No Smoking Ever

[mattster]

People trot out these claims (on both sides) without any proof.
Apart from the obvious difficulty getting accurate figures what the NHS spends on "smoking related illness" (remember how many different ways we had to count Covid deaths), even if tax is more than NHS expenditure, that doesn't mean all that tax take goes to the NHS. Unless it's ring-fenced which seems like it could be a good idea?

But right now the NHS' big problem is not money, it's capacity. Big infrastructure projects - as many of you will know better than me in real life -can't simply be scaled quickly with even infinite cash. Reducing the volume of people needing treatment for smoking illnesses would effectively increase hospital capacity hugely.

It's an interesting one, this, and people have tried to work out the maths for years - I don't think there is a real answer especially, as you say, smoking can contribute to so many different illnesses. I think the upshot was that state pension saved through early death was probably a bigger saving than the tax take, but it is fair to say that smokers do make a significant contribution to the state finances one way or the other. As an ex-smoker myself tho I do understand why smokers sometimes feel aggrieved when people start talking about witholding care to current smokers etc (never followed through on I don't think) when they are already paying so much. For that to be fair you'd have to start thinking about a "fat tax" or a lack of exercise tax, or a predilection for extreme sports tax etc and there is no real place to draw the line (although the stupid tax (lottery) has been quite successful I must admit).

[d000hg]

Is nicotine in vaping form still particularly dangerous? As a non-smoker I had always assumed 90% of the problem was the smoking, not the nicotine? Note I didn't say "does it have ANY ill effects" but comparatively.

[d000hg]

Purely in monetary terms, the revenue the UK government raises from tobacco taxes is nearly double what the NHS spends on treating smoking related illnesses.

People trot out these claims (on both sides) without any proof.
Apart from the obvious difficulty getting accurate figures what the NHS spends on "smoking related illness" (remember how many different ways we had to count Covid deaths), even if tax is more than NHS expenditure, that doesn't mean all that tax take goes to the NHS. Unless it's ring-fenced which seems like it could be a good idea?

But right now the NHS' big problem is not money, it's capacity. Big infrastructure projects - as many of you will know better than me in real life -can't simply be scaled quickly with even infinite cash. Reducing the volume of people needing treatment for smoking illnesses would effectively increase hospital capacity hugely.

[edison]

Hmm... this throws up all, kinds of issues. Is there anything else for which you have to be over any age other than 18 without it being a crime? Personally, I think grown adults should be provided with enough info to make up their own minds and act accordingly. You could argue that the legal age could be raised as we all do silly things when we are young but the NZ model raises the age every year so that people born after a certain date will never be old enough to legally smoke.

Besides, it's just going to drive tobacco underground into the hands of the criminal gangs. Stupid idea.

Smoking rates in the UK have fallen quite consistently for over 50 years from nearly half of all adults to about 19-20%. The trend has started to plateau a bit the last few years but generally fewer young people want to take up smoking tobacco, although teenage girls has been on the rise a bit. This trend is consistent in most developed countries in the world.

Even the big tobacco companies are preparing for a tobacco free future in the next couple of decades. Around 15-20% of revenue will come from non-tobacco products by the end of this decade.

Most criminal tobacco activity (smuggling and counterfeiting) is driven by the massive differential in tobacco duties between different countries. I remember about 10 years ago that if you brought a car load of duty paid cigarettes from Ukraine and sold them in the UK for half retail price, you'd make something like £3,000 profit, going up to £1m for a large truck. In terms of risk v reward, it seemed better than drug smuggling for sure.

[edison]

bloomin good idea, the health costs of smoking are huge.

yes people will work round it but that will be a small subset. also put duty up so only the filthy rich can afford a cigar a month!

Purely in monetary terms, the revenue the UK government raises from tobacco taxes is nearly double what the NHS spends on treating smoking related illnesses.

[SueEllen]

Good idea, but it might make it trickier to legalise smoking of weed.

Nah.

Nicotine is far more addictive.

[SueEllen]

A massive crackdown is required on vaping.

In my home town every mobile phone accessory/gadget shop sells vaping pens and they aren't fussy who they sell them to.

Couldn't agree more.

Apparently secondary school children (and probably a few primary children) are all vaping now because it is acceptable.

They need to make sure you can't vape or get nicotine products until you are 18.

Then make sure the law on cigarettes follows vapes.

The only exception is that you can get them on prescription if you are under that age.

[TheDude]

A massive crackdown is required on vaping.

In my home town every mobile phone accessory/gadget shop sells vaping pens and they aren't fussy who they sell them to.

[TheDude]

I saw an interview with a spokesperson from pro smoking group FOREST and the chap had framed photos of people smoking on his shelves.

[vetran]

bloomin good idea, the health costs of smoking are huge.

yes people will work round it but that will be a small subset. also put duty up so only the filthy rich can afford a cigar a month!