Don't blame me, blame the pot heads I know. I've seen them completely waste their lives, addicted to that crap.
I still like you though.
Smoking
- Thread starter Big Andy
- Start date
I still like you though.
This is one of those myths you hear.
I fail to see how smoking is “fun”.
I’ve probably smoked about 10 cigs in my life, as an impressionable 18 year old on nights out to look “cool”.
It stinks, tastes like shit, knocks years off your life. Hardly what I’d call fun.
Regretted each and every time I smoked.
I’ve probably smoked about 10 cigs in my life, as an impressionable 18 year old on nights out to look “cool”.
It stinks, tastes like shit, knocks years off your life. Hardly what I’d call fun.
Regretted each and every time I smoked.
I smoked for years. It's great fun at first. You get that tobacco rush and it feels great. But you soon stop feeling that, yet you're always chasing that remembered high. I smoked for 16 years and I didn't really even enjoy it. The taste is awful really and your mouth feels rank afterwards. It just becomes a habit.
I wasn't even 'addicted' in the true sense of the word. At one point I was on almost 40 Marlboro Red Lungbusters a day but even then it was just because I could, so I did. I was able to light up one after another at work all day. I never once in my life had a true craving for a cig and when I finally stopped, I just stopped and that was that. No nicotine patches, no gradual withdrawl or any of that stuff. 16 years ago now.
So I wasn't even truly addicted like a lot of people are, where they just can't cope or function without nicotine. Despite that, I smoked at least 20 a day for 16 years and did god knows how much damage to myself from a habit I never even really enjoyed. Tobacco is evil. Almost every smoker I knew wanted and tried to give up, but just couldn't.
There is nothing good about it, it just fecks up people's lives and the only pleasure is feeding the addiction that it forces upon you. Tobacco companies are scum.
I wasn't even 'addicted' in the true sense of the word. At one point I was on almost 40 Marlboro Red Lungbusters a day but even then it was just because I could, so I did. I was able to light up one after another at work all day. I never once in my life had a true craving for a cig and when I finally stopped, I just stopped and that was that. No nicotine patches, no gradual withdrawl or any of that stuff. 16 years ago now.
So I wasn't even truly addicted like a lot of people are, where they just can't cope or function without nicotine. Despite that, I smoked at least 20 a day for 16 years and did god knows how much damage to myself from a habit I never even really enjoyed. Tobacco is evil. Almost every smoker I knew wanted and tried to give up, but just couldn't.
There is nothing good about it, it just fecks up people's lives and the only pleasure is feeding the addiction that it forces upon you. Tobacco companies are scum.
I have never seen anyone contradict themself so much, especially that last bolded part. Bravo.
It’s just disgusting
and phenomenally thick
and phenomenally thick
As ridiculous as this sounds, I've met similar people, and I envy you
Smokers affect others in the sense that if someone smoke's neae you he's damaging your longues. I snoke casually as wellz and the only reason it gives.me pleasure is because I'm addicted to smoking. Everyone who says otherwise are lying to themselves.
Im not for banning smoking in your own home, but in public places, hell yes.
And this particular law is not banning current smokers from smoking, it's preventing children from picking it up and why the feck would anyone want people to start smoking.
Its (a) unnecessary (b) hard to enforce as people age (c) stupid - haven't we learned by now that making addictive substances illegal does not work (d) illiberal.So I've not really seen much of it, but I can't understand why people are against this rolling age increase on smoking, surely it should be banned altogether now that people are aware of the negative effects both on health and pocket?
Nobody, even heavy smokers, will realistically want their children and grandchildren to smoke, so I can't see why there's a resistance to it?
It does make me laugh though to think that in about 50 years time, there will need to be an older boy buying fags for a 65 year old man
Obviously they'll just move on to vapes in the future, but at least it's safer than smoking (allegedly) and would surely have a huge impact on lung cancer levels?
Bet it doesn't. All this will accomplish is to give scumbag dealers a new income stream. Brilliant work lads!
The way smoking has been managed out of society is a perfect example of how legalisation gives society tons of ways of keeping something undesirable under control, which banning something does not. That the anti smokers would forget this and over reach was inevitable, some people just like to ban things I guess. What, a total cultural change and near elimination of smoking not enough for everyone?
Ban it and watch smoking increase again. Eejits.
Last edited:
Next stop hailing smokers in a smoke free prison
Is it?
https://ash.org.uk/media-centre/new...ciety-17bn-5bn-more-than-previously-estimated
https://www.statista.com/statistics/284329/tobacco-duty-united-kingdom-hmrc-tax-receipts/#:~:text=In 2022/23, tobacco duty,in the previous financial year.
You should maybe arm yourself with facts before deciding on your opinion.
but what would i mix my spliffs with
ye just dont think things through here
ye just dont think things through here
Exactly. There will always be a baseline demand for tobacco and now it's criminalised. Brilliant work everyone.
if spliff gets legalized and then tobacco is outlawed i am calling joe duffy and i wont hold back i swear to god
You quoted a site that says the cost is higher than the tax take?
Oh dear. Anyway, cost to society is estimated to be from £10-17bn so that's more than the tax take.
The cost to the public purse is higher
While smoking has a direct impact on the NHS, it can also be said to have an indirect impact on society more widely (for instance, fire services need to be called out to incidents caused by smoking and ill health can result in lost productivity at work). The think tank Policy Exchange made an attempt in 2010 at quantifying the wider costs, coming up with a £14 billion total (including the £2.7 billion estimate of NHS costs).
Herbal cigarettes. A poor substitute but needs must. I suffered this to ditch the fags, so you have to as well.
You haven’t read it have you? Oh dear. Most of it is ‘productivity loss’ to business. Oh no, some billionaires have a little less money. It’s a rudimentary calculation based on smoke breaks and the like. How much do lazy bastards cost? It also ignores the economic boost from people buying cigarettes which would almost wipe out that ‘cost’.
Tax revenue far exceeds NHS costs. It is not a myth.
The original claim:
Tax on tobacco greatly exceeds the cost to the NHS
Your assertion:
This is one of those myths you hear
What the link says:
Cost to the NHS: 2.7 billion
Tax take from smoking: 10 billion
Conclusion based on link:
Tax on tobacco greatly exceeds the cost to the NHS.
The first to paragrafs are not banning but regulation and i fully support. As i said: "as long it does not affect others"
The last paragraf is "the children! The children! No one is thinking of the childre?". So dramatic. When you are 18 you are not a children ffs. Or was the UK selling underage legaly?
And before banning, should be education, free choice and regulation...and fecking taxing high
I agree with your last bit, I'm not for a total ban, but I do see the reason behind it. Smoking just sucks and people are too thick to realize it.
If you’re 18 you can legally smoke now and continue to smoke for the rest of your life. If the bill comes in it will only force people to quit who start before they’re legally allowed to (i.e. children)
The last has been in place for decades. It’s helped get numbers down. Banning them altogether is the logical next step.
There’s bound to be a black market of sorts and people who are absolutely determined to smoke will find a way. I would also imagine it will be fairly lightly policed. But it will take millions of cigarettes out of circulation and millions of people will never smoke (the best possible option) that would have otherwise taken it up. So that’s definitely a good thing. I am a bit worried about the economics of it. Apart from the tax take, smokers have a very budget friendly habit of dying young, suddenly. Will be tricky to balance the books if/when that stops happening.
Is that last bit really true though? Most smokers I know (including myself when I did) think it's a stupid, disgusting and unhealthy habit which will likely kill them. The problem is they're addicted and are struggling to give up. I think there's very few long-term smokers who don't realise it sucks.
Nicotine is a horrible drug and getting it out of society would be a benefit.
If you read back through this thread you’ll see at least one smoker in complete denial. So they do exist. Although I think it’s probably deliberate sticking of head in sand from someone who fancies themself as a bit of a libertarian antiestablishment rebel. There’s a lot of them about these days.
Instead of fecking about with an age related ban based on year of birth they should have just said right 10 years from today cigarettes wil be banned. You have 10 years to kick the habit, good luck.
With this rolling age ban people born in 2008 will still be smoking in the 2080's. So we're in for another 60+ years of people smoking.
With this rolling age ban people born in 2008 will still be smoking in the 2080's. So we're in for another 60+ years of people smoking.
Well I wouldn't say all cannabis smokers but yeah everyone I know who smokes it heavily every day is a useless feckwit. And they're all conspiracy theorists, make of that what you will.
Moderate daily consumption of Coffee actually has many health benefits.
I'm 100% in favour of them being banned. The rolling age limit is a great idea.
There should also be £500 fine for anyone caught behaving in an anti social manner whilst under the influence of alchohol. These should be regularly handed out - it'd soon make friday and saturday nights in town centres nicer places.
There should also be £500 fine for anyone caught behaving in an anti social manner whilst under the influence of alchohol. These should be regularly handed out - it'd soon make friday and saturday nights in town centres nicer places.
Surely there must be other organic shit that can be dried and chopped up you can mix with cannabis to smoke?
What do actors smoke in movies?
The Tories very much did not have this idea! The first I heard it mooted was by some public health body, in around 2016. Which would mean everyone with a birth year starting 19 would be ok, and the 20s wouldn’t.
I sorta agree - the amount of call outs London Ambulance services has due to people unable to drink responsibly is ridiculous. I think it was like over 75% of their call outs on weekends were due to this, which means people suffering from actual harm end up having to wait or find alternative means to get medical help.
Same goes for alcohol as well I suppose when it comes to health and pocket and add the reduction in domestic violence and just people behaving like absolute tools after a few drinks would make society such a better and healthier enviroment to be in...body and soul.So I've not really seen much of it, but I can't understand why people are against this rolling age increase on smoking, surely it should be banned altogether now that people are aware of the negative effects both on health and pocket?
Nobody, even heavy smokers, will realistically want their children and grandchildren to smoke, so I can't see why there's a resistance to it?
It does make me laugh though to think that in about 50 years time, there will need to be an older boy buying fags for a 65 year old man
Obviously they'll just move on to vapes in the future, but at least it's safer than smoking (allegedly) and would surely have a huge impact on lung cancer levels?
Just ignore everything else sure rather than acknowledge you’re wrong in the face of facts.Yes, all businesses are owned by billionaires.
Just wild
Various studies would suggest otherwise.
And just from personal experience of being in crowded places outdoors when people are smoking - beer gardens, festivals, the old days when you could smoke in football grounds - it's not as concentrated as indoors, but it's still grim for non-smokers.
The advent of beer gardens only became a thing when smoking was banned indoors. The smokers were sent outside and then everybody else slowly decided it was more fun to be outside.
Beer gardens have been a thing since forever. Albeit, only popular in good weather.
What the indoor smoking ban did was create "outdoor smoking areas" which are an insult to the notion of an actual beer garden but do often have a roof, so can be used when the weather is crap.
Yes i understand the bill and yes, i would love a world without cigarrettes. Im the only one in my inmediate family that never smoked at any point in my life and is a disgusting habit. I would love a wold without alcohol (barely consuming these days) and weed (occasional consumer) as i believe are disgusting drugs, specially having others friendlier.
I would also ban many other things, including things i consume extensively but they are bad for you or the negative outweights the positives likee refined sugars or intensive produced meat or many others
But ife should be decided by oneself through decisions done based on the education you received at home and through school (government...good luck). And banning substances rarely had been a solution
We were always in beer gardens over the summer when I was a kid (usually because we weren't allowed in the pubs) and that was pre-2007 smoking ban, by about 10-15 years.
And back in my student days, beer gardens were the place to be so long as it wasn't in the midst of winter, and that was early 00s.
You got your figures wrong. I am happy to ignore these types of facts.