Good riddance tobacco!

[EddieM]

probably because there are still a lot of tolerant people who, reluctantly accept that if a grown woman or man wishes to smoke himself or herself into an early grave they can be allowed to do it.

the pro-smoking lobby likes to invent stories about a ban or criminalisation of smoking so they can spout on about their freedom to die early, even though their freedom to do so is not being attacked.

However the freedom of the tobacco industry to recruit new young addicts to an early death, is under attack, and a good thing too.

You will notice that the pro-smoking lobby on this thread spouts much more about imaginary bans, which they have made up themselves, than about the true objective of cutting the number of children and young people who take up this vile addiction.

but if it doesn't affect others surely you should be free to put into your body whatever you like? I still dont really get it. I am all for banning it on health grounds though.

 

[killerheels]

probably because there are still a lot of tolerant people who, reluctantly accept that if a grown woman or man wishes to smoke himself or herself into an early grave they can be allowed to do it.

However the freedom of the tobacco industry to recruit new young addicts to an early death, is under attack, and a good thing too.

You will notice that the pro-smoking lobby on this thread spouts much more about imaginary bans, which they have made up themselves, than about the true objective of cutting the number of children and young people who take up this vile addiction.

Tolerant people? Like you, you mean? Anyone reading your post can see you seeth with anti-smoking fervour. Not to mention some of the insults that have been directed at smokers in this thread.

I'm trying to be objective about this ... unlike you.
1) With the smoking bans now in place the non-smoker is no longer having to breathe secondhand smoke.
2) All the restrictions and controls you so fervently applaud are ultimately going to lead to a tobacco ban so please don't insult my intelligence by dressing your views up as anything other than a desire for an eventual ban.

So.. that leaves us with a group who are basically saying that because something is unhealthy it's availability should be removed from forthcoming generations. It's vile, or stinks and is addictive and for some that's reason enough.
And then there are those who see it as a means for the goverment to curb free choice ... and wonder who will be next. This group includes non-smokers as well as smokers who generally believe that now the risks are known leave an individual to make their own informed choice. The same as with any other pastime or habit that poses a health risk.

We're going around in circlers now and not adding anything new to this discussion, so that's it from me.
I'm not defending smoking. I smoke. I also know the health risks.
But I am defending anyone's right to make the choice how they live their own life.

 

[JohnD]

but if it doesn't affect others surely you should be free to put into your body whatever you like?

Yes, and neither I nor the OP have advocated banning it. I have not attacked anyone's right to live their life (or to prematurely end it) how they wish, so there is no need for anyone to attack me for something I haven't said. I don't know who killerheels thinks s/he is "defending" against but it isn't me.

As far as I can make out the "ban" is just a straw man put up by the pro-smoking lobby so that they can disagree with it. Killerheels for example. Anyone reading his/her posts can see s/he seethes with pro-smoking fervour. Not to mention some of the insults that have been directed at non-smokers in this thread.

My "fervour" does not include banning it and does not include making smoking a criminal act.

I am however not in favour of contined recruitment of future generatons of children and young people being made into addicts in order to keep the tobacco industry profitable. I have not yet seen the pro-smokers disagree with this opinion, which is the one I have repeatedly expressed.

 

[masona]

but what about me or others that look after their health, We are also paying tax for people who couldn't careless about their health.

People like us who look after their health, are the biggest drain on the system.

In what way?

You might want to think about protecting fatties and smokers for your own self interest.

Because if you start down the road of rationing health care based on how much a person has paid, and how much they cost.

You might end up destroying the NHS.

No problem there but don't you think if people make an effort with their health then the NHS would be better off regarding the waiting lists?

 

[chapeau]

Afternoon killerheels

what do you think about women who smoke while pregnant?

 

[AronSearle]

People like us who look after their health, are the biggest drain on the system.

In what way?

Old age care, smokers die, obese die.

Healthy people hang around going mental and frail, requiring expensive care, VERY expensive care.

The danger with talking about

You might want to think about protecting fatties and smokers for your own self interest.

Because if you start down the road of rationing health care based on how much a person has paid, and how much they cost.

You might end up destroying the NHS.

No problem there but don't you think if people make an effort with their health then the NHS would be better off regarding the waiting lists?[/quote]

Total lifetime health care costs

Obese......... .............. Smoker ............ healthy........
€250,000 ............... €221,000 ................. €281,000



7/10 beds are occupied by the elderly of the top of my head.

One think tank has even suggested that in the future, just caring for the eldery will cost the NHS more than it's entire current budget.





If you want to protect the NHS, don't start down the route of preferential treatment based on funding.

You will regret it.

 

[JohnD]

It's terrible to advocate euthenasia of the old to save money.

 

[AronSearle]

2/10 Troll.

 

[JohnD]

remembering that it's the AS that keeps protesting a Ban is wrong, even though it's not what we've been arguing for. I see he's been at some other threads as well.

 

[peaps2]

Total lifetime health care costs

Obese......... .............. Smoker ............ healthy........
€250,000 ............... €221,000 ................. €281,000

what a blatant flaw

 

[AronSearle]

Peaps, would you like to tell me what the blatant flaw is?

That's quoted from the adam smith institute report, similar figures also quoted from a telegraph article showing that healthy people do cost more in healthcare over their life (because they live longer and need more intensive care over time).

Not really sure what you are getting at?

I see he's been at some other threads as well.

So you are following me in various threads, making silly posts about me (advocating euthanasia), and I am the troll.

I stand corrected, I would now give you 5/10 for trolling, keep it up!

even though it's not what we've been arguing for

I suggest you do some research on the organisations linked in the OP, you personally may not be arguing for a ban, but others in this thread have, and people working for those organisations have.

And you still don't debate my valid criticisms of plain packaging.


For ****s sake, Now I will have to upgrade you points again.

6/10 Troll, keep it up and by the end of the week you will be an apprentice troll no longer!

 

[JohnD]

did he say anything interesting?

 

[peaps2]

Peaps, would you like to tell me what the blatant flaw is?

That's quoted from the adam smith institute report, similar figures also quoted from a telegraph article showing that healthy people do cost more in healthcare over their life (because they live longer and need more intensive care over time).

Not really sure what you are getting at?

I see he's been at some other threads as well.

So you are following me in various threads, making silly posts about me (advocating euthanasia), and I am the troll.

I stand corrected, I would now give you 5/10 for trolling, keep it up!

even though it's not what we've been arguing for

I suggest you do some research on the organisations linked in the OP, you personally may not be arguing for a ban, but others in this thread have, and people working for those organisations have.

And you still don't debate my valid criticisms of plain packaging.


For **** sake, Now I will have to upgrade you points again.

6/10 Troll, keep it up and by the end of the week you will be an apprentice troll no longer!

Since you are unable to see it I will just claim victory and move on

 

[AronSearle]

Since you are unable to see it I will just claim victory and move on

Difference is I am answering your points, you lot are all just trolling.

 

[noseall]

My goodness me, i come back to this well worn thread (threadbare) and Surly Aron is clutching at straws.

.."You're a troll....you're a troll!"

Is that now the basis of your argument apart from selective googling...?

Lordy

Smoking will never benefit society either economically or medically so take your dummy and throw it in someone elses sand pit.