...And responsible for the high costs of the public health system...:mad::mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies
jc
Printable View
...And responsible for the high costs of the public health system...:mad::mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies
jc
Actually, smokers input more into the tax system than the theoritical cost from what I am lead to believe, also smoking related illness is very much like speed related accidents, the box gets ticked a lot more often than it shouldQuote:
Originally Posted by justinc
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick_Marsh
Haha, sheriffs don't chase piddly fines, the sheriffs office is a business you know;)
Fair comment on Station staff but Transit cops (Transport officers) have the authority to issue fines for smoking at stations and its thier job to enforce the rules.Quote:
Originally Posted by 303gunner
Fines - Sydney Trains
Significantly Not trueQuote:
Originally Posted by rovercare
"Tobacco smoking is the leading cause of preventable illness and death in Australia, accounting for eight% of the total burden of disease in 2003. Total smoking-related costs to society—including those for healthcare and lost productivity, and intangible social costs—were estimated at $31.5 billion in 2004–05." http://www.aihw.gov.au/~
versus Tax revenue
"It shows the government collected $5.45 billion in tobacco excise in 2011/12, down from the $5.79 billion Treasury estimated in the May budget." ~news/national/tobacco-tax-revenue-falls-by-341m/~
Skewed figures much? which percentage is health alone?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies
The net cost of smoking to the health system is therefore $318.4 million, a figure that hardly makes a dent on the $8.85bn the government was expecting to collect from smokers this year, even without the additional revenue from the proposed excise increase.
By far the largest and most speculative component is $19bn in "intangible costs", the hypothetical cost of pain and suffering and the "valuation of life" -- an estimate of the loss of productive capacity from a premature death.
Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian
Plenty more info out there
You just stick with adding 19bil made up money to the bill to justify those claims for social acceptance:)
17.2 The costs of smoking - Tobacco In Australia
Read the whole thing, the "costs" are made up social costs, what about those whom will replace one bad habit with another, not many studies on the costs of food addiction, obesity, what about a porn addiction? that's right, we just happily add speculation to something that has been made socially unacceptable.......sheeple, happily on the bandwagon will it affects something closer to our own heart, again, fossil fuelled powered vehicles anyone?
See how you feel when they start banning cars older than 10 years or atleast taxing them of the road, these things cause plenty of harm aswell, but you know, its not soically unacceptable like smoking.......yet;)
His secretary Sir Humphrey says banning smoking would leave the government out of pocket, since cigarette taxes paid a third of the cost of the National Health Service. "We are saving many more lives than we otherwise could because of those smokers who voluntarily lay down their lives for their friends," Sir Humphrey said. "Smokers are national benefactors."
:D
Transit Officers are only empowered to issue on the spot fines for offences covered in the Passenger Transport Regulation 2007 and the Rail Safety (Offences) Regulation 2008. This does include smoking on trains, and under covered areas of platforms and underground stations. Go to an open area of the station, or to the entrance and they cannot issue a fine. They may say something, and many people will believe that, but they do not have the power to enforce smoking in those areas. Others have long been aware of the limits of the rail regulations, and open areas of platforms have become the "smoker's zones".Quote:
Originally Posted by Discomark
NSW Health is responsible for the Smoke-free Environment Act 2000. This was amended in 2013 to greatly expand the application to a much wider area of Public Places, including many areas of and approaches to railway stations that are not covered by rail legislation. As it also applies to dining areas and children's play areas, it can also apply within National Parks too, particularly urban ones such as Sydney Harbour, Lane Cove and The Royal.
Enforcement of the Smoke free Environment act got off to a slow start, as from 2000 to 2013, it was only enforced by 30 Dept of Health Inspectors. From 3 Jan 2014, an amendment included NSW Police as able to issue fines, but only for transport related areas (train, bus, ferry and taxi).
You can't consider the balance sheet on smoking without the social costs, the fact that smokers almost always end up with some form of lung disease cant be discounted.Quote:
Originally Posted by rovercare
Lung diseases increase the numbers of days the worker takes off, that lost production is a loss of tax revenue, when the lung diseased person is no longer able to work they go on welfare an expense on tax revenue. That other persons have to stop work to care for a person disabled by smoking related lung disease is a loss of production and tax revenue, they go on a disability support pension another expense on tax revenue. If the person didn't smoke in the first place they wouldn't have the smoking related lung disease and both they and their partner would not be a burden on tax revenue.
The rest of your argument is irrelevant and nothing to do with the smoking and National Parks discussion.