NationStates Jolt Archive

Ok, this is silly, but why not.

The UK has recently instituted a smoking ban, which basically prohibits smoking in public places ("public places" includes pubs, restaurants, and apparently churches). Obviously, this has had a mixed reaction, and some smokers, not just the super-smug FOREST types, have been very put out (while others have simply tried to quit). Freedom of association arguments have been met with a deafening wall of "well, what about my right to breathe clean air". As a[n admittedly light] smoker, here's my take on it:

It's a good thing, because it will greatly empower smokers to push for reductions in tobacco tax. The traditional argument is that it is needed to fund healthcare from the trillions of people cigarette smoke mercilessly slays, as well as being a deterrent measure. But now, anyone inhaling cigarette smoke is clearly choosing to do so: they are either a smoker, or they are purposefully consorting with our filthy kind in our smoke-ridden ghettos. The government has argued this is in fact about choice, and in that sense they are right. You now have to actively seek out cigarette smoke, and in doing so, are removing the moral burden of those who pay taxes.

The logical extension of the smoking ban, therefore, is reduction in cigarette taxation (deterrence being equally achieved through the casting out of smokers in social pariahdom).

So, whaddya think: just a pipe dream?

Regardless of what I think of your argument, it would require the government to reduce tax on something. Which is obviously a silly notion.

Regardless of what I think of your argument, it would require the government to reduce tax on something. Which is obviously a silly notion.

What's silly about reducing taxes?

Governments don't really want to?

Don't be stupid.

It's rubbish.

What's silly about reducing taxes?

It's silly to expect it to happen.

When were the Petrol Protests? 2000? They almost got the country to a standstill (London was unusually pleasant), but petrol tax didn't go down. Think I saw 98p/litre the other day.

So I don't think a few smokers whining about the price of fags is likely to make much odds.

It's silly to expect it to happen.

When were the Petrol Protests? 2000? They almost got the country to a standstill (London was unusually pleasant), but petrol tax didn't go down. Think I saw 98p/litre the other day.

So I don't think a few smokers whining about the price of fags is likely to make much odds.

Well, I would admit that's true in the UK.

Here in the US, we occasionally get taxes rolled back a bit.

What's silly about reducing taxes?

We Brit's aren't quite as concerned about taxes as Americans are, generally. It's only specific taxes that we get miffed about. The Poll tax, as well as the unfair Council tax system that became the Poll tax's successor, is the best example.

Of course, this is an example of a proposed tax in the US.

http://www.sptimes.com/2007/07/17/Business/Cigarmakers_in_a_pani.shtml

t's no mathematical error: The federal government has proposed raising taxes on premium cigars, the kind Newman's family has been rolling for decades in Ybor City, by as much as 20,000 percent.

As part of an increase in tobacco taxes designed to pay for children's health insurance, the nickel-per-cigar tax that has ruled the industry could rise to as much as $10 per cigar.

"I'm not sure in the history of man, since our forefathers founded the country in 1776, that there's ever been a tax increase of 20,000 percent," said Newman, who runs the Tampa business founded by grandfather Julius Caesar Newman. "They had the Boston Tea Party for less than this."

When it comes to tobacco sales, cigars are just a speck compared to cigarettes. In 2006, the nearly 400-billion cigarettes sold domestically dwarfed the 5.3-billion cigars.

Just a handful of cigar smokers (ones who really smoke cigars) out there in the US - so I'm not sure anyone will vote against a 10$ per cigar tax.

However, for those of you in the US who are fond of using blunts to smoke something else - it's the end of the blunt in the US - forever.

What's silly about reducing taxes?
You have less money to spend on services to the general public, duh.

However, for those of you in the US who are fond of using blunts to smoke something else - it's the end of the blunt in the US - forever.
You have seemingly never smoked 'anything else'.

You don't imbed it into a cigar, you get some Rizzla (or whatever the American equivalent is), some tobacco, and 'something else', and you do it that way.

Which has nothing at all to do with cigars.

There's less money for the government to waste, duh...
Ermm.

Or use on things like the NHS, which are extremely useful.

You have less money to spend on services to the general public, duh.

There's less money for the government to waste, duh...

the smoking tax is already far too low for how much its costing so theres your plan out the window (yes who would of thought that smokers use the NHS!?)

though I am expecting a flare up in cases of pneumonia once it gets to winter time :p

the smoking tax is already far too low for how much its costing so theres your plan out the window (yes who would of thought that smokers use the NHS!?)



Link?

Here in the US, it's popular to buy Philly blunts, and stuff them with something else, and smoke them.

Which are cigars...

So it wouldn't be the end but the start of a change over

Ermm.

Or use on things like the NHS, which are extremely useful.

Well, how screwed up the accounting methods are at the NHS would be a whole new thread...

The logical extension of the smoking ban, therefore, is reduction in cigarette taxation (deterrence being equally achieved through the casting out of smokers in social pariahdom).

Or the other logical conclusion(man ya got love logic) is that because the goverment will be earning less tax money on fags, then they increase the amount of tax you pay on a packet.

You have seemingly never smoked 'anything else'.

You don't imbed it into a cigar, you get some Rizzla (or whatever the American equivalent is), some tobacco, and 'something else', and you do it that way.

Which has nothing at all to do with cigars.

Here in the US, it's popular to buy Philly blunts, and stuff them with something else, and smoke them.

Which are cigars...

Link?

uh now I have to get off my arse:

http://www.ash.org.uk/html/smuggling/html/whytax99.html

Tobacco taxation amounts to £10.5 billion per year whereas a figure for NHS spending on tobacco related disease is £1.7 billion.

first part covers it the rest is just a sleeping pill

Well, how screwed up the accounting methods are at the NHS would be a whole new thread...
Not really, it'd be pointless cock-swinging by the US members until we pointed out that our health system is simply better than yours, regardless of the cost, and that yours, dollar-for-dollar, is one of the poorest in the world.
Or the other logical conclusion(man ya got love logic) is that because the goverment will be earning less tax money on fags, then they increase the amount of tax you pay on a packet.
Imperial Tobacco started to put the price up even before the ban. Sad times for people like oneself.
Here in the US, it's popular to buy Philly blunts, and stuff them with something else, and smoke them.

Which are cigars...
Hmm. You guys have poor taste.

And/or fat fingers not suited for rollies.

Not really, it'd be pointless cock-swinging by the US members until we pointed out that our health system is simply better than yours, regardless of the cost, and that yours, dollar-for-dollar, is one of the poorest in the world.


It's more variable - if you have great insurance - you're good. If you don't, you're screwed.

The UK service is more levelled.

Hmm. You guys have poor taste.

And/or fat fingers not suited for rollies.

Never said we had good taste. I prefer using a bladed coffee grinder to turn it into dust, and put in into a pipe.

Never said we had good taste. I prefer using a bladed coffee grinder to turn it into dust, and put in into a pipe.

? (http://www.marijuana.it/images/herb_grinder.jpg)

and pipes are for opium and washing up liquid dammit!

So it wouldn't be the end but the start of a change over

Blunts are popular, because in some odd way, the smoker believes that people around them don't know what they're doing from a distance.

Oh goody. Another smoking thread.

Oh goody. Another smoking thread.

Welcome to NS General.

We have a choice today - there are some other standard threads about.

We Brit's aren't quite as concerned about taxes as Americans are, generally. It's only specific taxes that we get miffed about. The Poll tax, as well as the unfair Council tax system that became the Poll tax's successor, is the best example.

I am. I object to being taxed at 40% to aid those with whom I do not identify.

Stupid bloody ban anyway. Pubs and clubs have no atmosphere now; they are as sterile and fabricated as the average supermarket.

I am. I object to being taxed at 40% to aid those with whom I do not identify.

Stupid bloody ban anyway. Pubs and clubs have no atmosphere now; they are as sterile and fabricated as the average supermarket.

Wait until your local pub stops serving locally made beer, and starts bringing in your choice of either Budweiser, or Bud Light.

Welcome to NS General.

We have a choice today - there are some other standard threads about.

*begins shopping in other threads*

Wait until your local pub stops serving locally made beer, and starts bringing in your choice of either Budweiser, or Bud Light.

Much as I dislike Wetherspoons on many grounds, I cannot fault them for supporting local beers; they do supply a wide range of local real ales, ciders and wines.

I am. I object to being taxed at 40% to aid those with whom I do not identify.

Stupid bloody ban anyway. Pubs and clubs have no atmosphere now; they are as sterile and fabricated as the average supermarket.

Smoking gave a club atmosphere? How so?

Smoking gave a club atmosphere? How so?

I simply feel it did. It's a personal belief that I really don't feel any necessity to justify.

I simply feel it did. It's a personal belief that I really don't feel any necessity to justify.

*brings Chris a smoking jacket and a snifter of brandy*

Wait until your local pub stops serving locally made beer, and starts bringing in your choice of either Budweiser, or Bud Light.

Crap "beers" compared to stuff we can get here in the UK....

Taste like toilet water.

I dont find any atmosphere has gone.. just me choking less on smoke.

*brings Chris a smoking jacket and a snifter of brandy*

You need a group of blonde bombshells to go along with that

Smoking gave a club atmosphere? How so?

Smoke my not have been the best thing in the world but have you smelt a night club since the ban came in? Stale beer, farts and BO are the only aromas now. Apparently some of the larger clubs are looking to install the same kind of odour producing machines that large supermarkets use to simulate the smell of freshly bake bread just to get rid of the smell of hot people in confined spaces.

Smoke my not have been the best thing in the world but have you smelt a night club since the ban came in? Stale beer, farts and BO are the only aromas now. Apparently some of the larger clubs are looking to install the same kind of odour producing machines that large supermarkets use to simulate the smell of freshly bake bread just to get rid of the smell of hot people in confined spaces.

Yup i've noticed that and I like the idea of having foam parties with scented bubbles to combat it *nods*

You have less money to spend on services to the general public, duh.

...but more economic liberty, duh.

As for the public smoking ban, I think the decision ought to be up to business owners concerning what to allow in their establishments/on their property.

Let them decide whether they'll allow smoking on their premises. If their customers like it, they'll do well. If not, they won't, and may adjust their stance accordingly (to remain, or become, profitable).

Business owners own businesses.

Imagine someone coming into your house and telling you not to smoke. You might say something like, "Get the hell out of my house, I'll smoke here if I want to."

I am. I object to being taxed at 40% to aid those with whom I do not identify.
Not agreed.
Stupid bloody ban anyway. Pubs and clubs have no atmosphere now; they are as sterile and fabricated as the average supermarket.

Much as I dislike Wetherspoons on many grounds, I cannot fault them for supporting local beers; they do supply a wide range of local real ales, ciders and wines.
Abso-fucking-lutely agreed on both fronts.

Yup i've noticed that and I like the idea of having foam parties with scented bubbles to combat it *nods*

I live in Manchester. The last foam party I went to almost resulted in hypothermia.

...but more economic liberty, duh.
'economic liberty', eh?

Not really. You still really have to spend money on things like health insurance in the US, you can just try and con yourself that this is not the case.

As for the public smoking ban, I think it ought to be up to business owners as to how they decide what to allow in their establishments/on their property.

Let them decide whether they'll allow smoking on their premises. If their customers like it, they'll do well. If not, they won't, and may adjust their stance accordingly (to remain, or become, profitable).

There are dozens upon dozens of other threads that debate that exact point. I fail to see the need for another one.

Oh wait, wait... *clicks fingers*. It's NSG. Of course. Silly me, carry on.

Smoking gave a club atmosphere? How so?
It just does. It's fantastic.

I hate them now, they smell of middle-aged men's BO, rather than, say, Marlboros.

Blech.

Much as I dislike Wetherspoons on many grounds, I cannot fault them for supporting local beers; they do supply a wide range of local real ales, ciders and wines.
And cheaply too, although admittedly the Boar has about as much soul as...something without much soul, anyway. And that's just as true before the ban, really.

It just does. It's fantastic.

I hate them now, they smell of middle-aged men's BO, rather than, say, Marlboros.

Blech.

I don't notice any difference to be honest but then again i've been living with it longer than England. I just altered my choice of pubs slightly.

I don't notice any difference to be honest but then again i've been living with it longer than England. I just altered my choice of pubs slightly.
Funnily enough, I only noticed it in pubs I hadn't been in before. Odd.

"If my smoking offends you, don't breathe."

You have less money to spend on services to the general public, duh.

Most people in the US aren't so keen as Europeans are on that. My dad especially. Says it causes lack of incentive. But that's not my opinion, and I mostly disagree with it, so don't challenge me on it.

"If my smoking offends you, don't breathe."
:eek:

Another person from York!

Whereabouts in York do you live?

Well I only ever bum smokes off other people so a reduction in tax isn't going to affect me, but then neither do I ever smoke in pubs, mainly at parties actually.

IMHO it's not a breach of the smoker's freedom to smoke but to the Publicans right to determine what can and cannot go on on their property.

Not agreed.

Abso-fucking-lutely agreed on both fronts.

Real Ale festival! It was as if they wanted me to skip General Studies and get drunk!:)

There is, I hope, a wetherspoons in York?

There is, I hope, a wetherspoons in York?
Oh yes.

And a brewery which sells its own ale, and many pubs which sell proper ale.

Ok, this is silly, but why not.

The UK has recently instituted a smoking ban, which basically prohibits smoking in public places ("public places" includes pubs, restaurants, and apparently churches). Obviously, this has had a mixed reaction, and some smokers, not just the super-smug FOREST types, have been very put out (while others have simply tried to quit). Freedom of association arguments have been met with a deafening wall of "well, what about my right to breathe clean air". As a[n admittedly light] smoker, here's my take on it:

It's a good thing, because it will greatly empower smokers to push for reductions in tobacco tax. The traditional argument is that it is needed to fund healthcare from the trillions of people cigarette smoke mercilessly slays, as well as being a deterrent measure. But now, anyone inhaling cigarette smoke is clearly choosing to do so: they are either a smoker, or they are purposefully consorting with our filthy kind in our smoke-ridden ghettos. The government has argued this is in fact about choice, and in that sense they are right. You now have to actively seek out cigarette smoke, and in doing so, are removing the moral burden of those who pay taxes.

The logical extension of the smoking ban, therefore, is reduction in cigarette taxation (deterrence being equally achieved through the casting out of smokers in social pariahdom).

So, whaddya think: just a pipe dream?

Yeah. Your country and mine have the National Health (ours is called Medicare,) so the taxpayer is still paying to treat smoking-related illnesses. Unless doctors and hospitals refuse to treat smokers, the tax will stay.

More generally, the taxes come first and the justification for them second.

Pay yer taxes or smoke chop-chop, you smelly loser! :p

The next time you're in a Cathotic church and the priest starts stinking the place up with incense, I guess you'd be within your rights to grab the fire extinguisher and extinguish the bastard for endangering your health.

Hmm. You guys have poor taste.

And/or fat fingers not suited for rollies.

It sure is a waste. They put a shit load in one. Most just burns up. I always preferred a bong or pipe.

Heh, stupid government. What right do they have to tell establishment owners they can't smoke in their own establishments? In any case, I don't smoke and I don't plan (cigarettes at least[but hey, they all say that]) but I find it intolerable that teh government wishes to interfere in the rights of the individual at all, let alone demanding people do the governments orders in their own establishment.

Yootopia: Do you live IN York or around it?

"public places" includes pubs, restaurants, and apparently churches

'Apparently'?

What on earth is a church if not a public place?

Yeah. Your country and mine have the National Health (ours is called Medicare,) so the taxpayer is still paying to treat smoking-related illnesses. Unless doctors and hospitals refuse to treat smokers, the tax will stay.


The taxpayer in this case (in Britain at least) is the smoker. Even Ash (www.ash.org.uk/html/smuggling/html/whytax99.html) admits that smokers pay more into the system then take out due to smoking related illnesses.

Not sure how Medicare and tobacco duty work elsewhere though.

Heh, stupid government. What right do they have to tell establishment owners they can't smoke in their own establishments? In any case, I don't smoke and I don't plan (cigarettes at least[but hey, they all say that]) but I find it intolerable that teh government wishes to interfere in the rights of the individual at all, let alone demanding people do the governments orders in their own establishment.
I'd have preferred a system where businesses have to make a smoking and a non-smoking bit (only the non-smoking bit is mandatory, however), because, as a smoker I know don't really like going to crappy local concerts if I can't even have a cig to cheer myself up and all that.
Yootopia: Do you live IN York or around it?
Actually in York. I take it you're from one of the surrounding villages?

I am. I object to being taxed at 40% to aid those with whom I do not identify.

Stupid bloody ban anyway. Pubs and clubs have no atmosphere now; they are as sterile and fabricated as the average supermarket.

40% tax, boy you must be rich. Earn less, move elsewhere, or stop being so miserly with ya dough.:D

40% tax, boy you must be rich. Earn less, move elsewhere, or stop being so miserly with ya dough.:D
I don't think he's earning enough to get 40% taxes at this juncture of his life, let's be honest.

You need a group of blonde bombshells to go along with that

Thats similar to the old shell suits of the 80's yeah?

Thats similar to the old shell suits of the 80's yeah?
Hahaha no.

Think "the lassies on anything with Bruce Forsythe". They are 'blonde bombshells'.

:eek:

Another person from York!

Whereabouts in York do you live?

Must be you're neigbour huh, I mean there are wot two streets in the whole of York?

I don't think he's earning enough to get 40% taxes at this juncture of his life, let's be honest.

Say are you calling him a liar?:D

Hahaha no.

Think "the lassies on anything with Bruce Forsythe". They are 'blonde bombshells'.

Ahhh yes well do I remember Brucies 'Dolly Dealers'

Must be you're neigbour huh, I mean there are wot two streets in the whole of York?
Only one, actually, The Shambles, which has the Minster and Clifford's Tower, as well as all of our museums and parks, as well as shops and cafés.

Or so you would probably think if you came here and listened to the York Tourist Board.

Perhaps they should outlaw smoking while near any other living creature while they're at it - oh, unless they're smoking too.

Perhaps they should outlaw smoking while near any other living creature while they're at it - oh, unless they're smoking too.

And what about PLANTS ? How do you think they like having OTHER PLANTS smouldering in their vicinity ? They must be rather seriously traumatized I think. . . .8-]

And what about PLANTS ? How do you think they like having OTHER PLANTS smouldering in their vicinity ? They must be rather seriously traumatized I think. . . .8-]

Oh, plants are living. ^^

Oh, plants are living. ^^

Umm yeah and what about air born bacteria, spores, fungus, a whole multitude of life!

Oh, plants are living. ^^

They aren't creatures though

I don't think he's earning enough to get 40% taxes at this juncture of his life, let's be honest.

But my parents are, and I will be in only a matter of years.

But my parents are, and I will be in only a matter of years.



:D

Thanks, I needed a good laugh.