Smokers and obese people DON'T cost the health system more

Bottle_of_Smoke

Fair enough for smokers but we should still have a stigma toward obese people. They cost the same and they're an eyesore, go to a continental country compared to Ireland/Britain and you'll see what I mean.

Paparazzo

In Ireland we live to an average age of 80. Smokers die on average 10th to 15 years younger. So, that's about retirement age.
And smokers pay about 7 tax on a pack of smokes. On a 20 a day smoker, that's €2500 a year. That's adequate health insurance for smoking related illness.

HarryPotter41

PeakOutput wrote: »

i dont know its just science

it definitely depends on the job though. like an assembly line tends to be quite repetitive work i imagine (by its very nature) and you dont have any choice but get your work done before the next one comes along or whatever and you probably get so used to it that you are doing it on autopilot at times

but in other jobs that arent like that like an office job were you are staring at the screen examining numbers or whatever then its been shown that you will be more productive if you take regular short breaks

I now work in an office using a computer all day, still see no need for it.

HarryPotter41

ScumLord wrote: »

I don't really have a problem with that as such if that's company policy and the staff agree to it then that's just the way things are, smokers will get used to it. If I have to go without a smoke to earn my money then so be it. Depending on your type of work that may not be such a problem if your a smoker because when your busy you don't get get the urge to smoke. If it's a tedious job it may just be best for everyone to allow the smokers to get their fix.

If the workers agree to it??? Why should the workers have to agree to it? They get paid to do a job, not smoke, they can smoke on their own time.

ScumLord

HarryPotter41 wrote: »

If the workers agree to it??? Why should the workers have to agree to it? They get paid to do a job, not smoke, they can smoke on their own time.

Exactly, they're given designated times to smoke. I don't go for totalitarian management, the staff should be consulted when it comes to changing their working environment.

jackiebaron

Kimia wrote: »

I think it is selfish. I have nothing against smokers, or smoking, but I choose not to smoke so it's unfair that it's forced on me or anyone who doesn't choose it. Why should we have to not breathe? Why can't the smokers smoke where it doesn't affect others?

Oh GOD!! Come on!
Next you'll be pissing and moaning because a guy across the street sparked up a ciggie and one or two of the smoke molecules may have drifted in your direction "forcing his habit upon you". :rolleyes:

jackiebaron

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Fair enough for smokers but we should still have a stigma toward obese people. They cost the same and they're an eyesore, go to a continental country compared to Ireland/Britain and you'll see what I mean.

You should go to the town of Algiceras in southern Spain. The girls there make Rosanne Barr look trim.

HarryPotter41

ScumLord wrote: »

Exactly, they're given designated times to smoke. I don't go for totalitarian management, the staff should be consulted when it comes to changing their working environment.

Asking someone to work all the period between breaks without popping off for a smoke is reasonable to me, people smoking has nothing to do with their work enviroment. If I egt hungry I have a set time to eat, I don't pop off for a snack before my lunch.

Jesus Wept

PCPhoto wrote: »

I cant be ar$ed reading the whole thread - I just want to say that....if smokers die horribly quickly cheaply and young - why are the government trying to stop them from dying - by providing health care for them.

on that note ... why do the government make efforts to "control" the general public ... increase tax on smoking/drinking, speed checks to stop speeding ..... why not let people do what they want (within reason) .... and if they mess up - HUUUUGE penalties.

Because they have to get elected. It isn't about what is right and wrong.

Kimia

jackiebaron wrote: »

Oh GOD!! Come on!
Next you'll be pissing and moaning because a guy across the street sparked up a ciggie and one or two of the smoke molecules may have drifted in your direction "forcing his habit upon you". :rolleyes:

lol at the hysteria.

I am perfectly entitled to have an opinion on this.

Kimia

To the poster above who called me hypocritical. Why can't I think that smokers are people too, and they shouldn't be bothered by the right wing 'they should all be left to die alone because it's their choice to smoke' brigade while at the same time not personally enjoying having smoke blown in my face?

ScumLord

HarryPotter41 wrote: »

Asking someone to work all the period between breaks without popping off for a smoke is reasonable to me, people smoking has nothing to do with their work enviroment. If I egt hungry I have a set time to eat, I don't pop off for a snack before my lunch.

So we're agreed, the company needs to set a smoking policy but once that smoking policy is set up it has to be agreed to, and with a smoking policy non-smokers can't cry about smokers smoking.

HarryPotter41

ScumLord wrote: »

So we're agreed, the company needs to set a smoking policy but once that smoking policy is set up it has to be agreed to, and with a smoking policy non-smokers can't cry about smokers smoking.

I work where explicit emails have been sent stating that workers should smoke on their breaks and not during work time and this has been blatantly ignored on a daily basis. My experience is smokers will tend to do what they want. And are resentful of any attempt to stop them.

Kimia

HarryPotter41 wrote: »

I work where explicit emails have been sent stating that workers should smoke on their breaks and not during work time and this has been blatantly ignored on a daily basis. My experience is smokers will tend to do what they want. And are resentful of any attempt to stop them.

What a load of crap and I find it quite offensive.

HarryPotter41

Kimia wrote: »

What a load of crap and I find it quite offensive.

I have heard the whinging when the email arrives, I have seen the same thing in the last company I worked for when the line leader suggested less breaks. Prove me wrong.

Kimia

HarryPotter41 wrote: »

I have heard the whinging when the email arrives, I have seen the same thing in the last company I worked for when the line leader suggested less breaks. Prove me wrong.

dark crystal

HarryPotter41 wrote: »

I have heard the whinging when the email arrives, I have seen the same thing in the last company I worked for when the line leader suggested less breaks. Prove me wrong.

As you seem dead set to tar all smokers with the same brush, it's unlikely your mindset will be changed by anyone else's experience.

At work, I don't take any more breaks than I or anyone else is entitled to - I'd be disciplined if I did. Also, smokers don't hold the monopoly on dossing off work, trust me on that.

ScumLord

HarryPotter41 wrote: »

I work where explicit emails have been sent stating that workers should smoke on their breaks and not during work time and this has been blatantly ignored on a daily basis. My experience is smokers will tend to do what they want. And are resentful of any attempt to stop them.

You do seem to be emotionally biased against smokers.

Kimia

dark crystal wrote: »

As you seem dead set to tar all smokers with the same brush, it's unlikely your mindset will be changed by anyone else's experience.

At work, I don't take any more breaks than I or anyone else is entitled to - I'd be disciplined if I did. Also, smokers don't hold the monopoly on dossing off work, trust me on that.

That's a fact. Are you equally as hostile about non-smoking dossers?

HarryPotter41

Kimia wrote: »

That's a fact. Are you equally as hostile about non-smoking dossers?

Most certainly am equally hostile to all dossers, the difference being that other dossers don't hold up their right to doss as an entitlement.

stateofflux

im betting on at least 50 more pages of sweeping generalizations