Boards.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more x
Post Reply  
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
02-05-2005, 22:03   #61
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 428
Quote:
Originally Posted by RainyDay
Actually, I do quite like the smell of cigar or pipe smoke myself, that I don't see the relevance here. It's a pity that you're now evading engaging in actualy debate and attempting to drag the thread down to personal slagging, but I'm not going to fall for your troll. If/when you want to have a genuine debate on the impact of 2nd hand tobacco smoke on non-smokers, please feel free to repost.

Mmmmm - interesting. But you expect me to inhale the stench of their 2nd hand tobacco smoke?

Please don't expect anyone to take your talk of 'free democracy' or 'facists' seriously. The surveys to mark the 1st anniversary of the ban showed that it has overwhelming support from the public and for bar workers. The few cranks that ran in the 2004 local/euro elections on an anti-smoking-ban platform performed abysmally in the polls. Funny how you don't seem too concerned about democratic rights of bar staff to clean air?
As I already said on this thread, and am happy to repeat, I am a smoker who supported the ban initially, and still supports it, so I don't see the point or relevance of accusing me of not being concerned about the "democratic rights of bar staff to clean air". I smoke only where it is legal to do so, and obey the law of the land.

In terms of the trolling comment, I found your urine analogy rather bizarre and inappropriate, so I responded in kind. I wasn't the one that brought the urine analogy into the thread, you did!

I am more than happy to have a rational debate on the dangers of passive smoking. Myself and another poster posted stats above, which you have yet to contradict.

Having said that anyone who really thinks smoking in DART stations is a key transport or commuting issue in Dublin needs their head examined in my view!

In fairness to the original poster, he/she asked a legitimate question, which has now been answered (smoking in stations is ILLEGAL and I support any moves to prosecute people who do smoke in stations, incidentally, while smoking on open air platforms is LEGAL, much as it probably disappoints some of the zealots!).

Interesting that this thread is turning out so lengthy, while threads on far more important transport issues attract limited responses. Some people have strange priorities, in my view! Anyway to avoid the risk of being a called hypocrite, I will now practise what I preach and won't be making any more posts on this particular thread as the original poster's question has been answered!

Last edited by hawkmoon269; 02-05-2005 at 22:16.
hawkmoon269 is offline  
Advertisement
02-05-2005, 23:12   #62
Victor
Registered User
 
Victor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 72,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkmoon269
I doubt if they would like to inhale the stench your urine, particularly when it's so full of hatred, prejudice and bile.
I'm not 100% sure but you can only get bile in faeces, not urine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkmoon269
I wasn't the one that brought the urine analogy into the thread, you did!
No, I did.

Last edited by Victor; 02-05-2005 at 23:26.
Victor is offline  
03-05-2005, 10:02   #63
DublinWriter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 9,247
Since the smoking ban, I've found the following to be true:

- European country with the highest life expectancy? Spain. European country with highest number of smokers per capita? Spain.

- If the Government really cared about the Nation's heath then we wouldn't have had 300+ people in Trollies in A&E units as was the case last week.

- Non-smokers will have to plug the €500million tax shortfall in Customs & Excise duties in the fiscal year 2004

- Smokers die younger and are less of a drain on the pensions system (the arguement about smokers costing the heathcare system more is mute, non-smokers develop health problems in later life too, and believe it or not, are not immortal)

- The national average for people dying in nighttime housefires started by a lighted cigarette is up by 18 in 2004 (source: National Safety Council)

- We are becoming very tetchy and rule-orientated as a nation

- Unhappy people will always seek to share their misery

- Intolerance kills more people than tolerance

- Arguing with a health nazi is pointless, stressfull and bad for your health
DublinWriter is offline  
03-05-2005, 12:06   #64
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 6,796
Quote:
Originally Posted by DublinWriter
- European country with the highest life expectancy? Spain.
Wrong. Spain is 11th in European life expectancy rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by DublinWriter
- European country with highest number of smokers per capita? Spain.
Wrong - Spain doesn't make the Top 15 list of daily smokers by country

Unless of course you have more up to date data you'd like to show?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DublinWriter
- Non-smokers will have to plug the €500million tax shortfall in Customs & Excise duties in the fiscal year 2004

- Smokers die younger and are less of a drain on the pensions system (the arguement about smokers costing the heathcare system more is mute, non-smokers develop health problems in later life too, and believe it or not, are not immortal)
Wrong. The shortfall in excise taxes will be more than outweighed by the savings in health care expenditure in the long term.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DublinWriter
- We are becoming very tetchy and rule-orientated as a nation

- Unhappy people will always seek to share their misery

- Intolerance kills more people than tolerance
Bull. Pure Bull.
RainyDay is offline  
03-05-2005, 12:53   #65
DublinWriter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 9,247
Quote:
Originally Posted by RainyDay
Bull. Pure Bull.
True, France was the country I meant. I was booking a Spainish holiday on line this morning, so I think I can be forgiven!

The stats you mentioned make my case - France is the 8th highest for life expectancy out of 47 countries listed and 3rd highest on the table of for smokers per capita.

Curiously, both Italy and Spain aren't on your smoking stats. They surely must be in the top 10 somewhere? I can't believe Sweden has more smokers than either country, and Sweden is in 4th place for life expectancy out of the 47 countries?!?

As for the savings in heathcare in the long term, are you on drugs?!?

All of us, whether smoker or not, will (hopefully!) get old and will require the same intensive levels of healthcare in the last years of our lives.

If anything non-smokers cost the state more in healthcare and pensions. Think about it!
DublinWriter is offline  
Advertisement
03-05-2005, 14:38   #66
Alun
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 18,824
There are, of course, many more factors that influence life expectancy than whether you smoke or not. For instance, the Spanish, Italians and mediterranean types in general have a much healthier diet than we do ... it's the Olive Oil and fish in their diet that do this, so whilst maybe more of them die from smoking related illnesses, fewer will die from heart attacks. Swings and roundabouts.
Alun is online now  
03-05-2005, 18:59   #67
Victor
Registered User
 
Victor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 72,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by DublinWriter
True, France was the country I meant. I was booking a Spainish holiday on line this morning, so I think I can be forgiven!
Or maybe you are merely parroting something said on Politics recently?

Quote:
If anything non-smokers cost the state more in healthcare and pensions. Think about it!
Perhaps, but the non-smokers also contribute more.
Victor is offline  
03-05-2005, 22:01   #68
murphaph
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 18,011
Quote:
Originally Posted by DublinWriter
We are becoming very tetchy and rule-orientated as a nation
What kind of rules are you talking about?
murphaph is offline  
03-05-2005, 22:38   #69
SeanW
Registered User
 
SeanW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 7,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkmoon269
Because we live in a free democracy, last time I checked, and not a fascist state.

Incidentally, Churchill and Roosevelt were both smokers.

Hilter was a fanatical anti-smoker.

So, remind me again, who won the war?
Hitler ... Interesting how you should bring that up because the person who started this debate on this thread (Eriguena) I looked over his/her post history and most of it is Jew bashing and Holocaust Denial in the skeptics forum. Maybe you should take this debate over there too.
SeanW is offline  
Advertisement
03-05-2005, 23:48   #70
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 6,796
Quote:
Originally Posted by DublinWriter
True, France was the country I meant. I was booking a Spainish holiday on line this morning, so I think I can be forgiven!

The stats you mentioned make my case - France is the 8th highest for life expectancy out of 47 countries listed and 3rd highest on the table of for smokers per capita.

Curiously, both Italy and Spain aren't on your smoking stats. They surely must be in the top 10 somewhere? I can't believe Sweden has more smokers than either country, and Sweden is in 4th place for life expectancy out of the 47 countries?!?
Ok then - I fully and absolutely believe that you were really thinking about France when you posted this morning (even though France doesn't have the highest life expectancy in Europe and doesn't have the highest number of smokers in Europe). It all makes sense now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DublinWriter
As for the savings in heathcare in the long term, are you on drugs?!?

All of us, whether smoker or not, will (hopefully!) get old and will require the same intensive levels of healthcare in the last years of our lives.

If anything non-smokers cost the state more in healthcare and pensions. Think about it!
You are ignoring the huge costs of treating cancers in the relatively young, the loss of productivity due to additonal illnesses, the loss of productivity due to early death. Just like your spurious Spanish arguement, you don't get to make up facts round here. If you believe smokers save the state money, please refer to a reputable paper or publication to support your view.
RainyDay is offline  
04-05-2005, 13:17   #71
DublinWriter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 9,247
Quote:
Originally Posted by RainyDay
You are ignoring the huge costs of treating cancers in the relatively young, the loss of productivity due to additonal illnesses, the loss of productivity due to early death. Just like your spurious Spanish arguement, you don't get to make up facts round here. If you believe smokers save the state money, please refer to a reputable paper or publication to support your view.
Ditto.
DublinWriter is offline  
04-05-2005, 21:52   #72
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 6,796
Quote:
Originally Posted by DublinWriter
Ditto.
So after being caught making up facts about Spain, you expect me to go googling again to disprove your rubbish about smokers saving the economy money? I really don't know why I bother - but I do. Here's the figures showing that smokers are a net cost to the economy, and even their early deaths won't save money for the rest of us. Let's just ignore the ethics of the tobacco manufacturers claiming that early death is a benefit for the moment. They conveniently ignored the fact that funds spent on cigarettes today would (for the most part), be switched to be spent on other items which would (for the most part) be taxed and would result in increased tax take on other items. Funny how that key point just slipped their mind, ain't it.

Last edited by RainyDay; 04-05-2005 at 21:54.
RainyDay is offline  
Post Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Remove Text Formatting
Bold
Italic
Underline

Insert Image
Wrap [QUOTE] tags around selected text
 
Decrease Size
Increase Size
Please sign up or log in to join the discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Share Tweet