Support NeoGAF

[numble]

Smokers cost to the NHS per annum - £5 Billion.

Smokers pay in taxation per annum - £10 Billion and rapidly rising.

Sshhhhhh.

So does 50% of smokers' taxes go to the NHS?

 

[gutter_trash]

I hate cigarettes because hot girls who smoke smell & taste like tobacco.

it's in their hair, it's on their skin, it's in their breath.. it's a real damn shame

 

[MaxSteel]

I hate cigarettes because hot girls who smoke smell & taste like tobacco.

it's in their hair, it's on their skin, it's in their breath.. it's a real damn shame

i think it's hot

 

[MikeOfTheLivingDead]

Horrible logic.

Taxes don't all go towards NHS; you need to state non-smoker cost to NHS relative to total taxes for a proper evaluation of the impact.

My expectation is that the 50% payout ratio for smokers would be <10% for non-smokers since non-smokers make more money (higher denominator) and take better care of themselves (lower numerator).

He was refering to the taxes smokers pay on their cigarrettes alone. A smoker may pay up to 4+ dollars in taxes per pack. It's a sin tax, the vast majority of which is supposed to go to health care in most places around the world. Healthcare for smokers is the entire justification for the outrageous taxes on cigarettes.

 

[Aquavelvaman]

I wonder if they could ever just phase out smoking over a period of time. Like say, everyone born in 2005 or later will never be able to legally smoke. They're all kids now so they have no reason to already be addicted. In 2040 gas station clerks won't be looking at 15 year olds saying "eh he's probably 18" they'll be saying "yeah you're definitely not 35".

I don't see how it could ever happen though, given how scary it would be toward people's sense of individual freedom and rights etc.

 

[MDSLKTR]

i think it's hot

Same (and i'm not a cigarette smoker).

 

[Vox-Pop]

Smoking is nasty, but looks oh so cool.

 

[WanderingWind]

i think it's hot

Yup. To a point...

A young, dangerous blonde taking a long drag on a cigarette while eyeing you through the thin wisps of smoke? Hot.

Leatherfaced bitch who smells of stale smoke and laughs through stained, yellowed teeth? Not so much.

 

[Bob Loblaw]

Smoking is nasty, but looks oh so cool.

Thank conditioning for that. It only ever started looking cool because the people that we're used to advertise it were cool in the first place. Taking that cig out of James Dean's mouth doesn't make him any less cool. It's because people (teenagers) see cool people do it and want to be like them. The act of putting a stick in your mouth and inhaling it's smoke isn't cool at all.

 

[Get'sMad]

If not for the smell and adverse health effects I would smoke 10 packs a day.

 

[Vox-Pop]

Thank conditioning for that. It only ever started looking cool because the people that we're used to advertise it were cool in the first place. Taking that cig out of James Dean's mouth doesn't make him any less cool. It's because people (teenagers) see cool people do it and want to be like them. The act of putting a stick in your mouth and inhaling it's smoke isn't cool at all.

It's probably just that bad boy image (boys + girls).

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Thank conditioning for that. It only ever started looking cool because the people that we're used to advertise it were cool in the first place. Taking that cig out of James Dean's mouth doesn't make him any less cool. It's because people (teenagers) see cool people do it and want to be like them. The act of putting a stick in your mouth and inhaling it's smoke isn't cool at all.

Screw James Dean, this makes smoking cool!

 

[Fenderputty]

What do smokers enjoy about cigarettes? I smoked for years and have my own opinions but would love to hear those still defending their habit. Is it more than just addiction?

It was more then an addiction for me. Which is why after not having one cigarette in almost half a year, I can still recognize how one would be nice in certain situations.

Post meal, cigs and beer, after smoking a bowl and having sex with the wife.

Most of those situations are probably still mental addictions that I came up with myself, but if smoking wasn't bad for you, I would have zero issues with starting back up again. Even if they kept their addictive attributes.

I just enjoyed it.

All that being said, there aren't too many points in life where I've been more proud of myself then after successfully quitting smoking.

 

[SapientWolf]

I see some people comparing unhealthy food to cigarettes here... In all seriousness, I wonder what is worse for you- one cigarette or one cheeseburger.

Comparing cigarettes to cheeseburgers comes off as an attempt to rationalize one type of self destructive behavior by comparing it to another one. But there's more differences than similarities. Cheeseburgers aren't physically addicting. Cheeseburgers can satisfy your hunger and they're really not that bad for you in moderation. You won't ever get hospitalized from secondhand cheeseburger.

If you are already in good shape and you have a high metabolism cheeseburgers won't really make much of a difference. You can't say the same about cigarettes. If you stuff yourself full of cheeseburgers 24/7 then yeah things will go downhill pretty quickly. But then the problem then is overeating, not necessarily cheeseburgers.

 

[bosskoss21]

good question

 

[GDGF]

You won't ever get hospitalized from secondhand cheeseburger.

I'm staying out of this thread for the most part, but I do want to point out that Secondhand Cheeseburger is a pretty cool name for a band.

 

[demon]

I smoke maybe a couple cigarettes a week. I like it, it gives me a nice buzz. I avoid smoking more than that out of fear of becoming addicted, though.

 

[water_wendi]

The only way to combat the non-smokers is to purchase your cigarettes from non-taxed sources. People are already buying mostly from online or native american shops. If you cant stand a whiff of smoke then you wont get one dime from me. Not only that but if i ever do get cancer and become a drain on the health care system im going to hang on for years through sheer will just for spite.

 

[Cdammen]

Smokes for some, miniature American flags for others!

 

[Kibbles]

Second Hand smoke aint no fun either

This. Hey fine let the smokers do their thing, but make it illegal to do in public.

 

[Monocle]

Fucking this. I quit smoking 10 years ago, and I'm still annoyed by the anti-smoking crowd. "Why don't we get rid of it?" If we got rid of everything that was unhealthy for you, then the list of things we'd have left would be microscopic.

Junk food, automobiles, the internet, alcohol, weed (lol), etc.

If you want to use the absolutely retarded "burden on health care" argument, then you better accept the ideal that everything you do could be regulated under the same argument. Don't like jogging? Too bad, fucker. Lace up, because it decreases health care premiums.

EDIT:


...this literally made me facepalm.

While I agree that a widespread smoking ban is both unrealistic and undesirable, I have to say you're using some pretty shoddy logic to defend this point. Smoking ban advocates aren't suggesting we ban every potentially unhealthy thing, just a single product whose deadly effects are well documented. And even if cigarettes were to be banned nationwide, that wouldn't necessarily lead to bans on other types of products.

 

[Fuzz Rez]

How much do you need to inhale secondhand smoke that it would actually cause real damage ? I'm down with the fact that smoking in bars and etc. is banned because the workers there has to deal with the smoke whole day.

But banning smoking outdoors as some of here has suggested is just ridiculous. Smokers should have the courtesy to ask people around them if it's ok to light up a smoke and if people are not ok smoker should go smoke somewhere else.

 

[UnblessedSoul]

Smoking is stupid and a major turn off for me, if you know the risks involved and you get cancer etc, then that's too bad

 

[Bad_Boy]

smoke weed, not tobacco.

alright im out.

 

[joeyjoejoeshabadoo]

How much do you need to inhale secondhand smoke that it would actually cause real damage ? I'm down with the fact that smoking in bars and etc. is banned because the workers there has to deal with the smoke whole day.

Personally I think there is a good chance that if a worker was working in a bar that allowed smoking they are smokers themselves. I know anecdotal evidence is full of shit, but I've known quite a few worker in the food service industry and a majority of them smoke.

The way I see it banning smoking in bars is stupid. A bar is a place where you go to drink and socialize. If you aren't killing yourself slowly through cigarettes you are doing it through booze. If you hang out in bars and don't drink or smoke you need another place to hang out.

Restaraunts are a different story. Even when I was smoking I always chose the non-smoking side. Smelling cigarette smoke while eating isn't appetizing at all. Sure a smoke after
a meal was divine but during, GTFO.

 

[Fuzz Rez]

Personally I think there is a good chance that if a worker was working in a bar that allowed smoking they are smokers themselves. I know anecdotal evidence is full of shit, but I've known quite a few worker in the food service industry and a majority of them smoke.

But not all of them. It's not fair to the workers who don't smoke. They might be in a minority but still it is unfair.

The way I see it banning smoking in bars is stupid. A bar is a place where you go to drink and socialize. If you aren't killing yourself slowly through cigarettes you are doing it through booze. If you hang out in bars and don't drink or smoke you need another place to hang out.

Agreed. Drink and socialize is fine by me. Drink, smoke and socialize is not fine by me. Pissed me off when you just wanted to stop for one beer and still had to change your clothes because of the smoke.

 

[WanderingWind]

But not all of them. It's not fair to the workers who don't smoke. They might be in a minority but still it is unfair.



Agreed. Drink and socialize is fine by me. Drink, smoke and socialize is not fine by me. Pissed me off when you just wanted to stop for one beer and still had to change your clothes because of the smoke.

Then those workers can find other employment. Why protect the desires of a few to stomp on the rights of many?

...then don't go to bars. Go to restaurants that serve alcohol. There is more than likely a Chili's, Applebee's or some analogue near you. Your desire to not want to change your shirt because of a smell that's offensive to you personally is irrelevant to those who would like to retain their rights. That, of course, being the right to operate their bar in the manner they see fit.

I mean, after all, if it's a smoker friendly bar, and the business suffers because of it, then the business will change, right?

 

[Fuzz Rez]

Then those workers can find other employment. Why protect the desires of a few to stomp on the rights of many?

It's not always easy to find new job.

...then don't go to bars. Go to restaurants that serve alcohol. There is more than likely a Chili's, Applebee's or some analogue near you.

Restaurants and bars don't even compare. Two different kinds of places totally different atmosphere.

Your desire to not want to change your shirt because of a smell that's offensive to you personally is irrelevant to those who would like to retain their rights.

True. The fact that I loathed the smell of my clothes after a bar run didn't stop me for going to bars. It was just a nuisance that is now gone because it is banned to smoke inside bars here (there is still room for smokers and that's fine by me). Smokers might have lost their rights but I didn't lose anything so I don't really give a crap Now my clothes don't smell like shit after a bar trip so it all has worked for me. Yay!

That, of course, being the right to operate their bar in the manner they see fit.

Long as they operate their bar within the laws I have no problems. Bar has to offer room for smokers and no smoking in the open areas of the bar.

 

[WanderingWind]

It's not always easy to find new job.


Restaurants and bars don't even compare. Two different kinds of places totally different atmosphere.


True. The fact that I loathed the smell of my clothes after a bar run didn't stop me for going to bars. It was just a nuisance that is now gone because it is banned to smoke inside bars here (there is still room for smokers and that's fine by me). Smokers might have lost their rights but I didn't lose anything so I don't really give a crap Now my clothes don't smell like shit after a bar trip so it all has worked for me. Yay!


Long as they operate their bar within the laws I have no problems. Bar has to offer room for smokers and no smoking in the open areas of the bar.

1) So? Because something is difficult, doesn't make it an argument one way or the other.
2) Again, so? Find a bar that doesn't allow smoking in accordance with the owners wishes.
3) Well, as long as you're aware that your being selfish. At least you're honest.
4) Why does it have to? Bars are not for children, and adults should be able to make up their own mind on where to patronize. Making it illegal to smoke in bars served nothing save for some people's sense of entitlement and laziness.

 

[SapientWolf]

1) So? Because something is difficult, doesn't make it an argument one way or the other.
2) Again, so? Find a bar that doesn't allow smoking in accordance with the owners wishes.
3) Well, as long as you're aware that your being selfish. At least you're honest.
4) Why does it have to? Bars are not for children, and adults should be able to make up their own mind on where to patronize. Making it illegal to smoke in bars served nothing save for some people's sense of entitlement and laziness.

Making smoking indoors illegal helped the non-smokers who frequent bars avoid second hand smoke and all the problems it caused. There were no bars (in my city) that didn't allow smoking before the ban because banning smoking could cause them to lose customers. There was no incentive to change because a bar owner's main concern is profit, not the health of the bar's customers.

People now smoke outside, which is only common courtesy. I would say that smoking indoors was a consequence of people's sense of entitlement and laziness.

 

[WanderingWind]

Making smoking indoors illegal helped the non-smokers who frequent bars avoid second hand smoke and all the problems it caused. There were no bars (in my city) that didn't allow smoking before the ban because banning smoking could cause them to lose customers. There was no incentive to change because a bar owner's main concern is profit, not the health of the bar's customers.

People now smoke outside, which is only common courtesy. I would say that smoking indoors was a consequence of people's sense of entitlement and laziness.

Yeah, no shit. That's why they own and operate bars and not soup kitchens. And what problems from patronizing bars with smokers was unavoidable again?

 

[Numpt3]

How much do you need to inhale secondhand smoke that it would actually cause real damage ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Castle

 

[SapientWolf]

Yeah, no shit. That's why they own and operate bars and not soup kitchens. And what problems from patronizing bars with smokers was unavoidable again?

Well, prior to the indoor smoking ban, breathing in second hand smoke was unavoidable when you went out to drink. Nicotine has been linked to impulsive behavior, so maybe bar and club owners were profiting from the cloud smoke. Same goes for the casinos around here.

The fact that they serve alcohol doesn't give them carte blanche on noxious chemicals. I could understand if there was a good mix of smoking and non-smoking establishments but prior to the ban all the adult establishments in my city allowed smoking indoors. Hot boxing for hours at a time couldn't have been healthy for anybody, smokers included.

 

[WanderingWind]

Well, prior to the indoor smoking ban, breathing in second hand smoke was unavoidable when you went out to drink. Nicotine has been linked to impulsive behavior, so maybe bar and club owners were profiting from the cloud smoke. Same goes for the casinos around here.

The fact that they serve alcohol doesn't give them carte blanche on noxious chemicals. I could understand if there was a good mix of smoking and non-smoking establishments but prior to the ban all the adult establishments in my city allowed smoking indoors. Hot boxing for hours at a time couldn't have been healthy for anybody, smokers included.

You keep repeating the same things. I guess I will too. If you don't want to be around something, then don't go to where that is taking place. Certainly, don't go there and demand they change around you. If bars were always smoky and you didn't like smoke, then why would you go to a bar?

The fact that you keep bringing up "profit" as a negative is slightly worrisome. Do you know why there wasn't a good mix of smoking and non-smoking? Because the customer base didn't demand it.

 

[Zzoram]

You don't choose to inhale second hand smoke. Children of smokers don't choose to inhale second hand smoke. It's child abuse, plain and simple.

 

[WanderingWind]

You don't choose to inhale second hand smoke. Children of smokers don't choose to inhale second hand smoke. It's child abuse, plain and simple.

Lot of children in bars, then?

 

[SapientWolf]

You keep repeating the same things. I guess I will too. If you don't want to be around something, then don't go to where that is taking place. Certainly, don't go there and demand they change around you. If bars were always smoky and you didn't like smoke, then why would you go to a bar?

The fact that you keep bringing up "profit" as a negative is slightly worrisome. Do you know why there wasn't a good mix of smoking and non-smoking? Because the customer base didn't demand it.

Some people might not complain about asbestos either but that doesn't mean that builders should continue using it. Lots of people smoking in a small, closed area was unhealthy for everybody, even if they didn't speak out. Smoking outside is a good compromise.

 

[adamsappel]

People now smoke outside, which is only common courtesy. I would say that smoking indoors was a consequence of people's sense of entitlement and laziness.

I can remember working in offices where people smoked at their desks. That's mind-boggling to me now. I can humor the argument about smoking in bars, but can anyone justify smoking in a corporate office environment?

 

[demon]

You keep repeating the same things. I guess I will too. If you don't want to be around something, then don't go to where that is taking place. Certainly, don't go there and demand they change around you. If bars were always smoky and you didn't like smoke, then why would you go to a bar?

If "don't go to where it's taking place" meant go to a different bar then you'd have a more valid argument. But for someone who doesn't appreciate second-hand cigarette smoke (any sane person), there was no such option. Don't like that you can't smoke in bars anymore? Tough shit. Laws and regulations exist for a reason, sometimes the people need to be told what's good for them, and when it comes to the epidemic of cigarette smoking anything to discourage it and help to eliminate its "cool factor" is a good thing for everybody in the long run.

 

[WanderingWind]

Some people might not complain about asbestos either but that doesn't mean that builders should continue using it. Lots of people smoking in a small, closed area was unhealthy for everybody, even if they didn't speak out. Smoking outside is a good compromise.

Forcing one group out of the building is not a compromise. Bar patrons were already engaging in unhealthy behavior. And really? Asbestos? Fine. Find me the rampant pro-asbestos-breathing lobbyists and maybe you have an argument there.

If "don't go to where it's taking place" meant go to a different bar then you'd have a more valid argument. But for someone who doesn't appreciate second-hand cigarette smoke (any sane person), there was no such option. Don't like that you can't smoke in bars anymore? Tough shit. Laws and regulations exist for a reason, sometimes the people need to be told what's good for them, and when it comes to the epidemic of cigarette smoking anything to discourage it and help to eliminate its "cool factor" is a good thing for everybody in the long run.

"Sometimes the people need to be told what's good for them?" You and I have nothing more to discuss. You have a fundamental flaw in your world view that I can't reconcile with thinking, rational individuals.

 

[EzLink]

I hate that some of my friends smoke. Not because I think they are bad people for it, but because I love them and don't want to die horrible deaths from something so pointless as tobacco :/

I really don't understand the appeal. As others have said, you don't get high, it makes you smell like shit, makes you cough, takes up tons and tons of your money, and will eventually kill you or give you some crippling illness. All of my friends who smoke wish they could quit. In fact I don't think I've ever talked with any smoker who enjoys it, they ALL wish they weren't addicted so that they could never touch one again.

Tobacco companies are fucking scum and deserve to burn

I know personal responsibility is the most important thing here, but it is so easy to get swept up into a nicotine addiction when it is so common and prevelant in our culture

Weed for life, my friends

 

[batbeg]

Weed preachers are being entirely unreasonable here. It is in no way the same thing, so I don't understand why its even being brought up.

 

[speculawyer]

History.

Once something is legal, it is hard to take away.

 

[EzLink]

Weed preachers are being entirely unreasonable here. It is in no way the same thing, so I don't understand why its even being brought up.

We're just bitter that our hobby is still outlawed

 

[WanderingWind]

We're just bitter that our hobby is still outlawed

Yeah, that sure sucks.

 

[SapientWolf]

Forcing one group out of the building is not a compromise. Bar patrons were already engaging in unhealthy behavior. And really? Asbestos? Fine. Find me the rampant pro-asbestos-breathing lobbyists and maybe you have an argument there.

"Sometimes the people need to be told what's good for them?" You and I have nothing more to discuss. You have a fundamental flaw in your world view that I can't reconcile with thinking, rational individuals.

I have an argument because the logic is the same in either case. People don't have to be unnecessarily subjected to unhealthy conditions just because they don't complain. It is okay for the local government to pass regulations to benefit the health and wellbeing of the public as long as they are not making unreasonable restrictions to people's rights. Walking outside to smoke is not unreasonable.

 

[WanderingWind]

I have an argument because the logic is the same in either case. People don't have to be unnecessarily subjected to unhealthy conditions just because they don't complain. It is okay for the local government to pass regulations to benefit the health and wellbeing of the public as long as they are not making unreasonable restrictions to people's rights. Walking outside to smoke is not unreasonable.

Neither is leaving the establishment.

 

[SapientWolf]

Neither is leaving the establishment.

No one is going to leave the establishment. People would continue to breathe in all that junk in the air. Society would then be burdened with the healthcare and lost productivity costs of their second-hand smoke related ailments down the line.

 

[WanderingWind]

No one is going to leave the establishment. People would continue to breathe in all that junk in the air. Society would then be burdened with the healthcare and lost productivity costs of their second-hand smoke related ailments down the line.

Well, if they chose not to leave the establishment, that's their fault and their responsibility.
And we should regulate personal freedoms based on the loss of productivity, right? Or let insurance companies create public policy based on risk factors? Amazing that people think this way.

 

[SapientWolf]

Well, if they chose not to leave the establishment, that's their fault and their responsibility.
And we should regulate personal freedoms based on the loss of productivity, right? Or let insurance companies create public policy based on risk factors? Amazing that people think this way.

A government has a vested interest in the productivity, health and well being of its constituents. It's why you can't kick back and smoke crack, even if it's your day off. Most states even make you wear seatbelts! Tragic, I know.