Has anyone noticed the media, all trailing along after our ABC.

Ruddy wanted the carbon tax, [we call it a carbon trading scheme] off the agenda, & the front page.

He grabed a few oranges, in the form of a $2 increase in tax on smokes, & a bit of faceless packaging, & rolled them passed our grand news hounds.

God, would you believe it. Off went the ABC hounds, chasing these decoys, with all the rest of the media following like playful puppies. It is a bit like a fox hunt, with the hounds replaced by a bunch of french poodles.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry. It was not a very edifying glimpse of the quality of our media, you know, the ones who like to think of themselves as hard bitten.

Ok, I've figured it out, it is funny, I'll laugh, just as soon as I stop crying.

What a load of yesterday nonsense. The reason for the $2 increase is for people to stop killing themselves on a by-gone product which has no more relevance in today's world than steam powered trains. When you have a deep look at the costs of our already overburdened health system, the $2 increase has a two way street involved, and Hasbeen, I take it you disagree with the increase.
Hasbeen. Smoking has been and "gone ( No punt intended ) by' period, and the money that will be made, will bring great pluses to all that are afflicted with the past calls, like! "any-how have a ........'and so on.

I too, am one of these people, and we all remember the adds. Look at it as a blessing, not another whipping stick from the GOV.

I say, a ten dollar increase,( and that's being nice ) because who wants there child to stick a smoke in their mouth.

Think about this. The money that,s been generated will go back into the system for people like you.( if you smoke ) and you already pay ( wtf ) for a two dollar hike ( punt intended ) for ATM transactions, and your call has what? to the currant problem ?

What are you trying to say?

TTM

What rubbish. My post was about the media.

I have no interest in the price of cigarettes, & a couple of dollars added to the all ready huge tax on them, is neither here or there, although it may be for some pensioners who are addicted to the things.

My interest was in the hew & cry from the ABC, doing exactly what Ruddy wanted, & tearing off at a tangent. I wonder if he told them what to do, or if they are just that easily distracted from the main game?

If they wanted to say something, they could have pointed out that the state premiers had stuck a ring through Ruddys nose & led him, like a tame bull, to making his huge expenditure to get his pretend health care reform through. That's the reason for this tax hike, nothing to do with the fool's interest in smokers wellbeing.

My amusement was at the "independant" media, following along in the ABCs wake, on the same nothing story, as if it was something worth reporting. I wonder if any of them ever have an original thought.

I am told that nicotine is the hardest addiction to brake. That being the case, it seems a bit unfair that we spend millions on helping those addicted to illegal drugs & then slug the poor smoker of a legal drug.

There are very large numbers of old age pensioners who's only pleasure is the odd beer, & a smoke. As they are probably incapable of giving up their addiction to nicotine, it's not quite right that we make these poor old buggers, give up food, to service their addiction to their legal drug, so we can use the tax to treat anothers addiction to an illegal one.

"What rubbish. My post was about the media."

OK. That,s your opinion, and ABC or other........... some-times, well........media...........and worth a toss you might say, mmmmmmmmmmmmm interesting.. But you do agree with some of the above?

Put yourself in leaders prospective, and how and what would you do? It,s all good to sit there and winge, quite frankly that's all Australians seem to do. All my point was, is about the smoking problem and the taxes involved with it, and Iam sure you can see. Sorry for spoiling your post. ( if you think so )

A wise man once said, Those who sit, will only gather moss. but yes the ABC................. I will say no-more.

TTM

Hasbeen each and every one of us lives within their own reality.
We all see things our way.
We often sneer at another's views, yet we can and are, often wrong.
Like the Fonz in happy days we too find it hard to say, or even think, I got it wrong.
I prefer the ABC, some are barred from my radio.
Rudd may have reasons to tax more, costs us much more than the saved tax to help smokers in their last days.
Media follows no one, each manufactures its news in its own factory.
Just maybe you are wrong here, well if you are not I am,very much so.

Belly "Media follows no one, each manufactures its news in its own factory"... would be 'OK' if it were a true reflection of how the media operated.

Sadly, it is not. There are very few news agencies in the world, and all media people draw from them, so the 'news' is homogenised tripe.

The views expressed within the media are consistently middle class, status quo views, that rarely if ever question too much.

There is a 'news cycle', and all inhabit it at the same time. See how quickly, like fashion' stories evaporate once published.

The GFC, for instance, has not bee 'solved' at all, yet our papers are full of the next round of growth talk, and all memory of why and how we were gifted the GFC has gone.

See the goons in the US all berating Goldman Sachs officials.... who deregulated though, Goldman Sachs or those goons in the US Senate and House?

Yes, hasbeen is probably correct to some extent, Rudd is seen as being a dud, but still a 'better bet' than Abbott, the only negative that keeps the ALP afloat at the moment.

But it's good to get the Storm fiasco off the front page.

This query is perhaps a little tangential to Hasbeen's topic, but perhaps someone can help me out.

Recently, whilst driving in city traffic, I observed a bumper sticker which pretty obviously had at least part of the MSM as its target. It started off with:

"Is your news limited, or ......?"

It is the second part of it that I either cannot remember or did not see properly in the first case. Can anybody complete the punchline?

Does anybody know where these bumper stickers may be obtained?

If these measures (tax hike and packaging rules) have anything at all to do with public health smoking products would be by prescription only, the legal age to buy smoking products would go up each year, quitting products like patches and gum would be subsidised by some of the taxes they raise from tobacco, and there would be an end-point for legally buying tobacco products in Australia.
Now I hear the tobacco companies are going to be compensated for loss of value to their trademarks etc., which I wouldnt have an issue with provided said companies realise they will have an ongoing responsibility the same way James Hardy has with asbestos victims.
Maybe I'm being a bit naiive and idealistic regarding the media, but in a nutshell they provide stories people want to hear. I dont think I would want to watch the news if it was just going to be a reworking of last week's stories.
There's also a racial element to this way of solving problems. Some races' problems are solved by throwing money at them hand over fist, but generally us caucasian folks are helped out by having to pay more tax.
The alcopop tax didnt stop teenagers from drinking, the new wine cask tax wont stop pensioners (I assume this is the story we'll be sold) or teenagers from drinking.

Hasbeen that is the nature of the media - a new story to get the teeth into when much of what is written these days is plagiarised or rehashed from another's work.

I see what you mean though, it is a bit like watching a pack of dogs chasing a ball in constantly changing directions. Thus is the nature of news.

However, it will be a while before the health reform will be off the front pages for good.

PatTheBogan
I doubt that compensation to tobacco companies will ever see the light of day. I would be livid if tax money went to bulk up the profits of what is only a legalised drug trade.

Hasbeen and others. See the problem with introducing a product of addiction or any product that has lights and bells attached to it, is quite simular to the crows overwhelming attraction to shiny objects, and with that, if you try and take what shouldn't have been introduced in the first place away from them, sometimes the cold turkey or higher pricing, can be best when money literally goes up in smoke before their eyes, and can change minds quite quickly. I would have to agree with Pat The Bogans comments on subsidized nicotine medication and so on.

Unfortunately the world has been designed in a very similar fashion to the way sheep are used for its productivity and not so much emphasis of the animals welfare, and people fit directly in this category of the rock and hard place scenario, and you know what its like taking candy from a baby.

Hasbeen. You say the poor old pensioner just wants to sit back and have a beer and a smoke, don't you think that's shooting the whole idea of bringing Australia (young or old) into a more healthy realm which would increase productivity and save money in the health system.

Because of greed, the world has gone backward and if Mr Rudd and his offset partner in crime Tony Abbott, and yes folks they all lie in the same bed together and everyone knows the entire Australian economy just needs care takers from both left and the right, and just take turns in power to suit there own needs and with that the rich get richer and the poor can only sound like a sheep.

I wonder if politicians have a soul or some type of human consciousness, because some of the decisions made on behalf of the people are quite questionable in believing that the decisions are for the welfare of the all.

Continued.

"I would be livid if tax money went to bulk up the profits of what is only a legalized drug trade."

And now we are getting to the bones of the matter. Well I can tell my findings on the pouch tobacco and the difference with tailor made cigarettes.
I went to the pouch one,s, and after 4 days the cravings for tailor mades when through the roof, and it was only until I put the tailor one,s in side me, that the fix was instantly satisfied, so they do know the substances are addictive, so why cant we sue?

Pelican. You have made my point quite well. thank you.

I don't understand why they don't just ban the import and growing of tobacco.
Sure there will be people that will grow it like they do the other
stuff but the amount would be so small as to have no effect on the
medical system and the number of patients with tobacco related
disease would start to fall.
Tobacco is very bulky and not easily smuggled.
As it is now it comes into the country by the multiple container loads.
The addicts would just not be able to get enough to maintain their addiction.
Any other product that killed as many as tobacco does would have had
them running around the shops and taking it off the shelves.

Hasbeen. You say the poor old pensioner just wants to sit back and have a beer and a smoke, don't you think that's shooting the whole idea of bringing Australia (young or old) into a more healthy realm which would increase productivity and save money in the health system.

Hasbeen?

Where have you gone? And why have you not answered.

Smoking kills, this ex walking ash tray of 30 years ago knows that.
We tax it not just because it kills but because we, tax payers pay a great deal to look after those waiting to die.
Bazz has it right.
But in a world reluctant to give Rudd any credit, here in this measure he leads the world.
The next step, hardest one, is banning it, remember Nick Minchin said cigarette smoke is not harmful.
And know conservatives will bat for the tobacco lobby if Rudd bans it, he should or lift all bans on all drugs.
Hasbeen an illness [ you would think of it as such] is sweeping Australia, blame Rudd for it.
We are carriers of Gonareelecthim.

TTM, I was not talking about tobaco, but if you must follow the news hounds after the red herring.

There is no idea about Oz health in this, just a desperate dill of a PM, trying to claw back a buck, to cover his stupid spending, & get another of his stuff ups off the front page.

I don't know where you get an increase in productivity from the over 70 brigade, & if you think making them healthier will save money, you are as dumb as our PM.

My mother is 99 next week. We [the tax payer] have spent more health dollars on her in the last 4 years, than in all the rest of her life. If you wanted to save health dollars, you should have spent them on buying her tobaco 25 years ago, in the hope she would have died of cancer years ago. Of course it would have been cheeper to run some council busses past her home, that should have done it.

You could start buying them for me, if you will guarantee me an earlier departure than her. Now I can no longer do it, she is in an excellent nursing home, with great physical care, but mate, I'd much rather be dead than there. So send me the smokes, if it's not too late for me to take it up now.

I do envy you your rose coloured glasses. It must be nice going through life seeing good, even in people as disgusting as Rudd, I hope for your sake, they never fall off.

My old neighbour who lives alone, with his 2 dogs, was lamenting the other day, that he was having trouble, feeding himself, & his dogs. He may have to put one down.

AS he pulled out his pouch of tobacco, he glared at it & said, "if only I could give this sH#t up", but he can't. He's tried again & again. Rudds new tax won't help him, he can't give it up, he'll just have to give up some food. Him or his dogs that is.

Yeah he seems like a reasonable sort of a bloke, putting a dog down because he prefers the smokes. One would think, an older person with some life experience could foresee the difficulties of budgetting a dollar or so each day for dogfood, versus the CHOICE of smoking maybe ten dollars a day.

But I digress, this isnt about some selfish old doddering idiot, indeed not about the smokes either but the media... The price of smokes goes up, the packaging rules are changed. The media should simply ignore all these developments and keep going over the carbon tax issue and millenium bug or something.

On your first post you did mention tobacco. And I did say sorry for by-passing your post. But what you have said in your last post was, as I take it, you must support The reduction in the amount of elderly and the support the overpopulation problems we have by killing them with smokes. That poor dog. Now its an animal rights issue. You do enjoying digging holes for yourself, and those coloured glasses will never come off my friend;)

Rudd is not a dud, its just the same old job no matter what side your on.



"My mother is 99 next week. We [the tax payer] have spent more health dollars on her in the last 4 years, than in all the rest of her life. If you wanted to save health dollars, you should have spent them on buying her tobacco 25 years ago, in the hope she would have died of cancer years ago. Of course it would have been cheaper to run some council buses past her home, that should have done it.

You could start buying them for me, if you will guarantee me an earlier departure than her. Now I can no longer do it, she is in an excellent nursing home, with great physical care, but mate, I'd much rather be dead than there. So send me the smokes, if it's not too late for me to take it up now."

Quote! " you could start buying them for me"

Then I would be no better than the one,s that sell it.

Maybe you would like to borrow those glasses now before its too late for you.

Hasbeen. Please read what I have wrote.

TTM

INMHO..............Australia is the great, is the best, and we will become The one's that will show the way. An opinion is like an ares hole, and ever-ones got one, but that does not help our spot in the world of politics's. Too fast too hard.....sometimes..........But you have the balls to see what you have, if you love Australia, and I know you do OK, its not so cool on the political fronts, but we know this, and the question is, what the fu@k are you doing. You young have the world, and a great job you are doing, dont the bullsh@t kill you too, You are Australian afterall And kick the ball we will.

Go KEV top job mate. EVO.

TTM

In times yet to come some one shifting through posts in OLO will find evidence of just how blind some of us are.
No surprise, human nature is defensive, and defense by attacking that we do not like, or is it understand?
The reviewer of our thoughts will have an advantage.
He/She or them will know the outcomes of health reform, ETS, Abbott's defective leadership, his successors rebuilding and re focusing of the conservative side of politics.
Time will have entrenched the evidence of most spending that needed to take place being a reason Australia made it undamaged past THIS GFC.
Rudd will be remembered as a well liked leader, until mid third term, his achievements respected.
For half a century conservatives will cringe when thinking of the take over of their party by the extremists last year.
I have no doubt none that conservatives on returning to power will fight just as hard for ETS, health reform and much they today dither with.

Belly, is there anything that you think Australians are able to make responsible decisions about for themselves, or is everything we do best controlled by a government?

Here's a few areas of interest to get you started:

housing - private ownership, or Government? After all, some people go broke trying to pay for mortgages they can't afford and rents are fast moving beyond the reach of single people. Should the Governemnt simply nationalise all housing stock? Homelessness costs this nation millions every year.

Transport - surely, if tobacco is to be eliminated, then private motor vehicles, which kill or maim many thousands every year and cost the taxpayer billions in both medical and maintenance costs should surely be phased out as soon as possible?

Food - every year, thousands of australians are stricken with diseases caused by eating too much or poorly-prepared food. Surely a caring government can determine the optimum level of nutrtion we each require and make it available in a prepared form at nominal charge?

Exercise - many thousands of people die or are hospitalised every year due to the effects of lack of exercise. Since we are obviously incapable of making our own rational decision to exercise for the minimum requisite amount, surely a caring Government should be making such exercise compulsory? Perhaps calisthenics in the now-empty streets before the whistle blows to signal the commencement of the mandated work-period?

Medication - is frequently abused and even sometimes used to make other, untaxed medications. nearly all the medication in this country passes through peivate pharmacies, putting pharmacists in the position of having to make decisions about whether individuals are likely to use or misuse what they buy. surely, a caring government would simply ban such private drug distribution networks in favour of a national pharmaceutical supply arrangement?

I could go on...