About time us smokers got some tax money back

michael j says:

02:07pm | 10/12/10

INdeed i took up smoking at age 10 (grade 5) i have
adictted to them 43 years,my lifes dream when i was 17
was to stop smoking by age 21,didn,t happen,i have had 8
goes at giving up during my longest (2,5 yrs) off
the evil shit,i watched
my father die from throat cancer,i won’t go into details ,
but it is still the worst death i have seen,
as for myself i have out lived him, but i know he wood have found
his grandkids perrty cool
i have times when i lose feelings in both feet,and they change colour from red to blue so i suppose it will bye-bye to
them soon,
patches don’t seem to work for me ,physical traning got me off them for that 2,5 but that is not an option these days
What i would like to see is the tobbaco industy shut down
and stripped of all their stripped of all their i’ll gotten gains
i say this because it has been proved that over the years
they have manipulated nicotine and other chemicals to make
cigerrattes more adictive,,i know that i was hooked sience that first pack of cigs we shared bettwen 5 of us,,,
and i believe ciggs to be the true gateway to hell
for those of you that don;t smoke,lucky you
to those of you that do smoke you,poor barsteds
try harder you can do it (not)

acotrel says:

06:29am | 12/12/10

Smokers get their share of the tax revenue when they’re in the public hospital dying from the effects of the lung infection every smoker carries!  They get value for money in the form of the antibiotics used to treat the infection which usually kills them in the end by causing pneumonia, after they’ve vomitted the pharmaceuticals. Yul Brynner sent you the right message!

acotrel says:

06:35am | 12/12/10

My father found giving up smoking was easy.  All it took was for the doctors to tell him he’d die in the next two weeks, if he didn’t stop!  He stopped smoking overnight!  I’m very angry that companies are permitted to research ways to make their products more addictive!

Zander says:

07:54am | 10/12/10

There have been calls to tax sugary and processed foods similarly to smoking. It’s a bit more complex and difficult to do. There is a GST on many of these things that does not apply to fresh food. I hope it does happen

Rossco says:

10:40am | 10/12/10

A tax on junk foods or highly sugary or salted foods is complete nanny state garbage. I have to pay extra because some fat chick cant stop eating cadbury chocolates and buckets of KFC chicken? Ridiculous and it wont wash with the greater public.

Zander says:

11:02am | 10/12/10

Too bad, Rossco. Junk food costs us heaps of money. It’s like a smoker claiming that they shouldn’t have to pay extra/inflated tax because they only smoke 1 pack per year when there are smokers lighting up 3 packs per day.

There is no social or health benefit in smoking or junk food - there are massive costs associated with both - it should be taxed heavily.

hot tub political machine says:

11:07am | 10/12/10

One hear a radio interview with a British health journal editor who said he was certain every Western government would have a fat tax withing the next 10 years - I heard this about 5-6 years ago

Tim says:

11:44am | 10/12/10

Zander,
smoking and fatty/sugary foods are not even close to being the same.
A person can eat fatty/sugary foods with no health consequence as long as they are getting enough excercise whilst the health consequences of cigarettes are intrinsic to the act of smoking.

Matthew says:

11:57am | 10/12/10

“So why not tax fast food and tax people who have an unreasonable BMI (> 40)?”

Because it is possible to have an unreasonable BMI due to other purposes.  I don’t disagree with taxing junk food (fast does not mean junk i might add) but taxing larger people won’t help.  It just sends people with low self esteem (larger people) into depression when it’s not always their fault.

Mel says:

12:15pm | 10/12/10

ah Tim not every smoker gets cancer or has the health problems you allude to

Geoff - Brisbane says:

12:48pm | 10/12/10

@ Mel - Although, a person can live 100 years without smoking. but only a couple of weeks without eating

Against the Man says:

01:03pm | 10/12/10

Good point Matthew. It is a complex issue.

Tim says:

03:54pm | 10/12/10

Mel,
and no doubt some people will survive getting the Ebola virus.
What’s your point?

Mel says:

04:48pm | 10/12/10

my point is that there is no 100% proof only conjecture that smoking causes cancer

OddCreature says:

07:49pm | 11/12/10

Well your first big problem is that you have to actually define what junk food is before you can tax it. As another Punch writer pointed out a few weeks back we can all agree maccas and KFC are bad for us, but how else do you define junk food? Because when you think in terms of salt, sugar and saturated fat a gourmet meal from a 5 star restaurant is probably just as bad for you. And fast food isn’t necessarily junk food.

Second, it’s been statistically proven that a lot of people on lower incomes are fatter. Therefore a tax on junk food (supposing you could overcome my first point) would punish the lower income earners, much as cigarette taxes do now. Besides which, weight loss doesn’t come cheap. Gym memberships, dietician appointments, Weight Watchers meetings, and personal trainers all cost money which low income earners don’t have, so you’re only punishing them further for a situation they already feel they can’t change. Not to mention what it’s doing to their self esteem.

Finally - a tax on BMI? How would that be enforced? Would I be expected to list my weight on my tax return? How would the ATO know if I was telling the truth? Would an auditor be sent to our homes with scales and a tape measure? That notion is pure silliness.

Look, taxes on cigarettes were always a band aid option. The government trying to look like they’re doing something about the issue without actually doing any work. This plan to subsidise nicotine patches is the first real action the government has taken on smoking in a quarter of a century and I applaud it. So please let us not slap another band aid on obesity by upping the tax. The smoking issue has proven that band aid taxes don’t work, so lets learn the lesson and have some real action on obesity now! A good start might be bulk billing dieticians and nutritionists.

And please, please, please, please, please just once can we have a debate about a health-related issue that doesn’t result in a fat-bashing session? The obesity issue actually has bugger all to do with this article. The point here is that the government are finally doing something real to tackle cigarette smoking. This is a good thing, and all you’ve done is put a massive negative spin on it.

Reg says:

12:26pm | 12/12/10

A great summary old one. The discussion is about smoking and to drag it off onto food is a childish diversion. If we want to lose weight we can cut or moderate any combination of SALT, SUGAR, SAVORY, ALCOHOL , CALORIES and EXERCISE, none of which are intrinsically dangerous, such as smoking is.

I would like to see the sign that says, ” Police Targetting this week, Smoking while Driving.” (Double demerit point if there are children in the car).

Melly says:

12:56pm | 13/12/10

OddCreature, one of the reasons that a higher proportion of overweight people who have low incomes is because of the simple fact that fast/junk food is generally cheaper, especially compared to lean cuts of meat and fresh fruit and veggies. Maybe the introduction of a tax will reduce the price difference, making these healthier foods seem like a viable alternative.

A few days ago, I was in coles on my work tea break buying an apple. It was 90c, but as I was paying I saw cadbury chocolate bars at the register for $1. I know that if I was hungry, and had $1 in my pocket I would be going for the chocolate, not the apple, as im sure would most other people.

over it says:

01:01pm | 13/12/10

Tim says: “A person can eat fatty/sugary foods with no health consequence as long as they are getting enough excercise whilst the health consequences of cigarettes are intrinsic to the act of smoking.”

Where did you hear that one from? Fatty foods clog your arteries. Doesn’t matter how good you look on the outside, your body suffers on the inside if all you eat is junk food. How can you NOT know that.

Damo says:

11:39pm | 15/12/10

Why are people so worried about the health of others? People know the health risks with smoking. If they want to smoke, let them. People also know that eating too much junk food is bad for their health. If they want to keep eating it, let them! Stop trying to control every aspect of peoples lives. Give us back our Freedoms. We know that smoking and eating junk food will shorten a persons life. But its their right to do it if they want. Why do you care so much? The world is over populated as it is anyway.

Adam says:

01:20pm | 10/12/10

I gave up smoking 5 years ago. Then after a year I decided that I was missing out on something I enjoyed and decided to take up smoking again. Haven’t regretted it since.

Quitting is simple - just stop. Addiction is all in your head. But if you want to smoke because you enjoy it, stop using a supposed addiction as an excuse.

VickiPS says:

01:57pm | 10/12/10

Oh Adam, you are funny!  “I can give up smoking any time”.  “I smoke because I choose to”.  Virtually word for word out of the Addict’s Dictionary of Rationalisations.  Of COURSE you were missing out on something you enjoyed.  That’s the addiction bit, get it?  Your brain chemistry has been permanently altered.  “Addiction is all in your head”—exactly, whoever said it wasn’t?  But it’s still addiction. 

It’s been nearly 3 years since I gave up, I’ve been clinically depressed for most of that time and I miss cigarettes every bloody day.  But I have a predisposition to addiction (10 years sober) so I will be damned if I am going to give in after all this angst.

acotrel says:

08:36pm | 15/12/10

Most smokers don’t die of lung cancer, it the same germ that causes bronchitis and eventually pnuemonia, and consequent strokes, that usually gets them. Smoking stuffs the lung clearance mechanism, the bacteria do the rest.

Greg says:

08:30am | 10/12/10

Probably should’ve read it, despite its “length”. He actually acknowledges that smokers are a net cost to the taxpayer.

Tracker says:

09:04am | 10/12/10

@pat, you are an idiot to compare marijuana to tobacco. I smoke a joint then drive a car and i am off with the fairies and rolling down the road in my mind. I smoke a joint and operate machinery and it goes soooo slow and isn’t it funny watching my arm get ripped off.. i think you get my point. I smoke a cigarette and i am still aware of my senses. This is the problem with anti-smokers always looking for something to compare with to denigrate smokers or tobacco.

Burko says:

10:34am | 10/12/10

@ Tracker….......where in the article is the effect of nicotine vs THC measured? I though it had to do with tax and smoking, the effects on Public Health and the PBS. Maybe Pat was slightly off the mark, but you sir are in a different time zone. Perhaps you should read before posting…......especially when describing some one as an idiot.

The Badger says:

12:24pm | 10/12/10

Yes tracker
you are still aware of your senses.
except your sense of smell and taste.

Get off the fags - idiot.

Ben C says:

12:49pm | 10/12/10

@ Burko, I think Tracker has every right to call pat an idiot. Sure, the article does not compare the effects of nicotine vs THC. So why does pat bring up the marijuana vs tobacco debate? Just because they’re consumed the same way?

I wholeheartedly agreee with Tracker - I can’t see where Penbo is a hypocrite when he’s condemning the use of an illegal substance and complaining about the taxing of a legal substance. Yes, they’re both dangerous and addictive, but at least tobacco doesn’t cloud the mind and subsequently put other people in a more immediate position of risk because of its use.

pat says:

01:09pm | 10/12/10

Tracker to be fair I said both habits were dangerous and addictive, which they are. Your veiw would be more relevant if maintaining pot’s illegality actually stopped anyone from smoking it, which it doesn’t.

Tracker says:

03:11pm | 10/12/10

@badger, why should i stop smoking when it is a legal product, contributes to government waste and extravagance and i enjoy it ? I have no problem with the price of cigarettes and they can make it $100 a cigarette and can always go black market if I want to then where are you going to get your precious dollars to support your family Part A, Part B or whatever welfare systems this country has to support the poor to middle classes. As for smell and taste, i have quite acute smell and quite fussy tastes so this taste and smell theory is nothing but an urban myth. Keep the anger flowing though, nothing makes me more happy than to p*$$  off a poor to middle class anti-smoker reliant on my tobacco tax dollars I contribute to this fine country..lol Merry Christmas and don’t forget to include me on your Xmas card list PS, You CAN quit smoking. Call Quitline 131 848, talk to your doctor or pharmacist, or visit http://www.quitnow.info.au

The Badger says:

04:43pm | 10/12/10

tracker
You should stop because I care about you and so does your family.
besides
If you quit and get your sense of taste and smell back, you will smell what you’ve been missing.

hot tub political machine says:

08:33am | 10/12/10

Roughly 70% of all people in hospital are smokers

Macca says:

08:57am | 10/12/10

@HTPM, I find that hard to believe.

I’m not saying you’re incorrect, I’m probably quite naive to the fact, but I generally don’t agree with most of your posts, and it’s Friday, so I really can’t be bothered bucking the trend.

Some data or something may change my tune

Berni says:

09:27am | 10/12/10

If we need the govt to ban smoking for our own safety then they really need to ban all climbing too.
On a nursing site I saw a T-Shirt that had printed on it “Hi I’m your nurse, and what f*cking stupid thing did you do to yourself?”
I understood that shirt, as a front line health worker….. I can only sit here shaking my head because anything more may be a breach of privacy.

I would love to know where this statement “Roughly 70% of all people in hospital are smokers” came from. What a load of crap. I have asked that question of many many hospital patients (I REALLY mean MANY patients) and without question the majority are not current smokers (meaning now or within the past 5 years).

iansand says:

09:30am | 10/12/10

And 93% of them invent statistics to suit their argument.

Adam Diver says:

09:43am | 10/12/10

@ HTPM - are you serious? Do you have a link to back that up, because that number is far higher than I would of assumed. I would love to see that data

@ Macca, I think the increase in medical expenditure, routinely promised should be aimed less at upgrading hospitals and more at preventing people from needing them.

James1 says:

09:47am | 10/12/10

When I quit three years ago, the patches I used cost less than smoking.  I can’t see this policy making any real difference, if the situation remains the same.

PaulB says:

10:24am | 10/12/10

Doubt its 93 percent but certainly if you lump in the smokers with the already damaged ex-smokers then you’d be getting well up there.  Add in the dope smokers with their various schizophrenias that disrupt emergency departments and clog up psych wards then you’d have an interesting stat study for someone’s Nursing phd.

hot tub political machine says:

10:24am | 10/12/10

I got the roughly 70% statistic from a close friend RMO working at a hospital in Adelaide, though he was talking generally rather than about an Adelaide specific study.

If you have a look at studies (its a very heavily researched area) you find numbers higher and lower depending on the country/what kind of hospital ect. This RMO was referring to all purpose hospitals rather than specialist maternity hospitals

Macca says:

10:39am | 10/12/10

@HTPM, so when you say roughly in the future, I should translate that as “someone I know said based on their occassional obsurvations that…?”

hot tub political machine says:

10:52am | 10/12/10

No Macca,

In this case the opinion comes from a medical professional - a very close friend not an aquaintance - who was working with patients who were smokers and has access to the hospitals admission stats

Matthew says:

12:10pm | 10/12/10

HPTM, so he went through all the vigorous scientific requirements for this study?  Like a random sample size that’s large enough and covers all areas?

You clearly state “Roughly 70% of all people in hospital are smokers” then state “from a close friend RMO working at a hospital in Adelaide”.  Which is it, one Adelaide hospitals or all hospitals?

I work in IT in a hospital and have access to *all* records if necessary but on any given day I might see about 3-4 smokers outside in a hospital of 300+ beds.  That doesn’t suggest anywhere near 210 smoking patients as you suggest.  You can do some calculations that’d expect about 3 people to be outside the hospital smoking *constantly*.  (assuming each person had about 3 cigarettes in an 8 hour day and stayed out there for approximately 5 minutes while smoking it).

The Badger says:

12:28pm | 10/12/10

I find the 70% high especially considering that many people will lie and say they don’t smoke.
Don’t know if it is official policy, but I suspect that there are certain procedures and treatments that are not available to smokers, in the same way that you can’t get a liver transplant if you are an alcoholic.

hot tub political machine says:

12:36pm | 10/12/10

Mathew,

If there is anyone, in any profession that can’t read a study and understand how reliable it is then that would be a worry. Of course if the study hadn’t passed peer review already then it wouldn’t be published anyway. It is an odd question you ask.

I don’t know what the study was or which method he uses to record/digest the information- what I’m doing is trusting an expert practitioner’s knowledge. When I go to a doctor and get their medical opinion I don’t ask them which studies they base this on or how many recent conferences they have attended on the illness/drug/surgical method–  I actually acknowledge which of us is likely to know better given for one of us it’s a vocation and for the other its not.

Also I’m guessing you can see the flaws in using how many people are outside a hospital smoking as a reliable study, but in case not off the top of my head I can think of #of patients too incapacitated/’unconscious to be outside smoking, # of patients embarrassed about smoking when they are in hospital because they have just been told it’s the cause, # of patients who don’t like standing outside in hospital gowns, # of patients only in for a short stay or emergency procedure going home soon and waiting until then to smoke, # of patients who are under age smokers and unwilling to smoke in front of parents/carers…..I’m sure we could think of more.

Chris says:

10:36am | 10/12/10

Wow, ok then. So couldnt the same method of thinking be used for Alcohol? It Creates antisocial behavious, costs the health system millions, it increase crime and violence, Why not introduce a Prohibition on Alcohol?

Or better yet, Seeing how you are big supporter for Facist ideologies how about you move to China and Ill stay here, have a smoke and allow some refugees (or boat ppl as you call them) to live in a country without persercution based on ones personal choices.

Davida says:

11:31am | 10/12/10

@Chris,
Apologies Chris ( sarcasm doesn’t always work in print).  I AM a smoker…...my point is it’s “us” now ( along with the obese, boat people etc) but if it was no longer “us” it would be someone/something else that was apparently responsible for draining/wasting public resources and denying others of what they see as their entitlement.  The beauty of judgement and blame is you never run out of scapegoats.

mickijo says:

02:58pm | 10/12/10

In an idle moment one day, count up exactly what you spend on cigarettes in one year. ...When you recover from your swoon, count up exactly what you could buy with that money, the holiday you could take? The new thingy? Dream on and know that with a bit of ‘WON"T power’[will power is useless] you can make it. I did . Too late but I did it

Duff says:

09:26am | 10/12/10

And why is it, exactly, that we think smoking makes people look “cool”?  I don’t get it.  The people milling around at the bottom of my building, furiously gulping down acrid smoke in all weather conditions certainly look anything but cool to me.  They actually look pathetic and I feel sympathy for them, not envy.  Sorry, I don’t mean to sound smug, it’s just that I don’t get why we think holding a little burning stick to our mouths looks ‘cool’.

acotrel says:

08:46pm | 15/12/10

My father didn’t look ‘cool’ sitting in hospital crying as a result of his third stroke.  He knew he was dying, and faced his death bravely.  His tears were not caused by sadness, but the fact that part of his brain had been destroyed.  He was always a happy sociable man, and even joked about the long green box that used to be wheeled out of the ward each morning! Forget the money implications for giving up smoking.  Think about where you will finish up. It isn’t really such a slow process!

Giveitup says:

08:21am | 10/12/10

Oh please. Sitting next to you at that cafe as you blow smoke into our faces, not giving a rat’s ass that it stinks, ruins the occasion and is really unhealthy, is the most frustrating thing for non smokers. You claim your right to smoke is more important than my right to breath air not filled with smoke. Just go away and die… oh you’ve been smoking a pack a day for 33 years. You will.

Laura says:

09:06am | 10/12/10

of course he will, everybody dies

Syl says:

09:50am | 10/12/10

Wow Giveitup, how amazingly condescending and inappropriate.

Steve has a point, the education wasnt there 30 years ago and many people did take up smoking, it is addictive and many have not or can not give up. (Nor should they be forced to, it is a personal decision).
Smoking is NOT illegal, and until it is I just wish the amazingly smug non-smokers like yourself would get off their high horses and show a little couertesy.

Smoker are people too, with rights, strengths and failings and are no less a person than you, no matter how superior you think you are.  The thing that frustrates me is people like you who vilify and abuse people for doing something legal, that they enjoy, even when they are not hurting you.

I am not a smoker, never have been, and I dont like smoke being blown in my face.  But you know what, my experience is that if I am sitting near a smoker they tend to go out of their way NOT to blow it near me, often excusing themself from the table or asking me first if I mind them smoking.

I have no problem with smoking / non-smoking areas in fact i believe they are necessary.  I just don’t go in the smoking area if I want my air clear of smoke, it really is quite simple.  I am not so conceited to think that my needs (or wants) should outweigh the needs of someone else, and if someone else wants to smoke, good luck to them, let them have somewhere to do it, don’t treat them like second class citizens.

Lastly, you say “go away and die…..” wow, you wish a person to die because they like something you dont…. Words cannot explain how disgusted I am to read this comment, or be associated with non-smokers like you.

NEFFA says:

11:50am | 10/12/10

i’m with you Giveitup. Smokers are the biggest pack of whinging whining victims.
Heroin, Alcohol and food addicts dont get half the support to give up you do, and still you complain.
I am fed up with living with a city drowning in cigarette butts and having my right to breathe fresh clean air taken from me because you dont have the fortitude to give up.

Giveitup says:

11:40pm | 10/12/10

Gee Syl, what fantasy land do you live in? I’d like to move there.

In my experience smokers are rude and obnoxious about their smoking, don’t even notice or care when their smoke is stinking out the place, litter the streets with butts and pollute our waterways and have no problem coughing up half a lung and spitting it onto the pavement.

I know this not because I’m a conceited smug non-smoker but because every single day at least 30 smokers congregate at any given time on my street corner to smoke during their breaks and they’re certainly not being polite about it. And yes, I do cross the street when I have to pass because gee, I seem all out of standard-issue gas masks.

Smokers are a detriment to my health as well as theirs and certainly don’t give a stuff about it. They smoke in non-smoking places without so much as a half-hearted thought. I know, shocking isn’t it.

At the recent U2 concert at Etihad Stadium, clearly a non-smoking venue, 20,000 people were crammed into the general admission and sure enough many rude, obnoxious smokers had to light up, and would not put their cigarettes out, even when asked nicely.  Am I supposed to move? Why? I’m not the one being antisocial and breaking the rules.

Sure it’s legal, go smoke yourself to death. Just don’t do it in my face.

Syl says:

09:06am | 13/12/10

Ah Giveitup

You pigeonhole a pretty large cross section of our community as rude and obnixious (whilst displaying those very characteristics) and uncaring of anyone else but themselves (whilst also displaying said characteristic).  As soon as you start accusing an entire group of people of something that comes down to individual personality traits I stop reading.  Its rubbish and unfair.
Yes there are obnoxious smokers, just as there are obnoxious non-smokers, so why do feel it is necessary to attack them all?  I explained that I am all for non-smoking areas and smoking areas, as long as the rules are being adhered to, if they are not, you have every right to complain, just dont run off on a diatribe blaming everyone.
I certainly dont live in a “fantasy land” as you claim, maybe Ive met more socially concious smokers than you, or maybe Im a little more willing to judge someone on what they actually do, not a stereotype Ive decided to make up.
I never defended people breaking the rules, reading comprehension is a great tool.
I don’t know why I am even answering your post, as soon as someone says “go away and die…” to someone they dont know, for no reason, their opinion, really, is always going to be meaningless.

Burko says:

10:25am | 10/12/10

Or another idea is Champix. I smoked a pack a day for about 20 years, went to the local GP, got my script and was off the somkes in about a week. Haven’t touched a smoke in about seven months. I would highly recommend them to anyone

leegirl says:

10:28am | 10/12/10

Read it…...........still smoking

Richard The Lionheart says:

09:11am | 10/12/10

Thanks Tim, I have a cancer unrelated to smoking and enjoy my baby boomer puff with a drink or following a meal. The highlight of my year was dining in the empty Intercontinental Hotel restaurant at Aqaba, the piano playing my favourite tunes and the waiter emptying the ashtray at will. My smoking companion and self were discussing how sports injuries were probably costing the National health schemes more than smoking related illnesses and that our taxes were now more than covering other complaints. We mused on how so many people came down with air-conditioning related respiratory complaints on cruise ships and following long flights and how hotels and office blocks never enjoy fresh air. We remembered when airlines gave out free promotional ciggarettes and we would climb the spiral staircase to the Captains Lounge and enjoy a fag and congac. Pilots forced fresh air down the aisle to keep us awake and enjoy the flight far more than today’s fetid experience. I can dine and drink al fresco in 99% of countries including Singapore in set areas which I don’t mind. At home I never dine out and never go into the city in case I get arrested or abused over a cup of coffee. There are never recepticles for my butts so I carry my own even in the third world. You ain’t seen nothing tax wise when the Govt. tobbacco taxes dry up. It will be your turn next. Please just leave me alone with my taxed luxuries.

Cam says:

09:42am | 10/12/10

I agree with your sentiment -Tim.  But the dying early and saving society money on health care is not really the case.  They don’t always just drop off the twig, they can dangle off it for some time - all the while requiring some form of care.  It just brings the cost forward a few decades.

Tim says:

10:32am | 10/12/10

Cam,
on average, a nasty cancer or smoking caused heart disease is a much quicker and cheaper way of dying than sitting in an old folk’s home with demetia for a decade.
If people want to kill themselves with their vice of choice, then that’s OK with me as long as it doesn’t cost me anything.

O'Really says:

12:34pm | 10/12/10

Sounds like:
I hunt I vote
I fish I vote

Yes, smoking, hunting and fishing are how I base my vote.

fish says:

01:26pm | 10/12/10

D*ckheads also vote - what’s your point?

El says:

12:06pm | 10/12/10

Smokers pay their own hospital 3 fold, due to the amount of tax they pay on cigarettes, plus they also pay income tax. Maybe do some actual research before commenting. Uneducated people frustrate me.

hot tub political machine says:

01:21pm | 10/12/10

El, if you look below you will see me discussing a study that shows the costs of smoking outweight the taxes - though I think the tax rate is about right myself. To paraphrase you “Maybe figure out if the person has done some research before telling them to do some research”

The Shag says:

10:02am | 10/12/10

Of course smoking products other than tobacco have no effect on your health, and thats before you look at the potential for psychosis. It seems the damage may have already been done.

GG says:

07:17pm | 10/12/10

At least I know where to use apostrophes.

Ben81 says:

01:22pm | 10/12/10

I’m glad I quit smoking just a few weeks before the tax hike was announced, I probably would have kept right on smoking just to spite them.

anne says:

10:23am | 10/12/10

The government collects around $7b in tobacco excise pa but tobacco costs a staggering $31b a year in healthcare, lost productivity and other costs, according to a government report by health economists.

hot tub political machine says:

11:20am | 10/12/10

Was that the Access Economics report? I remember thinking 1) It’s weird they put an actual dollar figure on years lost due to death and 2) they probably underestimate the knock on effect off death outside economics

Dr N Riviera says:

01:36pm | 10/12/10

Anne, the figure of $31b in healthcare costs was achieved by blaming smoking for every single illness suffered by smokers. “You seem to have denge fever sir. Do you smoke? I see…another smoking related illness!”

pediasource says:

12:20pm | 12/12/10

Medicare is the major component of the total Commonwealth health budget, taking up about 43% of the total. The program is estimated to cost $18.3 billion in 2007–08.[1] This figure is projected to rise by almost 4% annually in real terms over the next few years.[1]

Duff says:

11:24am | 10/12/10

True that.  I find it hard to believe that cost is the reason people aren’t going on the patch.

Peter says:

02:09pm | 10/12/10

The problem Duff is giving a nicotine patch is like giving a herion patch to herion addicts. I do not recommend this method of stopping smoking. If someone is ready to stop, they’ll do it with patches or no patches.

Having a patch on your arm is a 10 week reminder that your a smoker.

Mark says:

12:05pm | 10/12/10

The greens have made it pretty clear they are siding with Labor and have supported them on this legislation. Who will you vote for now?

True Believer says:

01:29pm | 10/12/10

Rob:

I concur with your post. My father was a heavy smoker, at 70 he had to have both legs amputated - he was in hospital for 8 months as the surgeon fought to save at least one knee so he could have artificial limbs. Every week they had to take a bit more. He was not a diabetic, was otherwise healthy, but died at 81 of lung cancer and secondaries in the liver. 

It is fine for people to be full of bravado when they are young but the price they will probably pay will make them live to regret it. My sister and I have been plagued with asthma, lung infections etc as a result of the passive smoking.

I would that the wretched things would be made illegal.

True Believer says:

01:29pm | 10/12/10

Rob:

I concur with your post. My father was a heavy smoker, at 70 he had to have both legs amputated - he was in hospital for 8 months as the surgeon fought to save at least one knee so he could have artificial limbs. Every week they had to take a bit more. He was not a diabetic, was otherwise healthy, but died at 81 of lung cancer and secondaries in the liver. 

It is fine for people to be full of bravado when they are young but the price they will probably pay will make them live to regret it. My sister and I have been plagued with asthma, lung infections etc as a result of the passive smoking.

I would that the wretched things would be made illegal.

Mark says:

12:25pm | 10/12/10

They worked for me. It took me a few goes though.I think for most people they think it will be easy on the patches. Its not, but its easier for most than going cold turkey.

The Badger says:

12:38pm | 10/12/10

They work Nicole. I know many who have used them. One person tried them failed and then tried again the next year and hasn’t smoked for ten years. I quit cold turkey, but that’s just me.

Think of your children. Do you want them and your grandchildren to see you wheezing with tubes coming out of your nose fighting cancer?

NicoleG says:

01:10pm | 10/12/10

I might give them a go. I’ve tried those fake ciggy things (can’t think of the name) and they were useless. And Badger I do think of those things. It would be horrible for my children to see that. Wouldn’t be too nice for me either. I need more will power.

James1 says:

02:05pm | 10/12/10

Worked for me too NicoleG.  I only used them for about two weeks though, and went cold turkey on the nicotine from there.  My wife is convinced they were a placebo thing for me, and that I was just ready to give it up.

The one that worked for my wife were the nicotine inhalers - much like the fake cigarettes (did you mean “Beadies”?) they mimic the smoking action, but unlike fake cigarettes you get a little bit of nicotine from them.

That said, it was the second attempt for both of us, and I think that time we were just in the right place mentally - we were ready.  That is the important thing - if you are not sure you want to do it, it will not end well.

AnthonyG says:

07:31pm | 10/12/10

try willpower luv

stephen says:

07:53pm | 11/12/10

If the Nazis are so smart how come they didn’t test their Zyklon B on rabbits ?

stephen says:

12:44pm | 12/12/10

‘the’ rabbits would be better.

“Thanks Sarah”.

Anti smoker says:

11:07am | 13/12/10

Smoking is a killer no matter what you smoke. It must cost the country billions every year

neverSayNever says:

06:37pm | 19/12/10

Anti smoker says: 11:07am | 13/12/10 “Smoking is a killer no matter what you smoke. It must cost the country billions every year”

Check out the tax raised from nicotine tax revenue. 

Nicotine tax pays for most of the hospital system.