Joe (Loudmouth),

I am an optimist. Which is why I said, "continue the work that is already being done with the most seriously affected groups such as Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders".

I imagine that the lion's share of any reduction in smoking is probably more attributable to youth participating in sports eg footy, going on with their education and so on.

You are right about the whitefellas stuff and it applies particularly to the rubbish middens(sic).

...We would do well to remember that cigarette smokers currently pay an absurd amount of tax, forcing those on lower incomes to smoke rollies which are both heavier on tar and heavier on the lung.

Don't you just love it when they play the victim card, forcing them. Also Dream on there are many like myself who don't smoke, pay into Medicare but are deemed to earn too much to bulk bill. Work that out!

If smoking is so bad and kills people then surely its cheaper than keeping fitness nuts who need multiple knee and hip replacements as well as ongoing medication into their nineties. Just a thought.

Hi Runner,

That may be fine for heavy smokers who are also devout believers, they're going to live forever surrounded by choirs of angels - but what about us agnostics and atheists ? This is our one and only life, we need to stretch it out as long as possible, then that's it. Where's your compassion ?

Cheers,

Joe

I thought that was one of the more astute comments that I have heard *Runner* make, and to carry it forward:

*Suze*

Contrary to what you have said, the guvment does not pay a cent. The people who pay are those who pay Medicare. And of those people, the people who earn more pay for those who cannot afford to pay at all and also those who can only make a partial contribution.

*Foxy*

A very interesting link with a vast array of information, however I was unable to deduce what constitutes the entire tax burden upon smokers as even the tax section only referred to excise hikes but didn't actually say what the total was or what the start point was. (Bear in mind though that I may have missed something as I raced through the info quite quickly)

*RehTub*

How much you earn as far as I understand it has no bearing on whether or not you are bulk billed as whether or not a Dr even sees you, let alone bulk bills you, is entirely at the discretion of the treating Dr.

Some Drs though have a practice policy of bulk billing concession card holders but do understand that whether or not they do is entirely a matter for them and not a regulatory requirement.

As for my point about "rollies," it is an unfortunate fact that in some regards putting up the price may well have reduced the total number of smokers and overall consumption a little, but it is also true that particularly in the case of lower income earners that they are FORCED economically to buy a form a nicotine that is arguably more harmful than others.

*Suze & Everyone* whilst we haven't as yet got to the bottom of exactly how much above and beyond their own medical costs smokers are paying in tax, it appears increasingly likely that they most certainly are paying a huge impost, part of which though may go to those that they effect by passive smoking, or does it?

As for plain packaging, I can tell you what I do with it (I smoke 2 or 3 a day + or minus a bit and the rest of the time I chew gum at $22 - $30 a packet if you can believe that)

As soon as I have a pack, I simply take the gangrenous feet, eyeballs, cancer dead cadavers etc covered packet, remove the contents and place it it one of my fancy and attractive containers which I acquired from JOYNT VENTURE and promptly bin all of the fancy printed warnings etc.

(And JV tell me that their sales of such paraphernalia jumped significantly since the new policies first came in.)

But to come back to *Runners* point and if I don't misunderstand, *Runner* is pointing out that as smokers incur additional health costs, why shouldn't other activities which also increase health costs equally be subject to some additional specifically targeted tax?

After all, if you look at the exclusions in insurance policies you will no doubt note that certain considered to be high risk activities are totally excluded i.e. if you want to engage in those kind of activities then let the consequences of same be entirely on ones own head - e.g. motor bike riding in Bali.

*THE SCAM*

But all of this is somewhat mute if the reality is that the PoliTicks are taking the Lion's Share of cigi tax and funneling it into general consolidated revenue and not into Medicare at all.

If that is the case, then higher income earners most certainly are paying for the self inflicted medical harm that some smokers suffer from, but again, why blame the smokers?

They are after all paying more than their fair share (or so it would seem) and if the money is being used for other purposes then that is hardly their fault.