should us smokers really be taxed so much
Discussion
NWTony said:
What I've tried to say is that your feelings result the "nastiness" of smoking, it isn't an objective outcome. You think it will be nasty and ergo it is nasty. Parmesan cheese etc. Also, I'm confident that the vast majority of people don't feel anything like as strongly about smoking as you do, most people just recognise that some people smoke and some don't and don't really mind much. Your reaction is an over-reaction and is the abberant one.....Mind you if I'm sitting in a pub (garden presumably) sipping a nice pint of some golden ale I'd really rather like a ciggy to go with it
...Even if it ruins the experience of the people at the next table.What you have said above is simply wrong. It is totally objective. It is only acceptable if you are another smoker. You are in the grip of an addiction which prevents you from recognising it. That it all we are trying to communicate.
cardigankid said:
...Even if it ruins the experience of the people at the next table.
What you have said above is simply wrong. It is totally objective. It is only acceptable if you are another smoker. You are in the grip of an addiction which prevents you from recognising it. That it all we are trying to communicate.
I just dont know how you,Derek etc manage to get through life day to day,everyday must be traumatic what with all these smells and toxins permeating your very existence.Walking through crowded areas must be hell.What you have said above is simply wrong. It is totally objective. It is only acceptable if you are another smoker. You are in the grip of an addiction which prevents you from recognising it. That it all we are trying to communicate.
cardigankid said:
...Even if it ruins the experience of the people at the next table.
What you have said above is simply wrong. It is totally objective. It is only acceptable if you are another smoker. You are in the grip of an addiction which prevents you from recognising it. That it all we are trying to communicate.
Argggggghhhh.What you have said above is simply wrong. It is totally objective. It is only acceptable if you are another smoker. You are in the grip of an addiction which prevents you from recognising it. That it all we are trying to communicate.
It is by very definition, not objective. You like the small of Old Spice, I like Brut. Neither however are objectively good or bad odours. It is, and I can't stress this highly enough, completely subjective. Objectively the smell of cigarette smoke is no different from any other burning vegetation, objectivly that is, not subjectively.
So in summary, cigarette smoke is objectively the same as any other vegetation burning, subjectively you find it unpleasant. But it is a property of your mind that makes it unpleasant it's not a property the smoke itself holds.
I really can't make it clearer that that.
NWTony said:
Objectively the smell of cigarette smoke is no different from any other burning vegetation, objectivly that is, not subjectively.
And that is where you are so VERY wrong.The smell of cigarette smoke is NOT just the smell of burning vegetation. Objectively, it is the smell of heavily chemically-enhanced burning vegetation. . Your subjectivity is that it's just burning leaves. It really, really isn't. Objectively, that smoke contains a very large number of carcinogens and other harmful components which quite simply aren't there in vegetation that anybody is likely to come across in the UK.
B'sides, people don't sit down in a pub beer garden, or walk along the street, only to find somebody with a portable bonfire next to them. And you'll virtually NEVER come across anybody arguing that they should be able to light a bonfire in the middle of a building or vehicle.
And, yes, bonfire smoke can be harmful.
And, yes, it is antisocial to spark up a bonfire if other people are going to get smoked out.
NWTony said:
Argggggghhhh.
It is by very definition, not objective. You like the small of Old Spice, I like Brut. Neither however are objectively good or bad odours. It is, and I can't stress this highly enough, completely subjective. Objectively the smell of cigarette smoke is no different from any other burning vegetation, objectivly that is, not subjectively.
So in summary, cigarette smoke is objectively the same as any other vegetation burning, subjectively you find it unpleasant. But it is a property of your mind that makes it unpleasant it's not a property the smoke itself holds.
I really can't make it clearer that that.
Any other burning vegetation which gives off the same smell as tobacco, which hangs on clothes, which impregnates people, which irritates the nostrils, in short is just as irritating, would be, by definition, just as repulsive. It is by very definition, not objective. You like the small of Old Spice, I like Brut. Neither however are objectively good or bad odours. It is, and I can't stress this highly enough, completely subjective. Objectively the smell of cigarette smoke is no different from any other burning vegetation, objectivly that is, not subjectively.
So in summary, cigarette smoke is objectively the same as any other vegetation burning, subjectively you find it unpleasant. But it is a property of your mind that makes it unpleasant it's not a property the smoke itself holds.
I really can't make it clearer that that.
The problem with smoking is nothing to do with its source. It would be just as repulsive if an aged aunt bought a bottle of it as a father's day present, all shops mysteriously having run out of Old Spice and Brut in their geriatric departments.
Cigarette smoke is objectionable not because it is cigarette smoke but because, like many smells, it is repulsive. Smokers can't smell it due, I believe, to continual exposure. Stopping smoking has lots of upsides, such as less risk of chronic illnesses, lung and throat cancers and other effects. It also makes you less stinky. On the negative side, all of a sudden you will find that you too can small smokers and will be repelled by them.
I'm actually more repelled by some of the attitudes on this thread to be honest with you - I see the great social engineering project has worked.
Not to worry, am currently waiting on a plane to travel to a country where they're a bit more relaxed, and if you want to smoke, they're happy for you to smoke. So much for the famous British tolerance eh?
Not to worry, am currently waiting on a plane to travel to a country where they're a bit more relaxed, and if you want to smoke, they're happy for you to smoke. So much for the famous British tolerance eh?
TooMany2cvs said:
And that is where you are so VERY wrong.
The smell of cigarette smoke is NOT just the smell of burning vegetation. Objectively, it is the smell of heavily chemically-enhanced burning vegetation. . Your subjectivity is that it's just burning leaves. It really, really isn't. Objectively, that smoke contains a very large number of carcinogens and other harmful components which quite simply aren't there in vegetation that anybody is likely to come across in the UK.
B'sides, people don't sit down in a pub beer garden, or walk along the street, only to find somebody with a portable bonfire next to them. And you'll virtually NEVER come across anybody arguing that they should be able to light a bonfire in the middle of a building or vehicle.
And, yes, bonfire smoke can be harmful.
And, yes, it is antisocial to spark up a bonfire if other people are going to get smoked out.
I give in. You simply aren't capable of understanding the basics and without this understanding further discussion is pointless, no matter how many really, really you add.The smell of cigarette smoke is NOT just the smell of burning vegetation. Objectively, it is the smell of heavily chemically-enhanced burning vegetation. . Your subjectivity is that it's just burning leaves. It really, really isn't. Objectively, that smoke contains a very large number of carcinogens and other harmful components which quite simply aren't there in vegetation that anybody is likely to come across in the UK.
B'sides, people don't sit down in a pub beer garden, or walk along the street, only to find somebody with a portable bonfire next to them. And you'll virtually NEVER come across anybody arguing that they should be able to light a bonfire in the middle of a building or vehicle.
And, yes, bonfire smoke can be harmful.
And, yes, it is antisocial to spark up a bonfire if other people are going to get smoked out.
If it is the added chemicals (which you are not capable of discerning by smell btw due to the very low levels) that are the issue then you can have no objection to roll ups which don't contain the same compounds. I bet you do however.
It is, as stated, subjective dislike and merely stating otherwise in the face of all the evidence is pointless.
Anyhow, I have better things to do than argue with those who think anecdote is evidence and can't grasp fundementals.
Bye bye smoking thread.
NWTony said:
You simply aren't capable of understanding the basics
I could, of course, say the same back. The difference is that I can and do understand your PoV.You like having a ciggy, you're in denial about the after-effects (perhaps in large part because your sense of smell is mullered from years of smoking), and your sense of entitlement means you just can't see why anybody might have a problem with you being able to do whatever you want to do whenever you want to do it.
Whereas you have utterly denied, repeatedly, that those of us who don't want to smell like ashtrays have our health harmed by your addiction might actually have any grounds whatsoever.
bodhi said:
I'm actually more repelled by some of the attitudes on this thread to be honest with you - I see the great social engineering project has worked.
Not to worry, am currently waiting on a plane to travel to a country where they're a bit more relaxed, and if you want to smoke, they're happy for you to smoke. So much for the famous British tolerance eh?
I don't think anyone on here suggested that you should be banned from smoking. Most seem to be quite tolerant of what you do in your own home to yourself.Not to worry, am currently waiting on a plane to travel to a country where they're a bit more relaxed, and if you want to smoke, they're happy for you to smoke. So much for the famous British tolerance eh?
bodhi said:
I'd rather have a cigarette to be fair. Preferably with none of you non smokers around, the incessant bleating and attempts to take the high Road offend my ears.
Excuse me, non smoker here.I just wanted to make a case for pubs to be allowed a smoking room. Far too many pubs are closing and while I wouldn't just blame the smoking ban it has certainly had an adverse effect.
What happened to all the people who said they would visit the pubs again once the smoking had stopped?
100 years ago, I'd have probably gone to church every sunday (despite personally thinking religions is all a load of) as if I didn't, I'd have been judged negatively and my business would have suffered.
50 years ago most of you would have thought it quite allright to treat black folk as second class citizens
5 years ago I gave up smoking, the catalyst was moving in with my then gf/now wife but the underlying was it's become a "bad" thing, one of the things that we as weak and feeble people need telling is bad, not for any reason other than people need rules making up that they can adhere to and believe in and to save them having to think too much.
What is good or bad is irrelevant so long as something is. As religions which all ban all sorts of silly things fall out of trend "big brother" society becomes inevitable, because people look for something to adhere to and encourage the powers that be to shackle us- just look at all these "busybodies inc" like brake and so on.
(BTW just in case any jumped up self promoting little twerp is thinking of rolling out some diatribe- I'm commenting on social attitudes and how whats right and wrong changes constantly not comparing the importance of any specifics above
50 years ago most of you would have thought it quite allright to treat black folk as second class citizens
5 years ago I gave up smoking, the catalyst was moving in with my then gf/now wife but the underlying was it's become a "bad" thing, one of the things that we as weak and feeble people need telling is bad, not for any reason other than people need rules making up that they can adhere to and believe in and to save them having to think too much.
What is good or bad is irrelevant so long as something is. As religions which all ban all sorts of silly things fall out of trend "big brother" society becomes inevitable, because people look for something to adhere to and encourage the powers that be to shackle us- just look at all these "busybodies inc" like brake and so on.
(BTW just in case any jumped up self promoting little twerp is thinking of rolling out some diatribe- I'm commenting on social attitudes and how whats right and wrong changes constantly not comparing the importance of any specifics above
bad company said:
Excuse me, non smoker here.
I just wanted to make a case for pubs to be allowed a smoking room. Far too many pubs are closing and while I wouldn't just blame the smoking ban it has certainly had an adverse effect.
What happened to all the people who said they would visit the pubs again once the smoking had stopped?
I do apologise that post was a bit quicker than intended thanks to the berk behind me trying to assault me with his hand baggage. I just wanted to make a case for pubs to be allowed a smoking room. Far too many pubs are closing and while I wouldn't just blame the smoking ban it has certainly had an adverse effect.
What happened to all the people who said they would visit the pubs again once the smoking had stopped?
Thankfully there are still plenty of considerate non-smokers around, who don't mind hanging on for 2 minutes whilst we pop for a smoke. I should have probably clarified that I meant those non smokers. I think we all know which ones I'm referring to......
Claudia Skies said:
Some things are definitely impossible. Near the top of the list is, "Taxing smokers too much".
Happened some time ago. Indications are that the tax take is reducing. Those who I know all smoke stuff thats been brought in from abroad. You can get a flight to Faro for approx £70 return and then buy a shedload of cartons, saving approx £50 per carton compared to UK prices. Its a no brainer for any smoker.bad company said:
What happened to all the people who said they would visit the pubs again once the smoking had stopped?
I'll rephrase that.Reducing the drink driving limit effectively to zero has hit some pubs in Scotland, as the original drink driving rules previously closed a lot of country pubs and restaurants. I could argue that the majority of sensible drinkers were penalised for the sins of a few irresponsible ones, however, I believe that we all accept that driving while under the influence of either drugs or alcohol is wrong - so it had to happen.
I'm not sure that it is true to say that pubs are an endangered species - plenty more seem to open, however there are a range of reasons why some may shut. Tied pubs may not be economical. Some pubs price themselves out of a market where originally, there was no such thing as off-sales. Some pubs, particularly in Scotland, are simply crap. Some have not moved forward from the era where you have to fight your way to the bar, spend ten minutes waving twenties under the noses of bar staff who are ignoring you, then stand in a crush drinking a pint. That is a bygone era, its not pleasant and I predict that few people will want to do it in future. In Germany, you sit down and someone serves you. That is civilised.
Edited by cardigankid on Monday 9th February 17:29
NWTony said:
So in summary, cigarette smoke is objectively the same as any other vegetation burning, subjectively you find it unpleasant. But it is a property of your mind that makes it unpleasant it's not a property the smoke itself holds.
I really can't make it clearer that that.
You are simply deluding yourself, but if you are happy, why should I spoil it for you.I really can't make it clearer that that.
cardigankid said:
I'll rephrase that.
Reducing the drink driving limit effectively to zero has hit some pubs in Scotland, as the original drink driving rules previously closed a lot of country pubs and restaurants. I could argue that the majority of sensible drinkers were penalised for the sins of a few irresponsible ones, however, I believe that we all accept that driving while under the influence of either drugs or alcohol is wrong - so it had to happen.
I'm not sure that it is true to say that pubs are an endangered species - plenty more seem to open, however there are a range of reasons why some may shut. Tied pubs may not be economical. Some pubs price themselves out of a market where originally, there was no such thing as off-sales. Some pubs, particularly in Scotland, are simply crap. Some have not moved forward from the era where you have to fight your way to the bar, spend ten minutes waving twenties under the noses of bar staff who are ignoring you, then stand in a crush drinking a pint. That is a bygone era, its not pleasant and I predict that few people will want to do it in future. In Germany, you sit down and someone serves you. That is civilised.
You have some points there. Clearly there are several causes for pubs to close and the smoking ban is one of them.Reducing the drink driving limit effectively to zero has hit some pubs in Scotland, as the original drink driving rules previously closed a lot of country pubs and restaurants. I could argue that the majority of sensible drinkers were penalised for the sins of a few irresponsible ones, however, I believe that we all accept that driving while under the influence of either drugs or alcohol is wrong - so it had to happen.
I'm not sure that it is true to say that pubs are an endangered species - plenty more seem to open, however there are a range of reasons why some may shut. Tied pubs may not be economical. Some pubs price themselves out of a market where originally, there was no such thing as off-sales. Some pubs, particularly in Scotland, are simply crap. Some have not moved forward from the era where you have to fight your way to the bar, spend ten minutes waving twenties under the noses of bar staff who are ignoring you, then stand in a crush drinking a pint. That is a bygone era, its not pleasant and I predict that few people will want to do it in future. In Germany, you sit down and someone serves you. That is civilised.
Edited by cardigankid on Monday 9th February 17:29
Perhaps we should have a separate thread on the demise of the Great British Pub.
TooMany2cvs said:
I could, of course, say the same back. The difference is that I can and do understand your PoV.
You like having a ciggy, you're in denial about the after-effects (perhaps in large part because your sense of smell is mullered from years of smoking), and your sense of entitlement means you just can't see why anybody might have a problem with you being able to do whatever you want to do whenever you want to do it.
Whereas you have utterly denied, repeatedly, that those of us who don't want to smell like ashtrays have our health harmed by your addiction might actually have any grounds whatsoever.
Touche! You have completely addressed my comments with your reply. No hang on, the other thing, completely failed to , that's what I meant to say. But on the plus side you have bought up some other points which have absolutely nothing to do with anything I've ever said.You like having a ciggy, you're in denial about the after-effects (perhaps in large part because your sense of smell is mullered from years of smoking), and your sense of entitlement means you just can't see why anybody might have a problem with you being able to do whatever you want to do whenever you want to do it.
Whereas you have utterly denied, repeatedly, that those of us who don't want to smell like ashtrays have our health harmed by your addiction might actually have any grounds whatsoever.
The Oxford union beckons for you I feel.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff