Stop being Rachist!

That this tax grab was not in the original budget, and is not accompanied with measures to help reduce smoking is plain evidence that this was purely to fill labors budget black hole, and Dudd is more interested in smokers' cash than their health.

So much outrage on OLO in regard to the Government's health policy, I wonder how much money cigarette manufacturers contribute to the Coalition?

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=15316

<<<..(A) wave of amoralisation has led the cultural right to lament that morality itself is under assault. In fact there seems to be a Law of Conservation of Morality, so that as old behaviours are taken out of the moralised column, new ones are added to it.>>

yeah..i recall prostitution/gambling
poker machines..were criminal;..before
now we we got 24/7 live gambling..on the web
and hookers are many..and the govt pimps[mostly ex lawyers]..misdirecting the real present dangers..

to tax smokers
hound us into early graves

YET NOT BO0ZERS
nor fatties

<<Dozens of things that past generations
treated as practical matters are now ethical battle grounds, including disposable (nappies), IQ tests, poultry farms, Barbie dolls and research on breast cancer.>>

google dumbing down american education
or adverse reactiont PERCRIBED DRUGS..[or death toll from booze
qld reported in 1999..it was 4000plus..

*BUT DUE TO PRESUMED HEALTH BENIFIT..lol..
4000 plus..was reduced to under 2000

<<Food alone has become a minefield, with critics sermonising about the size of sodas, the chemistry of fat, the freedom of chickens, the price of coffee beans, the species of fish and now the distance the food has travelled from farm to plate...

,,Many of these moralisations, like the assault on smoking, may be understood as practical tactics to reduce some recently identified harm. But whether an activity switches our mental switches to the "moral" setting isn't just a matter of how much harm it does...>>

thanks sis

Cost benefit analysis. Capitalism writ large.
Perhaps the author might like to book himself in to hospital for an empathy transplant. Under medicare of course.

I wrote the post below in response to "Morality lost in cloud of smoke" by Jane Rankin-Reid. Applies to "Dying to help" as well. I don't think anyone (bar tobacco companies) wishes to see greater uptake of the smoking habit but anyone already addicted should have every assistance to stop.

Rhys Jones raises interesting points which have some truth, though I suspect oversimplified on one hand and exaggerated on the other. Heart disease sometimes results in sudden death in both smokers & non-smokers. Ditto stroke. Odds are higher for smokers. How much more I don't know. More often than not however both conditions in smokers and non-smokers cause deterioration or disability requiring a great deal of care before death intervenes. High risk of cancer is not restricted to lungs. Mouth and throat ditto. Increased risk has been linked to many other cancers. Majority of people have their cancers diagnosed followed by extensive expensive treatments. Emphysema another example - death by degrees usually over years with progressive debilitation.

My beef is about whether enough of the money the unfortunate tobacco addict pays the Govt is being used to encourage and assist him/her to kick the habit.

"While I support heavy (and heavier still) taxes on a substance which is entirely injurious to human and environmental health, products and programs assisting smokers to quit should be heavily subsidised. As heavily as to cost a tiny fraction of a packet of cigarettes. Cigarettes hopefully will become extremely unattractive to wannabee smokers on basis of price if nothing else.

Ditto alcohol needs to be more expensive, carry warning labels on a par with tobacco and availability in terms of location and time clawed back.

While both 'legal drugs' obviously generate substantial revenues, unless I'm very mistaken, the costs in terms of public health, policing, property damage, sanitation and so on would surely exceed the income, probably not in a shy way. Then add on the personal cost to users, their families and broader community.

Is Govt 'Fair Dinkum" about 'helping smokers'? Think I'm with Jane on this one ..."