Advertisement
We've partnered up with Nixers.com to offer a space where you can talk directly to Peter from Nixers.com and get an exclusive Boards.ie discount code for a free job listing. If you are recruiting or know anyone else who is please check out the forum here.
If you have a new account but can't post, please email Niamh on [email protected] for help to verify your email address. Thanks :)

Doctors seek an increase of 2Euro on Cigarettes!!!

13

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,608 themont85


    yeah, that kind of thinking worked wonders with kids and other illegal drugs.

    I think you'll find that far less people are addicted to illegal drugs than smoking. Your never going to eradicate a problem because there's always a few gob****es who will keep it up but you can reduce the problem.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,564 ✭✭✭ Wazdakka


    themont85 wrote: »
    Your never going to eradicate a problem because there's always a few gob****es who will keep it up but you can reduce the problem.

    problem? :confused:

    Why is people smoking a problem?


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,608 themont85


    Wazdakka wrote: »
    problem? :confused:

    Why is people smoking a problem?

    Smoking is a problem for soceity much like drugs. It costs our health service millions, kills a lot of people and exposes people to an addiction which isn't good, thats a problem in my eyes. By reducing the availability of cigarettes, through financial and other methods you reduce their exposure to young people much like drugs. I never said this would completely cure the problem but it will have an effect on it, i was merely saying that like drugs of course some will smoke despite it been not widely available.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,204 ✭✭✭ jaffa20


    themont85 wrote: »
    Drinking is a problem for soceity much like drugs. It costs our health service millions, kills a lot of people and exposes people to an addiction which isn't good, thats a problem in my eyes. By reducing the availability of drink, through financial and other methods you reduce their exposure to young people much like drugs. I never said this would completely cure the problem but it will have an effect on it, i was merely saying that like drugs of course some will drink despite it been not widely available.

    Do you drink:confused: I'm guessing you do like most Irish people (excuse the stereotype). You could replace "smoking" with "drinking" in your post and it makes just as much sense, if not more.

    Increasing the taxes already sky high prices (which pay for the health service that is non existant) of cigarettes has not helped much in the past. Why should it now. Doctors should not have a say in how we choose to live our lives. If someone enjoys the odd cigarette or If they choose to quit for their own reasons, then let them do so but don't throw huge tax increases in their faces.

    I think if they wan't people to quit they should use some of the tax money we are paying on cigarettes towards providing free nicorette because buying it is almost 3 times as expensive as smoking.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 495 ✭✭ Tony Broke


    themont85 wrote: »
    Smoking is a problem for soceity much like drugs. It costs our health service millions, kills a lot of people and exposes people to an addiction which isn't good, thats a problem in my eyes. By reducing the availability of cigarettes, through financial and other methods you reduce their exposure to young people much like drugs. I never said this would completely cure the problem but it will have an effect on it, i was merely saying that like drugs of course some will smoke despite it been not widely available.

    lol you dont have a clue :p

    The doctors will push this as the goverment/ we need the money.

    The smokers are paying for the health care man, without the money from fags we would be in the ****.

    How many regular smokers in Ireland?

    Just guessing but say 250,000 smokers and they average a ten box a day and the goverment makes €2.50 on each box.Thats 625,000 a day/ 228,125,000 a year.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 12,236 ✭✭✭✭ ArmaniJeanss


    A wild drunken thought here.

    How about a new law to make it illegal (with huge penalties) for a shop to sell cigarettes to anyone born after 1st January 2009 ?

    Everyone (I think) accepts that smoking is not a good thing and would discourage future generations from taking up smoking, so its by no means a barbaric law. And it doesn't criminalise smoking as such, just puts the onus on retail establishments.

    Also gives the finance department 18 years to cater for the downturn in tax revenue which would ensue.

    And within 3/4 generations we are effectively a smokeless country.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,692 ✭✭✭✭ Mimikyu


    This post has been deleted.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,145 ✭✭✭ DonkeyStyle \o/


    Good news for the airlines anyway.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,608 themont85


    jaffa20 wrote: »
    Do you drink:confused: I'm guessing you do like most Irish people (excuse the stereotype). You could replace "smoking" with "drinking" in your post and it makes just as much sense, if not more.


    So therefore my post makes sense but you lumped drinking in with it to lessen it, the usual thing a person does to defend smoking. Yes i drink, not heavily, but yes i do. Drinking isn't like smoking, its not in the same realms of addictivness as smoking. Alcohal abuse is a problem in this country not drink itself, you cannot and will never be able to compare the two. In France for instance their probably is the same amount of drinkers as in this country per head ,however of course drink is far different over there and I'm of course guessing here but i would hasard they have far less alcohal addiction and abuse than here. However, in terms of smoking they have the same patters of addictivness as ourselves. Our alcohal problem is a cultural thing more than anything else, smoking is down to the nature of the drug and how bloody addictive nicotine is.
    Tony Broke wrote: »
    lol you dont have a clue :p

    The doctors will push this as the goverment/ we need the money.

    The smokers are paying for the health care man, without the money from fags we would be in the ****.

    How many regular smokers in Ireland?

    Just guessing but say 250,000 smokers and they average a ten box a day and the goverment makes €2.50 on each box.Thats 625,000 a day/ 228,125,000 a year.

    No, smokers pay for there own cancer care, which if they didn't smoke probably wouldn't have happened. I don't believe that by raising taxes(and reducing younger numbers who smoke) would leave us in the '****' at all, it would be a good thing.

    It is progressive to tax smoking heavier than other goods, firstly it pays for their medical bills and the other function should be to discourage smoking.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,608 themont85


    A wild drunken thought here.

    How about a new law to make it illegal (with huge penalties) for a shop to sell cigarettes to anyone born after 1st January 2009 ?

    Everyone (I think) accepts that smoking is not a good thing and would discourage future generations from taking up smoking, so its by no means a barbaric law. And it doesn't criminalise smoking as such, just puts the onus on retail establishments.

    Also gives the finance department 18 years to cater for the downturn in tax revenue which would ensue.

    And within 3/4 generations we are effectively a smokeless country.

    Sounds like a great idea to me, it will never happen but its a good idea.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 16,137 ✭✭✭✭ admiralofthefleet


    hopefully this happens, it might finally make me give up, my chest is in bits


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,204 ✭✭✭ jaffa20


    themont85 wrote: »


    No, smokers pay for there own cancer care, which if they didn't smoke probably wouldn't have happened. I don't believe that by raising taxes(and reducing younger numbers who smoke) would leave us in the '****' at all, it would be a good thing.

    It is progressive to tax smoking heavier than other goods, firstly it pays for their medical bills and the other function should be to discourage smoking.

    Figures, links, stats:confused: Not everyone who smokes get cancer. Cancer derives from lots of known and unknown reasons. Should we not allow obese people to be served in macdonalds or should we charge them more to pay for the heart disease that they will get :confused:


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,866 ✭✭✭✭ MagicMarker


    Christ, enough whinging like a bunch of children on the internet.

    Why would the government NOT put the price up when they know there are people stupid enough to buy them regardless.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,608 themont85


    jaffa20 wrote: »
    Figures, links, stats:confused: Not everyone who smokes get cancer. Cancer derives from lots of known and unknown reasons. Should we not allow obese people to be served in macdonalds or should we charge them more to pay for the heart disease that they will get :confused:

    http://www.dohc.ie/issues/smoking_ban/smokekey.html, pardon my bluntless but no **** sherlock that you get cancer from many things but cigarrettes are a massive cause and the fact they are addictive makes them worse than any old cheeseburger in McDs.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,204 ✭✭✭ jaffa20


    themont85 wrote: »
    http://www.dohc.ie/issues/smoking_ban/smokekey.html, pardon my bluntless but no **** sherlock that you get cancer from many things but cigarrettes are a massive cause and the fact they are addictive makes them worse than any old cheeseburger in McDs.

    My point is that people who are obese tend to be addicted to food.

    http://www.bnl.gov/thanoslab/Thanos%20PDF/JAddDisease1.pdf

    http://www.safefoodonline.com/article.asp?article=451

    http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2007/10/28/story27666.asp

    I particularly like this quote from the last article:

    "Obesity seems to have accumulated more vital statistics than you’d find backstage at Milan fashion week: if you’re obese at 40 you can expect to die seven years earlier; more than one in four children is overweight and the number classified as obese is doubling every ten years; children as young as two are being diagnosed as obese; obesity already costs the health service €339 million per annum."

    Now put that in your pipe and smoke it :D


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,608 themont85


    jaffa20 wrote: »
    My point is that people who are obese tend to be addicted to food.

    http://www.bnl.gov/thanoslab/Thanos%20PDF/JAddDisease1.pdf

    http://www.safefoodonline.com/article.asp?article=451

    http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2007/10/28/story27666.asp

    I particularly like this quote from the last article:

    "Obesity seems to have accumulated more vital statistics than you’d find backstage at Milan fashion week: if you’re obese at 40 you can expect to die seven years earlier; more than one in four children is overweight and the number classified as obese is doubling every ten years; children as young as two are being diagnosed as obese; obesity already costs the health service €339 million per annum."

    Now put that in your pipe and smoke it :D

    Eh of course if your obese your addicted to food, in fact aren't we all really seeing as how we all need it to survive:pac:. People get addicted to all sorts- gambling, food, sex even...but that doesn't compare to smoking at all. Nicotine is known to be extremely addictive. Each smoke has it in to abundance.

    Oh and btw, top work there with the irony at the bottom of your post. Truly fantastic work!


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,604 ✭✭✭✭ Sir Digby Chicken Caesar


    it's scary just how many people are out there that will never be happy until they can make everyone else's lives as boring, grey and tasteless as their own.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,507 Jigsaw


    Jesus, please just leave smokers the f**k alone!

    I am well aware of the health effects of smoking. I am a big boy and I choose to continue fully aware of the risks. I would like to give up some day - of course that would make sense but I resent having a government coerce me into such a move. I think there time could be better spent on a range of other issues tbh before they start on smokers.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,495 ✭✭✭ DublinWriter


    it's scary just how many people are out there that will never be happy until they can make everyone else's lives as boring, grey and tasteless as their own.
    Amen to that, Sister.

    To all those who say that smokers cost the state 'millions' in health-care...we don't. Smoking related illness are terminal illnesses.

    Non-smokers get terminal illnesses too and require on average the same amount of palliative-care in the last six months of their lives.

    The only difference is that non-smokers would have been around an extra 10-20 years to claim pension payments.

    ...and did I mention that each pack of 20 purchased puts around €6.50 directly into the public purse?

    => smoking is good for society!


  • Registered Users Posts: 212 ✭✭ whatduck


    All reading this thread made me do was crave a smoke...


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 65,358 ✭✭✭✭ Overheal


    jaffa20 wrote: »
    This will drive inflation through the roof!!!
    theyre just cigarettes, not oil.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,778 tallaght01


    Dragan wrote: »
    Ah come on Tallaght! You are way to smart to fall into that trap. Anonymous questionaire studies are the cheap whores of the statistical world.

    I think that's a reasonable point to make.

    These types of studies can give woefully inaccurate results Because A) Sometimes people don't want to admit something, when they don't know/trust the person asking the questions and B) sometimes people don't remember things well.

    So, questionnaire studies don't work when you're asking people about illegal/socially questionable activities, or about things that happened a long time ago. So, if we try to gauge the number of car thiefs in the population, asking "are you a car thief?" won't yield honest replies. Or asking "for how long did you breastfeed your child?" will give a lot of replies that deviate fromt he truth.

    But the reason these studies work are as follows (without trying to turn this into the statistics forum) :P

    1) We're not asking people to remember events in the past. It's about their current smoking habits, so we're not relying on memory and recall bias.

    2) We're not measuring the number of smokers in isolation. We're measuring the change in the proportion of smokers. So, we've used questionnaire studies to ask people about their current smoking habits before the taxes. Then a few years later, after tax increases, we ask people about their current smoking habits. So, if each population under-reported their smoking habits, then the proportion of change would still be roughly the same.

    Some very accurate data comes from self reporting. Watch the US elections next november. We'll know the results before they're counted, as people get asked anonymously how they voted by the TV networks.

    The study that showed the link between smoking and lung cancer was a questionnaire study (Though it was a prospective cohort study, which is a bit more reliable....but "point in time analyses" don't work like that).

    This kind of data just doesn't lend itself to randomised controlled trials, sadly.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,608 themont85


    it's scary just how many people are out there that will never be happy until they can make everyone else's lives as boring, grey and tasteless as their own.

    Its even more scary to think that some people derive happiness in their lives from a cigarette which has absolutely no effect on you accept to feed an addiction.

    I really do hate these arguments but smoking is something that really pisses me of. Don't give me 'its my choice to smoke, i know the risks', when you get cancer from them your friends and family suffer too. Sorry to sound like a bellend but thats just the way i feel about it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,044 gcgirl


    Some people who smoke get cancer some people who don't smoke get cancer just like heart attacks some people do and some people don't ! My gran is 80 she has smoked since she has 14 in the last year she has had every bloody test going and she is as healthy as i am!!


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,170 ✭✭✭ enda1


    gcgirl wrote: »
    Some people who smoke get cancer some people who don't smoke get cancer just like heart attacks some people do and some people don't ! My gran is 80 she has smoked since she has 14 in the last year she has had every bloody test going and she is as healthy as i am!!

    Are you actually going to argue that smoking doesn't, on average, cause damage to your body?

    Also just because you are not allowed to smoke in pubs anymore, doesn't mean that non smokers are no longer subject to the effects. It has only lessened the intake, and actually increased the problem if you care to sit outside at a restaurant for example...


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,842 ✭✭✭ Bottle_of_Smoke


    vinylmesh wrote: »
    When kids smoke their first few cigarettes they're not worried about price, coz they don't think they'll end up hooked.

    Nicotine directly interferes with your brains reward system.When you inhale a chemical that interferes with your brain's reward system the come-up is almost immediate leading to a very stong chance of addiction.

    From a purely addictiveness point of view, smoking tobacco is the same as smoking crack. (the strenght of the drug has little to do with the addictiveness, it's actually the speed of the come-up that's the main factor.)

    The withdrawal effects from nicotine are minimal, they cause no physical pain, they're irritating but pass quite quickly.

    So if a kid has a choice between that & saving two days of pocket money for a packet of cigarettes they're not going to bother.

    Now I acknowledge there is a risk that kids will pool their money to split them. I really can't say how this would pan out, only time would tell
    Most "social smokers" i know are actually not inhaling properly, so the nicotine isn't reaching their brains. That's why they're not becoming addicted.

    Isn't this what first timers do too? Social smokers do inhale, they're just not psychologically hooked so don't notice the withdrawal symtoms like full time smokers.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,931 Prof.Badass


    A wild drunken thought here.

    How about a new law to make it illegal (with huge penalties) for a shop to sell cigarettes to anyone born after 1st January 2009 ?

    Everyone (I think) accepts that smoking is not a good thing and would discourage future generations from taking up smoking, so its by no means a barbaric law. And it doesn't criminalise smoking as such, just puts the onus on retail establishments.

    Also gives the finance department 18 years to cater for the downturn in tax revenue which would ensue.

    And within 3/4 generations we are effectively a smokeless country.

    yeah... coz prohibition has worked wonders with other drugs :rolleyes:!

    Nicotine itself is not a bad drug. It is only addictive when inhaled (coz it reaches the brain almost instantly), and a lot of the other chemicals found in the plant are toxic.

    What the government needs to do is allow shops to sell nicotine gum (instead of just chemists) and do a huge advertising campaign urging people to switch to the far safer nicotine gum and related products.

    Nicotine gum (and related products) need to be seen not just as help for those who want to quit, but also as a long-term replacement for tobacco in people who have no intention of quitting.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,800 ✭✭✭ JC 2K3


    themont85 wrote: »
    Its even more scary to think that some people derive happiness in their lives from a cigarette which has absolutely no effect on you accept to feed an addiction.
    Nicotine is a stimulant in low doses and a sedative in higher doses. And its calming, relaxing effects aren't just due to addiction.
    themont85 wrote: »
    I really do hate these arguments but smoking is something that really pisses me of. Don't give me 'its my choice to smoke, i know the risks', when you get cancer from them your friends and family suffer too. Sorry to sound like a bellend but thats just the way i feel about it.
    Do alcohol and fatty foods piss you off too?

    I don't really subscribe to the idea that we should attempt to live our lives in as safe and low risk as possible out of consideration for our friends and families.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,931 Prof.Badass



    So if a kid has a choice between that & saving two days of pocket money for a packet of cigarettes they're not going to bother.

    Now I acknowledge there is a risk that kids will pool their money to split them. I really can't say how this would pan out, only time would tell

    maybe i'm wrong but i assumed that most people's first smoke isn't from a pack of cigarettes they bought themselves. Kids don't anticipate getting hooked so they only see the cost of one pack of cigarettes. If they were going for a 5er per fag, curious teens would still buy them (thinking that they're only gonna end up buying 1 or 2)
    Isn't this what first timers do too? Social smokers do inhale, they're just not psychologically hooked so don't notice the withdrawal symtoms like full time smokers.

    Maybe if they only smoke while drinking it's not as addictive, coz they only associate smoking with drinking, I'm not sure.... but the "social smokers" i've observed don't inhale properly.

    read my previous post;

    Nicotine gum ftw!


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,800 ✭✭✭ JC 2K3


    You're underestimating the sensation of smoking as a reason why people do it. Nicotine gum would never become a popular recreational drug because its effects would not be immediate or strong enough.


Advertisement