Good riddance tobacco!

[joinerjohn]

Now you're getting what I'm saying.
None of us are perfect. In an ideal world we'd all be that health conscious we wouldn't do anything to jeopardize our health. But we do.
And once the goverment start regulating and legislating one group or another where will it all end?

Exactly the point I have been trying to make throughout this thread, Killerheels. Exactly the point that others either can't see or don't want to see. I've said that the government are there to serve us, the electorate, not the other way round. Increasingly governments are heading towards a totalitarian state in this country. We're now told almost what we can think. (we're already told what we can't say)

noseall wrote:


Alcohol is also useful.

At what cost to the NHS ? Not just alcoholics who drain the NHS resources, through alcohol. Friday and Saturday evenings in any A&E dept, will find drunkards who are not alcoholic, but still need the NHS to pump their stomachs, because alcohol is a poison. The governments response? Increase duty on alcohol and probably introduce minimum pricing per unit. Yep that'll teach them, whilst raising extra income.

I won't even start on obesity, suffice to say, this is going to be the biggest drain on the NHS in the future.

 

[joe-90]

They all need tackling though.

 

[calorific]

I've said that the government are there to serve us, the electorate, not the other way round. Increasingly governments are heading towards a totalitarian state in this country. We're now told almost what we can think. (we're already told what we can't say)

If a government, using the advice and knowledge of some of the finest minds in the land (educated by the highest establishments of the land) comes to the informed conclusion that some things need to be outlawed and banned, then is this entirely unreasonable. We pay for these people to protect us, sometimes from ourselves.

I won't even start on obesity, suffice to say, this is going to be the biggest drain on the NHS in the future.

It'll certainly require larger drainage

 

[noseall]

I agree totally about fatties.

Gluttony and greed are abhorrent and they seem to go hand in hand with selfishness and ignorance.

This thread is primarily about smoking but i admit to the fact that the bigger picture must include all drains on society.

However, you can not ignore that whilst alcohol and drug abuse and gluttony are all a problem, we can not have a world without food, drugs and alcohol, but we could live without tobacco.

I say again, what useful purpose does it have?

Why can it not be phased out?

 

[killerheels]

Don't worry about it. It will be.

 

[AronSearle]

Why can it not be phased out?

Because it can't.

Pretty much the answer.

People want to take it, everyone knows how harmful it is, some decide the pleasure overrides the risk, nothing you can do about that, might as well wish the sky purple.

Should we stop putting out warnings about it's risk, no.

But banning it is a folly that will do more damage than good, something you don't even gloss over, but just point blank ignore.

/inb4 you simply repeat your question and ignore anything said.

what useful purpose does it have?

What useful purpose does bungee jumping have, etc. etc.

We pay for these people to protect us, sometimes from ourselves.

Do we, do you have a contract, or some other evidence of this agreement?

I won't even start on obesity, suffice to say, this is going to be the biggest drain on the NHS in the future.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/h...-than-the-healthy-who-live-longer-report.html

Obese and smokers less of a burden on the NHS than the healthy who live longer

 

[calorific]

Smoking is on its way out, plain and simple. Nobody will still be smoking beyond the end of the century.

Governments do act in our best interests, plain and simple. It's why we go to war. On a micro scale, it's why we all do our seatbelts up when we get get in our cars and rarely travel beyond 80mph on motorways.

 

[killerheels]

That was an interesting link AronSearle

From which I gather ... pick your own preferred poison and get stuck in ... it's kinder to the economy in the long run.

 

[killerheels]

Smoking is on its way out, plain and simple. Nobody will still be smoking beyond the end of the century.

Governments do act in our best interests, plain and simple. It's why we go to war. On a micro scale, it's why we all do our seatbelts up when we get get in our cars and rarely travel beyond 80mph on motorways.

Boy you make life sound sooooooooooooo exciting!

 

[calorific]

Smoking is on its way out, plain and simple. Nobody will still be smoking beyond the end of the century.

Governments do act in our best interests, plain and simple. It's why we go to war. On a micro scale, it's why we all do our seatbelts up when we get get in our cars and rarely travel beyond 80mph on motorways.

Boy you make life sound sooooooooooooo exciting!

Just realistic.

 

[joe-90]

Just when you've pulled you go all boring.

I'm not boring darling - I like a size 8. (it matches mine).

 

[AronSearle]

Governments do act in our best interests, plain and simple.

So everything Thatcher and gorgon brown did was OK then, first time I have heard anyone support BOTH of them!

 

[calorific]

Governments do act in our best interests, plain and simple.

So everything Thatcher and gorgon brown did was OK then, first time I have heard anyone support BOTH of them!

Not sure where I stated that everything that every government does is good Although, since sussessive governments don;t undo or reverse that of their predecessors, then presumably they underlying trend remains the same.

Anyway, when it comes to public safety, health and ethics then the line of best fit to cater for the overarching protection of the country always takes precedence. Hence why you can't nip into boots and buy a bottle of strychnine.

Tobacco is a curious one, since the financial repercussions are questionable in relation to cost verses expense. It's nothing to do with freedom of choice - after all only a complete halfwit would choose to take up a filthy and unpleasant drug addiction and then defend it as some kind of fundamental human right to be allowed to do so.

 

[Norcon]

after all only a complete halfwit would choose to take up a filthy and unpleasant drug addiction and then defend it as some kind of fundamental human right to be allowed to do so.

 

[masona]

Tobacco is a curious one, since the financial repercussions are questionable in relation to cost verses expense. It's nothing to do with freedom of choice - after all only a complete halfwit would choose to take up a filthy and unpleasant drug addiction and then defend it as some kind of fundamental human right to be allowed to do so.

The smokers deep down know it's wrong but won't hear of it or even answer my questions earlier has proved it. I can understand though because smoking must be like drugs they cannot give up. At the end of the day we all have our weakness somewhere.

I have a few friends that given up smoking since the smoking banned in public places and they all said to me, they didn't realised what the non-smokers have to put up with!