"The Medway Handyman" wrote in message
om...
dennis@home wrote:
"The Medway Handyman" wrote in
message om...
dennis@home wrote:
"The Medway Handyman" wrote in
message om...
dennis@home wrote:
Not my figures Dennis. The taxation income from smokers is an
indisputable fact. Even you can't argue with that. It's in
excess of £7 billion.
The figure of £1.5 billion is the 'official' NHS figure for
treating 'smoking related disease'. Bearing in mnd that they
include every possible thing that could plausably be caused by
smoking and are wildly exagerated. Do the math.
As I said, refuses to add in anything not in the NHS budgets.
The NHS doesn't treat disabilities so they are not in the NHS
budget. The NHS pays to amputate a smokers legs but it doesn't pay
the maintenance costs of that smoker later, that 20 year cost
comes from other sources which we tax payers have to foot the
bill for. Do the math, if you dare.
I'll type this slowly Dennis, so you can understand. The figure of
£1.5 billion isn't mine, its the figure quoted by the NHS for
treating 'smoking related disease's' so they include everything
smoking related. I haven't refused to add in anything, I'm just
quoting the official
NHS figures.
See, just as I said.
refuses to add in the true costs because he wants to believe smokers
contribute more than they cost even when it is clearly untrue.
Sigh OK Dennis, font of all knowledge & wisdom, how much does all
the other stuff the NHS has forgotton cost then?
I can't refuse to add in the true costs you ****wit because the NHS
don't say there are any.
So, tell us what it all costs Dennis. You must know surely?
What did you post earlier about another poster getting personal and
chucking insults because he was losing the argument?
You really are an arsehole.
I have been civil with you but an arsehole like you just doesn't like
it when you are shown to be wrong.
Why don't you book a one way ticket to Switzerland and put us all out
of your misery.
So you have no idea what the extra costs you claim I'm refusing to add in
to the NHS figures than?
I thought not. Do tell.
--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk
Whilst I am willing to believe your figures about the cost to the NHS (I've
read them in far more places than this) the fact remains that there are
costs that are not bourne from the NHS's budget. This will include the
costs of any non-medical equipment used in the home (eg beds and daily
living aids) and care and support packages (eg respite for any carers, home
helps and the like) these will both be paid for by Social Services. On top
of this there is the cost from the benefits system (incapacity benefit and
disability living allowance for the patient and carer's allowance) which
comes from DWP budget. Whether this combined is more or less than the tax
revenue generated I do not know.
Of course to completely analyse the figures we would need to also include
the reduced cost of pensions for smokers as an additional pay back along
with the tax generated.
As someone who has worked as a toxicologist (albeit not directly in the
field of smoking) the evidence of the harm of passive smoking is not as
clear cut as it is for direct harm to the actual smoker. That being said
there does seem to be a strong correlation with harm even if this is not
strong enough, at this moment, to prove direct causation. Much seems to
depend on how define the harm caused - for example an asthma attack may be
precipitated by exposure to tobacco smoke but it is unlikely that the
underlying asthma condition was actually caused by the smoke. I have read
any of the scientific journals for a few years now so I could be out of date
but if there are links to reputable, peer-reviewed journals feel free to
share.
As a non-smoker it appears to me that many smokers do not realise how
unpleasant their second-hand smoke is even on a purely irritating basis (ie
just the smell and general irritation of being in a smoky atmosphere rather
than any major toxicological effects it may cause) but, that being said, I
am not personally a great fan of the total ban. Personally I would have been
happy for there to continue to be smoking rooms in pubs and the like as long
as these were physicaly separate to the non-smoking areas and with decent
ventilation.
Cheers
Mark