Tobacco Marketing

daltonr said:
My child abuse crime would apply only to people who routinely smoke in confined places with kids who are unable to speak for themselves or get up and go somewhere else. e.g. Those with kids strapped into baby seats in cars.
I was about five or six - I could hardly leave home and the smoke didn't respect room boundaries.
 
Chris said:
I stopped smoking 18 months ago and haven't touched one since.

I succumbed after 8 years – no willpower.





Don’t mean to be cruel but does the State not gain with early deaths of ordinary citizens – pensions, hospital care.

Lets face it, hospitals are chocker full of geriatrics who never smoked, being kept alive (some against their own will) for commercial reasons to exhaust their private health insurance.





What will the State coffers do if the excise on tobacco disappears ?
Measures are half baked - 21 years should be the legal age to purchase/use either tobacco or alcohol.


I was delighted with the Ban and have now packed up the booze totally which is by far a more serious health, social, domestic, law & order problem.

Nurse – turn off that noise, where’s me aspirin! ahh a little bit more morphine !
 
Furze said:
Lets face it, hospitals are chocker full of geriatrics who never smoked, being kept alive (some against their own will) for commercial reasons to exhaust their private health insurance.
I'll probably be lambasted for this again but ... that's a fairly sweeping generalisation so do you have any evidence to back that claim up?
 
Furze said:
Don’t mean to be cruel but does the State not gain with early deaths of ordinary citizens – pensions, hospital care.

Lets face it, hospitals are chocker full of geriatrics who never smoked, being kept alive (some against their own will) for commercial reasons to exhaust their private health insurance.

What will the State coffers do if the excise on tobacco disappears ?
Nope - Smokers are net cost to the economy, despite what [broken link removed].
 
RainyDay said:
Nope - Smokers are net cost to the economy, despite what [broken link removed].

Excellent article
However, no mention of the additional health costs etc that will be placed on public services with greater numbers surviving. Also assumes that the lost excise take will be replaced by responsilbe consumer spending.


Escape from Responsibility

“A government study in 1993 found that if the tax on cigarettes were to truly reflect smokers' actual spill-over effects, it would have to be cut . “


ClubMan said:
I'll probably be lambasted for this again but ... that's a fairly sweeping generalisation so do you have any evidence to back that claim up?

Fair enough but slightly de-generalised.
http://www.dohc.ie/publications/pdf/bedrept.pdf?direct=1



“The rate of bed day use in patients aged 65-74 and 75+ is significantly out of keeping with their proportions either in the general population or in the inpatient population. Children, who constitute 22% of the national population, comprise 16% of the inpatient population and required 9% of the bed days used.

Persons aged 65+, who constitute 11% of the national population and 27% of the inpatient population, consumed 46% of the bed days used.”
 
Furze said:
Excellent article
However, no mention of the additional health costs etc that will be placed on public services with greater numbers surviving. Also assumes that the lost excise take will be replaced by responsilbe consumer spending.
The [broken link removed] did indeed take this into account;

Public finance saved between 943 mil.CZK and 1 193 mil.CZK (realistic estimate:1 193 mil.CZK) from reduced health- care costs, savings on pensions and housing costs for the elderly --all related to the early mortality of smokers

Furze said:
Escape from Responsibility

“A government study in 1993 found that if the tax on cigarettes were to truly reflect smokers' actual spill-over effects, it would have to be cut . “
I'd really like to see that 1993 study, wouldn't you?
 
Such an easy target us smokers. I hope all you non smokers choke on all the smugness that you are clearly full of!

I pay more for life assurance due to my minor habit simply because the form asks if i smoke. There's no question like "Are you a fat slob who pigs out daily in fast food restaurants on double cheesburgers and greasy fries". I'm not saying smoking is healthy let me take a chance (in the open air). I get more crap in my lungs walking down Dame Street every day courtesy of Dublin Bus, and more dubious chemicals in my system from that dreaded Flouride the government has decided to mass medicate us with.

I agree with the pub ban , ban on indoor smoking in public places etc, but some of your contributions such as banning it on the street are bordering on obsessive! Don't tell me now that a whiff of smoke on the street is gonna cause passive smoking effects. If we get that bad, ban traffic first. Cough.
 
podgerodge said:
I get more crap in my lungs walking down Dame Street every day courtesy of Dublin Bus, and more dubious chemicals in my system from that dreaded Flouride the government has decided to mass medicate us with.

Sorry...but that's bordering on delusional.
 
Don't tell me now that a whiff of smoke on the street is gonna cause passive smoking effects. If we get that bad, ban traffic first. Cough.

No. Nothing to do with health. Just the stink and the litter.

relax , im only "letting off steam"!

Similarly with the smugness you hope we choke on.
Just letting of steam. ;)

It's fun to wind up the smokers who were against the ban by suggesting we might go further. I don't know where you stood on the issue before the ban but Jem was dead set against it, I like to get him going a bit every now and again. Keeps him on his toes.


I agree with your point about the Junk Food Question on Forms. But it is a little more difficult to ask a question on diet in a way that will get a straight answer. There's such a variety of diets.

I'm sure if they get actaurial data on specific eating patterns then it might make it's way onto the form.

-Rd
 
Back
Top