what would the effect be on the economy if smoking was banned?

Answer 1

The Government’s Chief Medical Officer, Professor Sir Liam Donaldson, said that a comprehensive smokefree law could benefit the British economy by up to £2.7 billion. I find this figure hard to believe. We have to weigh up the positive and negative effects.

If smoking was banned, there would be a huge loss of revenue for the government.

Tobacco taxation amounts to £10.5 billion per year whereas a figure for NHS spending on tobacco related disease is £1.7 billion.

On the plus side however, there would be less work days lost. It is estimated that tobacco related illness costs some 50 million lost working days per year.

The 17,000 under-5s are hospitalised each year as a result of respiratory conditions caused by their parents smoking would be healthy and at home.

In 1996, smoking was thought to be responsible for 5,400 fires, causing 187 deaths and 1,982 casualties. The drop in house fires would effect insurance companies and many others.

Smoking is highly addictive, and I'm not convinced that a ban would make all smokers quit. The black market for cigarettes would be enormous - the cost of policing this new market would be huge.

The effect would be huge and wide ranging.

Answer 2

As most people have said, this would reduce the revenue that The Government takes off us. However, I don't think they would push up income tax too much. This Government is far too crafty for that!

Introducing "Motorpratt!" Yes, once again, it's the motorist who will make up the losses.

Say "Hello" to Congestion Charges in most major cities. And mind those speed camera's! cos they'll be everywhere! It'll also be difficult to travel any journey of more than 40 miles without at least half of it being on a toll road. In addition, it will be necessary to add 2p to 3p per litre to the cost of fuel. This will come under the guise of saving the planet and will under no circumstances have anything to do with taxation. But I'm sure you understand that!

After all, why should we drive from London to Edinburgh when we can hop on a train for a mere £278.00 (cattle class). Who knows, you might even get a seat!

Obviously there will be some savings because less people will be treated for cancer related ailments, but you won't here about that.

Well having put the world right; I'm off to the pub to get well and truly lagged. It's just another form of tax that I pay.

Answer 3

Think about it this way...alcohol is responsible for more injuries and deaths than smoking. Banning alcohol would do MASSIVE harm to the economy. Banning smoking is the lesser of 2 evils for law makers. Less of a impact on the economy and shuts up conservative interest groups.

Answer 4

Depends whether you mean a total ban or the ban in public places that is soon to be introduced.

If you are refering to the later then virtually non as people would begin to smoke outside as has happened in Dublin.

If you are refering to a total ban however it would have a major effect due to the servere loss of tax revenue that the government would suffer, this would mean they would either have to up tax on other goods or a major reduction in public spending. This would also be accompanied by a black market being set up just like the black market that already exists for illegal drugs, in opportunity cost this would be extreamly costly (possibly along the lines of the estimated £20,000,000 cost of congestion within the country currently).

Answer 5

Assuming that smokers got punished for smoking, the economy would benefit ENORMOUSLY in the long run, though in the short run tax revenues would go down considerably.

I say add sodium cyanide to random boxes of cigarettes and let the stinky bastards either kill themselves off or spook themselves out of smoking.

Answer 6

It was banned around me and a lot of restaurants and bars aren't making as much money as they used to because the people who do smoke don't want to go to those places anymore. When I look in a lot of restaurant parking lots, especially on weekends, they are not as full as they were prior the smoking ban. People talk about smoking being bad, what about alcohol? How is the smoking ban any different from the prohibition of alcohol? I don't smoke either, and I find it very stupid. But I remember hearing something about another vote on the law since some idiots who voted yes on it didn't fully understand it and now complaining because it is now illegal to smoke in company cars as well. It is a huge disaster, many eating places and other sit in places are losing out on a lot of money from people not wanting to go since they cannot smoke there anymore.

Answer 7

Loss of a LOT of taxes initially, but perhaps in 20 years or so there would be less money spent on smoking related health care.

Lots of people would have to be hired to look for cigarette smugglers.

Answer 8

The same effect that taking illegal drugs is having. It will create a "black" economy from which the government (and therefore the country) will get no taxation revenue but will have to spend money on enforcing the law. Finite sum of money, infinite reasons to spend it. Result something suffers somewhere.

Answer 9

There would be a massive decline in the government coffers due to the loss of a highly taxable product. That would mean that taxes would have to be increased in other areas, just to maintain current levels.

Healthcare should be more affordable, due to the decline in tobacco related illnesses.

Restaurants and bars would see a decline in business in the short run, but a slow increase over 2-4 years.

Answer 10

There would be none. It would save money. Although smokers do fund our entire police force, the health problems caused by it fall into the NHS funds.

Overall, it would save money if all the losers out there stopped smoking.