BH Runner
ISD BH
Interstellar Services Department
   |
Posted - 2006.08.16 18:02:00 -
[1]
Amazing how offtopic this went.
Smoking in the workplace has been banned in many european countries. This is a good thing in my opinion. Smoking for most people is a very bad drug addiction. People have the choice and the education now to understand this. If they are damaging their own future employment prospects by starting their drug addiction, then enforcement of this exclusion from applying for certain posts can only help to deter people.
I disagree with avon fundamentally on his suggestion that smokers should be respected for paying more tax. Smoking costs UK taxpayers money, alot of money. Figures have never been accurately determined and due to the incidious bature of the morbidity associated with smoking it is difficult to define and qualify.
Mortality is usually the figures quoted regarding the effects of smoking, this isn't close to half the bill. Anything to help prevent this drug addiction and remove the scourge of tobacco companies profits is good in my book. Personally I don't hire smokers, nor would I if I set policy for a large company.
I see this as a good thing.
[Bug Report Here] - [Contact Us] |
BH Runner
ISD BH
Interstellar Services Department
|
Posted - 2006.08.17 19:37:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: Avon
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Originally by: Avon
Ultimately, do you really think smoking would be legal if it wasn't a money maker for the government?
It isn't a money maker, but its still legal.
Why?
Because the government is run by politicians who care about the corporations that fund their campaigns more than the government they run.
Thus, if the government could lose a billion dollars to earn some companies a few tens of millions, they would happily do it. And they do.
zomg, you jumped in before my edit!
Tobacco taxation provides a net gain of ú8bil per year.
I do these figures to be entirely false, and fabricated, and influenced by tobacco lobbyists. As I stated originally they may refer to mortality etc, but they certainly don't take into account the number of taxdays lost to smokers being off work ill, nor the loss of potential income that would be granted by them living an addition 20 years, nor the benfits payments received by a large number when they become unable to work due to the morbidity caused by the diseases smoking generates.
True figures are very difficult to generate, and frankly I don't think the world would be ready for them. Tobacco does generate revenue that is correct, but the figures they generate for smoking related illness treated by the NHS doesn't actually deal with all illness caused by smoking, or the loss of quality of life it caused. I can bet that 2billion ata push figure doesn't include the NHS cost of dental cleaning that snkers should be receiving, not to remove stainging but to prevent gum diesase, which eventually leads to requirement for crowns, and then loss of teeth, which leads to requirement for dentures, which need fixed every so often, or replaced, or new ones made. Wouldn't come close.
[Bug Report Here] - [Contact Us] |