Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Ireland to ban Menthol Cigarettes and Rolling Tobacco from May

2»

Comments

  • #32
    Archeron
    Registered Users Posts: 6,157 ✭✭✭Archeron


    aziz wrote: »
    One thing that bugs me as a smoker is why I can only buy something that’s bad for me in larger amounts.

    I used to buy a 15g packet of tobacco and I could get a week out of it.

    Now I can only buy a 30g pack but would tend to go through it in a week

    Agree 100%
    Whatever the reason they banned ten packs, I immediately started smoking more when I could only buy a twenty pack. I know that may not sound right, but it's a horrible addiction i would love to be rid of, and it makes your mind work in a weird way. At times, I knew a ten pack would do a set time if I thought about when I was smoking and when I shouldn't be, so I made the pack last and smoked less as a result.
    I hate that lately in many shops I go into, I'm advised that no we don't have 20 pack, would you like a 23 or 27 pack. I'm convinced that the big tobacco companies aim to make that the standard. How many people say they smoke a pack a day? Aaah, but how big is the pack. I'd say the tobacco companies loved the ten pack ban.

    Why don't the government ban the larger packs?


  • #33
    MayoSalmon
    Registered Users Posts: 2,240 ✭✭✭MayoSalmon


    Rubberchikken wrote: »
    I wish all cigarettes were banned.
    A more disgusting legal habit I can't think of.
    It costs the state millions every year dealing with the effects of smoking and why we non smoking tax payers should be contributing towards smokers care is beyond me.

    Taxpayers contribute to all manners of things they might be opposed to...nothing new there all at I'm afraid.


  • #34
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,734 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Thread title is untrue. Ireland didnt ban rolling tobacco.

    https://www.joe.ie/fitness-health/smoking-588637

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • #35
    murpho999
    Registered Users Posts: 28,386 ✭✭✭✭murpho999


    Grab All Association wrote: »
    Over €1bn raised in taxes and duties on tobacco The smokers are not only covering their own costs, but funding the HSE. As mentioned above obesity is far worse. €1.1 billion cost to the state. T2 diabetes is a completely reversible condition.
    ReginaldSmythV wrote: »
    Smokers contribute far more to your care than you do to theirs. You’d be sobbing into your pillow any your tax bill if everyone gave up tomorrow.

    This is often said but often omits how much health care smokers need in later life if they manage to live that long.

    Also you need a lot more than €1bn a year to fund the HSE.


  • #36
    aziz
    Registered Users Posts: 723 ✭✭✭aziz


    Knew one chap who would buy a ten pack when he was going on a night out with the lads,he didn’t smoke at any other time.

    When the 10 pack ban came in he had to smoke 20 in one night


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    KaneToad
    Registered Users Posts: 3,156 ✭✭✭KaneToad


    Ads by Google wrote: »
    Obesity is far worse.

    Alcohol is worse again. No one ever bait the wife after a few smokes.

    Obesity will eventually be worse than alcohol.


  • #38
    Atlantic Dawn
    Registered Users Posts: 81,031 ✭✭✭✭Atlantic Dawn
    M


    Perhaps the best solution is only to allow the purchase in 200 box cartons, would be €140 a go. This would leave those hooked with an instant sting every time they make a purchase and would make people think twice about starting.


  • #39
    deandean
    Registered Users Posts: 2,217 ✭✭✭deandean


    Same happened when packs of ten cigarettes were banned. Lots of people limited themselves ro a pack of ten daily. Now you can only buy packs of 20. A stupid decision IMO.


  • #40
    Thelonious Monk
    Registered Users Posts: 13,685 ✭✭✭✭Thelonious Monk


    Rubberchikken wrote: »
    I wish all cigarettes were banned.
    A more disgusting legal habit I can't think of.
    It costs the state millions every year dealing with the effects of smoking and why we non smoking tax payers should be contributing towards smokers care is beyond me.

    If you think about it, if people didn't die from smoking, they'd die from something else. They might live way too long and have to be cared for in homes and have nurses go to their houses and it could cost a hell of a lot more.

    People don't live forever, we all die eventually, smoking is just one of the ways to die.


  • #41
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,611 ✭✭✭✭[Deleted User]


    Archeron wrote: »
    Agree 100%
    Whatever the reason they banned ten packs, I immediately started smoking more when I could only buy a twenty pack. I know that may not sound right, but it's a horrible addiction i would love to be rid of, and it makes your mind work in a weird way. At times, I knew a ten pack would do a set time if I thought about when I was smoking and when I shouldn't be, so I made the pack last and smoked less as a result.
    I hate that lately in many shops I go into, I'm advised that no we don't have 20 pack, would you like a 23 or 27 pack. I'm convinced that the big tobacco companies aim to make that the standard. How many people say they smoke a pack a day? Aaah, but how big is the pack. I'd say the tobacco companies loved the ten pack ban.

    Why don't the government ban the larger packs?

    Same happened me, 10 was plenty. Then 20. Once I got a job it was 23. Well, it took a week to go from 20 to 23 but it happened quick enough. :pac:


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Church on Tuesday
    Registered Users Posts: 3,858 ✭✭✭Church on Tuesday


    Rubberchikken wrote: »
    I wish all cigarettes were banned.
    A more disgusting legal habit I can't think of.
    It costs the state millions every year dealing with the effects of smoking and why we non smoking tax payers should be contributing towards smokers care is beyond me.

    I despise cigarettes and "rollies" but people should be free to smoke if they so wish. Smoking ban in pubs and other areas was a godsend, so it's a happy medium, just continue to tax the **** out of it and have the relevant health warnings that come with it and let people decide for themselves.


  • #43
    tdf7187
    Registered Users Posts: 1,597 ✭✭✭tdf7187


    KaneToad wrote: »
    Alcohol is worse again. No one ever bait the wife after a few smokes.

    Obesity will eventually be worse than alcohol.

    Way I see it, stress is worse than any of those mentioned and is in fact the main root cause of those health issues. But you never hear it mentioned because the bean counters don't know how to calculate it and if someone can't put a cost on it it doesn't matter in this sick hyperconsumerist society.


  • #44
    bb1234567
    Registered Users Posts: 5,491 ✭✭✭bb1234567


    Rubberchikken wrote: »
    I wish all cigarettes were banned.
    A more disgusting legal habit I can't think of.
    It costs the state millions every year dealing with the effects of smoking and why we non smoking tax payers should be contributing towards smokers care is beyond me.

    Indeed. 1 in 5 cancer diagnoses are directly attributable to excessive tobacco consumption. That's millions of cancer cases globally year in year out. Imagine if this wasn't the case, all the resources that could be better directed toward trying to treat cancers that occur among people who contract it by pure chance and bad luck. Such a waste of medical supplies/research/expertise trying to rectify the issues caused by such a completely useless habit and a cancer case with a completely modifiable cause/risk factor. Obviously I'm not saying that smokers shoudn't be eligible for the exact same quality of treatment but it's just such a pity that smokers couldn't kick the habit, for their own sake as much as the rest of us.


  • #45
    ShatterAlan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,807 ✭✭✭ShatterAlan


    Rubberchikken wrote: »
    I wish all cigarettes were banned.
    A more disgusting legal habit I can't think of.
    It costs the state millions every year dealing with the effects of smoking and why we non smoking tax payers should be contributing towards smokers care is beyond me.


    The tax smokers pay on tobacco pays for all your needs so you should be grateful.


  • #46
    ShatterAlan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,807 ✭✭✭ShatterAlan


    Rubberchikken wrote: »
    I wish all cigarettes were banned.
    A more disgusting legal habit I can't think of.
    It costs the state millions every year dealing with the effects of smoking and why we non smoking tax payers should be contributing towards smokers care is beyond me.


    Kinda regret your stupid tax comment now, eh?


    :pac:


  • #47
    Strumms
    Registered Users Posts: 24,758 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    ShatterAlan wrote: »
    The tax smokers pay on tobacco pays for all your needs so you should be grateful.

    Smoking costs the tax payer approximately 172 million euros in 2016. That averages out to the state over a decade at ‘about’.... one billion seven hundred twenty million...

    In addition to that, there are multiples of peoples expert hours spent treating conditions that smokers develop and present with as a result of smoking. Multiple beds, multiple surgery hours, screenings.. because of a ‘lifestyle’ choice and habit...a choice made BY somebody, not made for somebody..If a person develops a non lifestyle or non smoking related illnesses... it’s likely the smoker will beat you to that hospital bed, to that surgery time, to that rehab spot... because they choose to ignore expert advice and smoke. Smokers don’t become smokers by accident... habits are developed over time, the behaviors to develop habits are courtesy of choices...over time...

    So 172 million in cost, the money as in TOTAL tax generated.... depending on the year, but can be as little as half of that.


  • #48
    ShatterAlan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,807 ✭✭✭ShatterAlan


    Strumms wrote: »
    Smoking costs the tax payer approximately 172 million euros in 2016. That averages out to the state over a decade at ‘about’.... one billion seven hundred twenty million...

    In addition to that, there are multiples of peoples expert hours spent treating conditions that smokers develop and present with as a result of smoking. Multiple beds, multiple surgery hours, screenings.. because of a ‘lifestyle’ choice and habit...a choice made BY somebody, not made for somebody..If a person develops a non lifestyle or non smoking related illnesses... it’s likely the smoker will beat you to that hospital bed, to that surgery time, to that rehab spot... because they choose to ignore expert advice and smoke. Smokers don’t become smokers by accident... habits are developed over time, the behaviors to develop habits are courtesy of choices...over time...

    So 172 million in cost, the money as in TOTAL tax generated.... depending on the year, but can be as little as half of that.




    So canning and banning smoking will save money overall?


    How about I bitch because I am a male, hence I shouldn't have to pay tax that goes towards breast cancer research and mammogrophy purely because I don't have tits? Hmm?


    I'll pay DOUBLE to keep women healthy. You might say..."ah, smokers and boozers are taking a choice" Fine....then take no tax off cigs and have every smoker have that money put into a health fund so that it only goes towards people who develop tobacco related illnesses. None of the tax on smokes goes to parks or roads or the Civil Service or anything other than the treatment of smoking relating maladies and only those who smoke can avail of these services.



    Go for it.


  • #49
    Richard Hillman
    Registered Users Posts: 12,033 ✭✭✭✭Richard Hillman


    I have been using menthol filters for a while now with my tobacco. They'll never be able to ban those. Good luck getting your sniffer dogs trying to detect them at the ports.


  • #50
    Kimbot
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 18,412 Mod ✭✭✭✭Kimbot


    Rubberchikken wrote: »
    I wish all cigarettes were banned.
    A more disgusting legal habit I can't think of.
    It costs the state millions every year dealing with the effects of smoking and why we non smoking tax payers should be contributing towards smokers care is beyond me.

    Alcohol also cost the state millions every year in dealing with its effects...... why not ban that too?


  • #51
    Sonics2k
    Registered Users Posts: 8,237 ✭✭✭Sonics2k


    Richard Hillman wrote: »
    I have been using menthol filters for a while now with my tobacco. They'll never be able to ban those. Good luck getting your sniffer dogs trying to detect them at the ports.

    Genuine question. Why do you think a dog wouldn't be able to smell menthol filters? It's quite a strong smell even to humans.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    fryup
    Registered Users Posts: 18,069 ✭✭✭✭fryup


    not now not at this time, people are stuck at home & bored let them smoke its a distraction


Advertisement