I for one, doubt it!

We already buy bread, milk, flour and eggs in plain wrap and think nothing of it so long as the product tastes 'ok' and does the job.

All this will do is make the retailers job harder, as they will have to idendify which is which, esspecially if a staff member loads the shelves wrongly, which will happen.

Now if you want to reduce smoking, then may I suggest a message on each packet showing the breakdown of the costs.

Eg; $16.00 per pack

$4.00 for the cigarettes
$10.50 tax
$1.50 GST
The Australian tax payer and the Australian cancer fund thanks you for you donation.

rehctub
I don't smoke so am not aware if there is variation in the 'flavour'. My guess is the packaging won't make much difference if one is addicted to the nicotine fix. I imagine most people don't choose to smoke or continue to smoke because of the pretty packaging. Although brand choice may initially be influenced in the early stages of the habit - especially if 'marketing' is directed to younger people.

This is another 'look to be doing something' policy that achieves very little.

Which is why I don't understand why small retailers and service station associations are fighting this so vehemently unless they think it might work to reduce smoking and hence sales. If it did reduce smoking that would be a good thing, but I doubt that this will be the case.

Notice how the GST is a tax on a tax :)

Governments are no mugs when it comes to raking in the cash.

The LNP will be outed for any support received from tobacco, how cynical they are!

To become hooked on nicotine one first needs to consume lung busters. The marketing is aimed at vulnerable people, kiddies and adolescents. The packaging is a crucial part of building an image of status and so on to encourage people to smoke in the first place.

Fags and soft drinks account for much of the profit of garages and small shops. However, if the money wasn't spent on tobacco it would be spent elsewhere. Some might might even go into groceries.

The antis have the measure of the tobacco companies and the politicians who support them.

the whole anti smoking campaign has been an incredible success, or has it. Why is it that we continue to discriminate against a legal product and a group of people that are amongst the highest taxpayers around. Tobacco is for all of society a point of confusion. If it is so bad make it illegal, it really is that simple other wise shut up and stop whining.
We ban smoking but what of alcohol, fast food, carbon emissions and on it goes. Alcohol does more damage socially and medically than tobacco, and on that if you do get lung cancer and die at 50 is it really costing the tax payer more than it would cost to keep you if you live to be 90?
Funny how our freedom is always conditional.

nairbe,

"That's the beauty of argument: If you argue correctly, you're never wrong." – Nick Naylor, the 'Sultan of Spin' for tobacco, in Thank You for Smoking (2005).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBELC_vxqhI