealous of the rich who can smoke to their hearts content.

EDIT: was going to say that I used to smoke rollies but went back to normal fags for a while when I was working in the summer. Then couldn't revert back to rollies when I started uni again. Had to quit. So ****.

this is the objective of excise duty on cigarettes. Now it's a whole different argument whether it's right for the government to do that, but they have succeeded in what they wanted, which is to raise the price so high, that people can't afford to smoke.

[DaveSmith99]

(Original post by EonBlueApocalypse)
I might be wrong because I haven't done any research but surely if this was the case then getting people to stop drinking and smoking wouldn't be within the government interest; I know the government can be stupid at times but this is basic maths here.

Tobacco is a cash cow for the government, they make an absolute killing out of smokers.

(Original post by Ari Ben Canaan)
You're not taking into account the non-monetary effects of smoking. I'm an asthmatic... Whenever I used to get too close to a proverbial 'chimney' I would get an asthmatic attack.

That led to increased healthcare bills for myself and the fact that I, as a child, could not swim and eat certain foods.

Will your taxes and duties give me back my childhood ?

There's a lot more social effects on the people around you... So think about it.

I know very little about asthma im afraid, even outside if you walk past someone smoking it sets of an attack? I'm also a little confused as to how other people smoking prevents you from swimming or eating?

[Pride]

(Original post by DaveSmith99)
Which is more than covered by the tax and duty on tobacco.

wouldn't it be better if you paid the tax, and didn't need to use the NHS for your heart treatment? I mean, yes you put so much money in, but so what? Why do you have to spend it?

[Arturo Bandini]

(Original post by EonBlueApocalypse)
I might be wrong because I haven't done any research but surely if this was the case then getting people to stop drinking and smoking wouldn't be within the government interest; I know the government can be stupid at times but this is basic maths here.

It's definitely true. In 2010 UK smokers spent £17.6 billion on tobacco, the Treasury earned £11.1 billion in revenue from tobacco duties for the financial year 2010-2011 (including VAT). Smoking costs the National Health Service (NHS) approximately £2.7 billion a year for treating diseases caused by smoking. (http://www.ash.org.uk/files/documents/ASH_95.pdf)

Maybe the government actually cares a little bit about peoples lives and health enough that they're willing to sacrifice some income to save people?

(Original post by Ari Ben Canaan)
You're not taking into account the non-monetary effects of smoking. I'm an asthmatic... Whenever I used to get too close to a proverbial 'chimney' I would get an asthmatic attack.

That led to increased healthcare bills for myself and the fact that I, as a child, could not swim and eat certain foods.

Will your taxes and duties give me back my childhood ?

There's a lot more social effects on the people around you... So think about it.

He's not taking into account social effects because he was responding to your post about monetary effects? You claimed that non-smoking taxpayers had to cover smoking related illnesses and he said they don't, which is true.

[DaveSmith99]

(Original post by Pride)
wouldn't it be better if you paid the tax, and didn't need to use the NHS for your heart treatment? I mean, yes you put so much money in, but so what? Why do you have to spend it?

Well if I didn't buy the tobacco I wouldn't be paying the tax and wouldn't be putting the money in?

You post doesn't make much sense, it sounds to me like you are suggesting that smokers deliberately get heart disease for the purpose of getting some treatment out of the money they have put in?

[TCD23]

Look it's all good, you want to harm your body, I'm going to guess that your also going to want free treatment on the NHS once you get cancer right? To be frank cigarette prices should be higher in order to cover the costs that hard earning working men and women have to pay whilst you cough your lungs up. Its either that or you opt out of the NHS and sign on for having to pay.

[GottaLovePhysics! :)]

This will just tempt people to buy on the black market. I mean why buy a pack of 20 for £8 when you can it for £2?
The only saving grace for the government is that most people dont have the knowledge to buy for such a price.

[DaveSmith99]

(Original post by TCD23)
Look it's all good, you want to harm your body, I'm going to guess that your also going to want free treatment on the NHS once you get cancer right? To be frank cigarette prices should be higher in order to cover the costs that hard earning working men and women have to pay whilst you cough your lungs up. Its either that or you opt out of the NHS and sign on for having to pay.

[Pride]

(Original post by DaveSmith99)
Well if I didn't buy the tobacco I wouldn't be paying the tax and wouldn't be putting the money in?

You post doesn't make much sense, it sounds to me like you are suggesting that smokers deliberately get heart disease for the purpose of getting some treatment out of the money they have put in?

I'm just saying that just because you put more money in, doesn't mean you should spend it.

A rich person will be taxed loads, doesn't mean it's acceptable for him to smoke and come in for expensive bypass surgery. Regardless of who put the money in, treating smokers is still an annoying waste of resources, and there is loads of education out there to get people not to start smoking.

[DaveSmith99]

(Original post by GottaLovePhysics! :))
This will just tempt people to buy on the black market. I mean why buy a pack of 20 for £8 when you can it for £2?
The only saving grace for the government is that most people dont have the knowledge to buy for such a price.

Have you ever tried black market baccy? It's rank, I have friends who bought some, £6 for 50g of goldern virginia, they had one roll up then threw it away.

[Mother_Russia]

(Original post by UnknownPerson)
Dont see people complaining about rising condom prices

Who actually pays for condoms anyway?

It's ridiculous. I remember when I used to buy a 20 pack and hand over £5....and get change..

I smoke tobacco, and I have a cigarette case so I roll them before I go anyway and I normally manage to buy a lot of tobacco duty free, so hardly buy any here. Way to go.

[Shani]

Smoking does not cost any money to non-smokers. In fact, smokers are subsidising the tax non-smokers pay.

So fine, tell people to stop smoking because it's bad for their health, but don't pretend smokers cost non-smokers any money. They pay for their medical care and much more in the tax they pay.

[DaveSmith99]

(Original post by Pride)
I'm just saying that just because you put more money in, doesn't mean you should spend it.

A rich person will be taxed loads, doesn't mean it's acceptable for him to smoke and come in for expensive bypass surgery. Regardless of who put the money in, treating smokers is still an annoying waste of resources, and there is loads of education out there to get people not to start smoking.

Should we treat alcoholics? Binge drinkers? People who enjoy the occasional glass of wine? People who injure themselves playing sports? Over weight people? People who are injured in car accidents when speeding? People who get washed out to sea?


I don't want to live in a country where we deny healthcare to those in need because of personal decisions they make in their lives.

[Arturo Bandini]

(Original post by TCD23)
Look it's all good, you want to harm your body, I'm going to guess that your also going to want free treatment on the NHS once you get cancer right? To be frank cigarette prices should be higher in order to cover the costs that hard earning working men and women have to pay whilst you cough your lungs up. Its either that or you opt out of the NHS and sign on for having to pay.

In 2010 UK smokers spent £17.6 billion on tobacco, the Treasury earned £11.1 billion in revenue from tobacco duties for the financial year 2010-2011 (including VAT). Smoking costs the National Health Service (NHS) approximately £2.7 billion a year for treating diseases caused by smoking. (http://www.ash.org.uk/files/documents/ASH_95.pdf)

[cambio wechsel]

(Original post by TCD23)
Look it's all good, you want to harm your body, I'm going to guess that your also going to want free treatment on the NHS once you get cancer right? To be frank cigarette prices should be higher in order to cover the costs that hard earning working men and women have to pay whilst you cough your lungs up. Its either that or you opt out of the NHS and sign on for having to pay.

Think of all the pension payments that prematurely dying smokers don't pick up.

[Pride]

(Original post by DaveSmith99)
Should we treat alcoholics? Binge drinkers? People who enjoy the occasional glass of wine? People who injure themselves playing sports? Over weight people? People who are injured in car accidents when speeding? People who get washed out to sea?


I don't want to live in a country where we deny healthcare to those in need because of personal decisions they make in their lives.

you make a valid point, and I was saying that on another thread. I was just countering that idea that it's acceptable because of all the excise duty smokers pay. I wholeheartedly disagree.

It's acceptable because we all make mistakes, and it's not up to us to judge and exclude people. These people just need treatment.