Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 115212	2011-01-07 08:22:00	Fantastic news	somebody (208)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
1168046	2011-01-10 03:01:00	I like to think of the tax as an insurance, so that we gits don't have to pay. So irrespective of how it is divvied out, smokers pay their way. And then some.	Cicero (40)
1168047	2011-01-10 07:31:00	I like to think of the tax as an insurance, so that we gits don't have to pay. So irrespective of how it is divvied out, smokers pay their way. And then some. Ah! but they don't Ciccy, that's precisely the point, they make a disproportionate claim on a limited resource. The sooner they price smoking beyond the reach of average income earners the better. As Metla now seems to have acknowledged, they do not pay their way in the health system, though they could, and some blame for that probably lies with successive Governments and Ministers of Finance. But the worm is turning; in my local shopping centre there is only one place you will ever catch a whiff of smoke these days. Of all places it is outside the Florists, where the owner regularly smokes on the footpath outside his door. Can't be good for business. Time will tell. Billy	Billy T (70)
1168048	2011-01-11 05:32:00	The OP only mentioned the number of people who called quitline by the way. Nowhere does it say how many actually quit as a result.	Snorkbox (15764)
1168049	2011-01-11 06:51:00	According to the 1996 paper: A cost-benefit analysis of the average smoker: a government perspective (Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health Volume 20 Issue 6, Pages 607 - 611) which specifically studied the Australian situation, taxes well and truly cover smoking related illnesses, even without the recent tax rises . Abstract: The aim of this paper was to compare the benefit and costs of cigarette smoking from the government's perspective during a one-year period . This was undertaken by estimating, among other things, the publicly financed health care expenditure attributable to smoking and comparing it with tobacco taxes paid by smokers . This comparison of benefits and costs may provide a yardstick from which to measure the relative worth (in financial terms) an average smoker is to the government, an assessment that may be important when assessing health priorities and any level of commitment to reducing smoking rates . It is estimated that in 1989–90 an average smoker cost the government $203 . 57, while benefits received totalled an average of $620 . 56 in the same year . If the government were serious about addressing cigarette smoking as a primary health objective its efforts would portray this . The results of this analysis suggest that the objective of raising revenue from smoking is more of a priority than reducing smoking rates . Source(s): . interscience . wiley . com/journal/120147014/abstract" target="_blank">www3 . interscience . wiley . com What smoking costs The cost of smoking-related health care to the New Zealand taxpayer is about $250 million . There are also costs from litter, accidents, and fires . The government spends $28 million a year on smoking cessation and prevention programmes . In addition, the government loses income and other tax revenue from the lower productivity of sick smokers, and because dead smokers don’t work and don’t pay taxes . Brian Easton study .	Cicero (40)
1168050	2011-01-11 07:31:00	Ah! but they don't Ciccy, that's precisely the point, they make a disproportionate claim on a limited resource. The sooner they price smoking beyond the reach of average income earners the better. As Metla now seems to have acknowledged, they do not pay their way in the health system, though they could, and some blame for that probably lies with successive Governments and Ministers of Finance. But the worm is turning; in my local shopping centre there is only one place you will ever catch a whiff of smoke these days. Of all places it is outside the Florists, where the owner regularly smokes on the footpath outside his door. Can't be good for business. Time will tell. Billy If I fall off my perch 5 years earlier because of smoking that means among other things that that is over $50,000 not being paid out in old age benefit. There has been a black market for tobacco for ages and the higher the price the more lucrative the black market becomes and it is not illegal to grow your own baccy. When you stop driving your car Billy I will stop smoking. Both pollute.	mikebartnz (21)
1168051	2011-01-11 07:33:00	Just read the warning on the latest packet of ciggies I bought today. It says "smoking causes blindness". They used to say that about wanking to.	mikebartnz (21)
1168052	2011-01-11 07:40:00	When you stop driving your car Billy I will stop smoking. Both pollute. I could dispute this statement, but I'm too tired to do so. :p	pcuser42 (130)
1168053	2011-01-11 07:51:00	They used to say that about wanking to. Absolutely correct, and one of the first signs of excessive wanking is the inability to write two o's in succession because you have spent too much time fixated on one eye. Some chronic wank*rs end up in Parliament where they are mysteriously cured of the single o syndrome. Some say it is from repetitively writing or shouting "Me Too". Cheers Billy 8-{)	Billy T (70)
1 2 3 4 5 6