ChatterBank2 mins ago
Smoking
Its bad for you, costs the NHS millions and effects people who don't even smoke. Why doesn't the government just ban it? Tomorrow. Surely its not simple because its a revenue maker?
Answers
1 to 16 of 16
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Pootle. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Generally prohibition doesn't work and causes more problems that it solves. Look at the US attempt to ban alcohol, just sent it under ground and gave a huge boost to organised crime.
The only way is to get Europe wide agreements and rise the price dramatically across Europe. I'm not talking about tinkering at the edges I'm talking about draconian measures, �50 a packet for example. Yes there will always be smugglers but not enough and people will not be able to afford it. Of course if everyone gave up then short term revenue would suffer but that would be clawed back over a generation. Remember if tobacco where discovered today it would be in the same bracket as heroin.
We did a geographical study on this and found that some of the major tobacco producing countries are very poor and their economy could not survive without the industry.
Coupled with the tax received by the government, this is probably why.
Also, if they banned it, smokers would get it somewhere and smuggling etc would increase and the government would have to spend more revenue policing this
And while they are at it why not ban alcohol. Surely excessive drinking is the root cause of more social problems and physical abuse in this country and also a strain on the NHS than smoking is?
Way back in the late 90s when smoking was being banned in the workplace I worked for a rather large local authorities and when a review was made of sickness levels it was found there was more sickness amongst non-smokers then smokers (and there was no smoking allowed in offices so there was no passive smoking involved). Another curious result of the study was the highest 'type' of sickness came from vegetarians. So lets ban them as well!
Not so sure about that jane. Check out the chimp on the left:
http://eul0000562.eu.verio.net/boreme/funny-2004/m_smoking_chimp.php
Yes MargeB I expected something like that. Two observations:
1.It may be related to your question about evolution (our common ancestors-humans, apes-gave up, well most of them), hence those that gave up didn't evolve.
2.this 'smoking' chimp is an exception-otherwise he/she wouldn't be on this nice video, now would he/she/it?
Seriously Jane, I believe that both mammals such as eleqhants and birds, such as shrikes have been observed deliberately eating over ripe fruits, which are in the early stages of fermentation and contain alcohol and then appearing to be slightly intoxicated. Apparently Siberian Reindeer love to munch on fly agaric mushrooms which are hallucigens. They even lick up their own urine afterwards to get at the active ingredient that has not been used. And this article: http://www.samorini.net/doc/sam/flies.htm
suggests that even some insects like to get high.
Seriously newtron, 'lend me your ears, I come to praise animals, not to bury them'.
If you find time, see one very nice documentary (Jamie Uys's 'Animals are Beautiful People' from 1974)-drunken elephants, warthogs, baboons etc.-freebie alcohol, though.
Now I'm outta here to The Plough for few pints of Guinness and some ciggies.
1 to 16 of 16
