*RehTub*

whilst you clearly grasp one aspect of the economic issue

(i.e. the huge amount of tax funds that cigi tax gathers (but for what purpose these funds are used remains unclear))

it is surprising to me that you seem to fail to grasp the aspect of "economic coercion" that I refer to. Perhaps it is that you are objecting to my use of the word "forced" but do understand the point that I am making?

But let me break it down for you and for the sake of argument, let's use the example of an unemployed person on an income of say $450 per fortnight.

(whom the guvment have failed in that the economy is screwed coz they've blown their dough and are paying jobs money in interest payments to overseas bankers instead)

(and I note that *Joe LoudMouth* appears to understand quite clearly)

Now, this Mr X is a full time heavy smoker. He used to prefer smoking tailor mades with a great long filter as these don't make him cough as much as rollies.

But that was the all in the past when cigis were affordable.

Currently, Mr X smokes a 2 large packets of rollies which costs him (along with filters and papers) about $Au100 per fortnight.

In the alternative, he would smoke 2 packets of tailors per day at a cost of $25 per packet or $50 per day. $50 per day * 14 days per fortnight = $700 per fortnight.

But Mr X only earns $450 per fortnight, therefore, if Mr X wishes to continue to smoke, he is "FORCED" (economically) to purchase rollies which make him cough and gag far more than standards.

P.S.

There is one exception to my binning of those gross little images on the packets and that is, on special occasions, "Men's Club" will have a gathering, and, those little picis will be dutifully cut out, attached to a pin and cap, and awarded for various meritorious activities to members by the Master of Ceremonies.

HaHaHa

Oh, now, if you want to go all sentimental about it, then the same in principal arguments can be used to ban alcohol as it is every bit the carcinogen that tobacco is and arguably leads to more criminal violence and delinquent behavior.

And it is at that point when the majority of people will simply ignore you as a zealot.

DreamOn,

Alcohol as well ? Christ, you're a kill-joy ! Well, at least I've still got at least one hand.

I don't understand why and how I became a partner in crime, vis-à-vis overseas bankers ? Ah, I see: 'merchant bankers'. No - ask any fan of 'Minder'. See above. Thinking about it - it's either that or watching sunsets.

A packet of tobacco each week would limit Mr X to about ten a day, and still take up to a quarter of his UB. Now you want to take another quarter for his grog ? Oh well, sausages and potatoes again tonight.

Joe

The World Health Summit
of 2013 put out the following points re smoking:

In the 20th Century: 100 Million Deaths (Estimated) and by the 21st century: One Billion Deaths (Projected).

Their presentation is at:

http://www.worldhealthsummit.org/fileadmin/downloads/2013/WHSRMA_2013/Presentations/Day_3/Reddy%20Srinath%20-%20Tobacco%20Control%20The%20End-Game.pdf

The presentation says:

"In 2004, the Bhutanese Government banned sale of all tobacco products– It was the first country to impose such a ban. Violations were severely penalized and owners of shops and hotels can lose their business licenses. There is an imposition of 100% tax on all
tobacco products brought into the country for personal consumption by Bhutanese and foreigners selling tobacco to locals are severely penalized."

It does also say in relation to Tasmania:

"In August 2012, the Tasmanian Legislative Council unanimously passed a motion calling for the sale of tobacco to anyone born from the year 2000 to be banned."

So why do we have overseas countries with stronger policies than Australia? One state's Legislative Council can't make a difference. I would argue both Labor/Liberal parties see tobacco product sales as part of a free market economy.

Bill Shorten's "scare campaign" over a GP tax was nothing short of a farce, when he could have made a strong commitment, to having policies similar to places like Bhutan or even as basic as Tasmania and other countries that are "phasing out" smoking as per the presentation.

People in hospital dying or suffering illness from smoking take away or "steal" services from other patients, who have illnesses none of their own doing - for example areas as simple as bed spaces, as hospitals have "morals" and treat all patients regardless and try to save lives.

Its a pity Labor/Liberal parties don't have many morals at all or do more to save lives.