To those of you on the latest anti smoking fad. Look at these statistics and tell me if the NHS and the?

Question

country is better off or worse off with smokers.

£8 billion from cigarette taxes per year
£1.5 billion cost to the NHS from smoking related illnesses

I will accept most gratefully your thanks which you would undoubtedly like to give to all us smokers.

Dave O - Roy Castle was an extreme case - he worked in clubs all his life and played the trumpet requiring deep breathing. Also I find it odd that out of my four grandparents the only one who didn't smoke was the youngest to die of lung cancer. I agree with allowing the market to decide having smokers pubs and non smokers pubs. Employees in the pubs could decide what sort of pub they wanted to work in and entertainers could decide whether they want to go to a smoking club or not.

Answer 1

To say nothing of how much we save the NHS by not living long enough to suffer from Alzheimer's and all those other age-related diseases - cataract operations, hip replacements etc. And not collecting our pensions, needing bus passes etc. etc. - I could go on and on.

Answer 2

Good question

Good facts and figures.

My advice.

Buy more illegally imported fags and tobbacco and smoke on regardless.

I honestly believe the government would be on a sticky wicket for taking anyone who smokes in public to court.

They encouraged me to smoke for over 30 years and now they tell me I cant smoke in public.

No evidence whatsoever that passive smoke has killed anyone and if Roy Castles family were so disgusted with the smokey clubs then why did they not give back all of his earnings in protest.

Kings Cross fire was started by an idiot, surely we cannot all be judged by the actions of one person. That's like saying that everyone who drinks would do what Henry Paul did whilst driving Dianna.

The government are well aware that their will be a few who stop smoking due to the ban, but they are fully aware that the majority will still happily keep shovelling tax money into the coffers whilst the government are seen to be doing their bit.

Answer 3

I have to agree with the economics, despite being vehemently anti-smoking.

But mainly I am concerned that the PC brigade are taking our freedoms away.

A halfway point could have been to allow SOME establishments to cater to smokers perhaps?

Foxhunting - personally I believe it to be cruel and unnecessary. If foxes are a problem, a good marksman with a rifle and an infared sight can dispose of a fox far cheaper and more humanely than 50 dogs.

Cars - demonise the driver but dont provide a good public transport alternative.

I could go on, but the point im making is that this country was based on FREEDOM, now we almost need a chit to ****!

Answer 4

billybonzobones good question.

As a smoker myself I have felt lately that I have had to justify why I smoke to more people. The usual comments they make are so lacking in facts.

I don't smoke in public already, I choose to smoke only in my garden.How ever that still isn't good enough for some non smokers.

They bleat on about the smoke etc being in the air, but then they use cleaning products that release dangerous chemicals and drive cars.

The ban will cause more hassle and problems. Smokers now will all have a cig outside a pub, club etc and when a non smoker flaps their hands about, I believe more smokers will react a lot more heated than before the ban was in place.

Answer 5

I worked this out ages ago. The government want everyone to think that smokers are costing the NHS millions when the truth is, there would be no NHS without the revenue off cigarette sales.

Answer 6

The Government have it in for the NHS, they never mention the £8 billion, they just focus on the £1.5 billion and £1.5 billion is peanuts in comparison. They want to make smokers feel like social outcasts. Smokers don't live as long as 'healthy' people, on average they get either lung cancer and are dead within 6 months or they have a heart attack and die. What about non-smokers who live to a ripe old age and develop other cancers and diseases such as osteoporosis, diabetes, angina, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, kidney problems, dementia, asthma etc etc....Surely they cost more in the long run?

Answer 7

I think that the picture is even better than the one you paint. The £1.5billion cost is highly questionable, but even if it were accurate, people will eventually have to die of something, which will involve a cost to the NHS. Moreover, whilst those ex-smokers are merrily living to a ripe old age, guess what, they will be plundering the various pension schemes, and/or the various state handouts.

The so called passive smoking argument is massively exaggerated, even Professor Doll agrees with that. So I will join with you in accepting the thanks of all those non-smokers (anti-smokers in particular) who are so concerned about our health. PS, I am only asking for smoking to be allowed to continue in some pubs. Not much to ask.

Answer 8

Well said Georgeygirl! Smokers are an easy target but we will have the last laugh if we give up. When NHS contributions go up will we have the extra money to pay for the increase. What will non smokers have to give up to pay?

it seems that this country is now governed by pressure groups and that is hardly democratic.

Answer 9

Smoking is a dirty, stinky, nasty, filthy habit. and I was a smoker, now the smell makes me sick, but the government has not banned cigarettes and wonder why? because they are in the pockets of the tobacco companies, why aren't the ingredients listed on the package of a pack of cigarettes! how could they explain "Rat Poison" and other addictive chemicals. And now they say throw out all toothpaste that is made in China because of some form of anti-freeze chemical ! Go figure. The government is not looking out for anyones well being, they look for which company can $tuff their pockets.

Answer 10

I have been saying this for some time now,however the tax is nearer£9 billion and just a bit of info,it costs the NHS £3 billion to treat all eating related disorders,so tax pies and cakes.

Answer 11

To support your argument. Smokers die younger than non smokers therefore they pay their taxes and national insurance and don't live long enough to take the full advantage of their pension or the NHS.
So in a way the smokers are subsiding the non smokers!