Shock study reveals Southampton City Council and Hampshire County Coucil spend £16m annually on smokers over 50

Ageing smokers cost Hampshire taxpayers £16m a year

Ageing smokers cost Hampshire taxpayers £16m a year

First published in News Daily Echo: Photograph of the Author by , Senior Reporter

THE true cost of caring for ageing smokers can be laid bare today as new figures reveal that Hampshire taxpayers are stumping up £16m a year to treat them.

The shocking scale of looking after those over 50 with smoking-related illnesses comes as cash-strapped council bosses in the region struggle to save jobs and public services in the face of savage budget cuts of more than £100m.

The research by Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) found Southampton City Council forks out £2.3 million each year to support ill smokers in their own homes and Hampshire County Council £14.4 million.

Now council bosses have pledged to make it a priority to encourage more smokers to kick the habit, while campaigners are urging for more services that prevent people from picking up their first cigarette.

The extraordinary findings comes just a few months after a city council report revealed Southamp-ton’s taxpayers are shelling out an eye-watering total of £75m each year in dealing with smokers of all ages.

As previously reported, this includes spending £2m on picking up fag-ends, days after plans were unveiled to stop smokers from lighting up in outdoor children’s play areas.

More than £81m is spent on cigarettes and tobacco in the city every year, with more than one in five people lighting up.

Responding to today’s care cost findings, health and adult social care boss, Cllr David Shields, said: “These costs show just a small part of the problem we have in Southampton.

“With more smokers than the national average, reducing smoking is a key priority for the council and the city’s hea-lth and wellbeing board.

“Last year, we signed the Local Government Declaration for Tobacco Control and we have since introduced a tobacco control strategy.

“One part of this included making children’s play parks smoke-free, and next month we’re introducing carbon monoxide screenings to assist pregnant women give up.”

He added: “We want to do all we can to support and protect all our residents and with Stoptober around the corner, this is a really good time to think about stopping smoking.”

Cllr Liz Fairhurst, county council chief of adult social care and public health, added that these figures further highlight the benefits of ensuring fewer people take up the habit.

She added: “We have had the healthcare costs documented previously and NICE analysis has demonstrated that stopping smoking services remain the most cost effective intervention to improve people’s health outcomes.”

Chief executive of ASH Deborah Arnott added: “Local authorities are facing a financial squeeze that makes |effective and targeted spending on preventative services all the more important.”

Comments (59)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:10am Wed 3 Sep 14

elvisimo says...

Before the predictable comments, how much is spent dealing with Heath issues due to obesity, problems due to lack of exercise, drink related etc. small part of a bigger picture
Before the predictable comments, how much is spent dealing with Heath issues due to obesity, problems due to lack of exercise, drink related etc. small part of a bigger picture elvisimo
  • Score: 56

6:12am Wed 3 Sep 14

Kirsty666 says...

Simple answer don't treat them £16m saved then there is £84m left to go stop employing Balfour Beatty employ your own staff that saves £???? Probably take that down a fair few million get rid of high pay for some of council management stop expenses there you go HCC likely down by over half now!
Simple answer don't treat them £16m saved then there is £84m left to go stop employing Balfour Beatty employ your own staff that saves £???? Probably take that down a fair few million get rid of high pay for some of council management stop expenses there you go HCC likely down by over half now! Kirsty666
  • Score: -62

6:37am Wed 3 Sep 14

craige says...

But still, smoking brings in well over £10 BILLION pounds in revenue and tax per year. This is a total UK figure, but over the whole of the UK, the NHS bill for smoking related cases is around £3 Billion. Not saying smoking is good, but statistically, the revenue from smokers easily pays the NHS, cleanup, and non-productivity costs.
But still, smoking brings in well over £10 BILLION pounds in revenue and tax per year. This is a total UK figure, but over the whole of the UK, the NHS bill for smoking related cases is around £3 Billion. Not saying smoking is good, but statistically, the revenue from smokers easily pays the NHS, cleanup, and non-productivity costs. craige
  • Score: 83

7:24am Wed 3 Sep 14

miltonarcher says...

Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.
Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes. miltonarcher
  • Score: -58

7:37am Wed 3 Sep 14

elvisimo says...

miltonarcher wrote:
Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.
Don't smoke but not naive enough to be taken in by a story focusing on a small issue
[quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.[/p][/quote]Don't smoke but not naive enough to be taken in by a story focusing on a small issue elvisimo
  • Score: 31

7:52am Wed 3 Sep 14

Raxx says...

Smoking is stupid, obviously. And I say that as a smoker.

But smokers are actually LESS of a burden than the healthy types. Sound non-intuitive? yep - but remember than stupid smokers like me die *young*. The bigger cost is in all those joggers and slim healthy eaters that live well into their 90s with a dozen chronic conditions.

And then of course, there's the tobacco tax revenue...
Smoking is stupid, obviously. And I say that as a smoker. But smokers are actually LESS of a burden than the healthy types. Sound non-intuitive? yep - but remember than stupid smokers like me die *young*. The bigger cost is in all those joggers and slim healthy eaters that live well into their 90s with a dozen chronic conditions. And then of course, there's the tobacco tax revenue... Raxx
  • Score: 40

7:52am Wed 3 Sep 14

wwozzer says...

miltonarcher wrote:
Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.
Morning Adolf
[quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.[/p][/quote]Morning Adolf wwozzer
  • Score: 38

9:12am Wed 3 Sep 14

Heinz Kiosk says...

wwozzer wrote:
miltonarcher wrote:
Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.
Morning Adolf
I predict that mein Fuhrer will live a very long time, will have very paltry savings to defer his senile care costs and will cost us several hundred thousand pounds as he whinges out his days. Lets hope one of the care assistants doesn't stuff his head down the loo.
[quote][p][bold]wwozzer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.[/p][/quote]Morning Adolf[/p][/quote]I predict that mein Fuhrer will live a very long time, will have very paltry savings to defer his senile care costs and will cost us several hundred thousand pounds as he whinges out his days. Lets hope one of the care assistants doesn't stuff his head down the loo. Heinz Kiosk
  • Score: 11

9:16am Wed 3 Sep 14

Heinz Kiosk says...

ASH is a pseudo-charity engaged on pseudo cost benefit analysis. Can't the Charity Commission get a grip on it? Preferably shut it up, but if not, stop allowing it to pretend the stuff it churns out is anything other than propaganda for the same dimbos who'd have believed Goebbels.
ASH is a pseudo-charity engaged on pseudo cost benefit analysis. Can't the Charity Commission get a grip on it? Preferably shut it up, but if not, stop allowing it to pretend the stuff it churns out is anything other than propaganda for the same dimbos who'd have believed Goebbels. Heinz Kiosk
  • Score: 8

9:42am Wed 3 Sep 14

wwozzer says...

Heinz Kiosk wrote:
wwozzer wrote:
miltonarcher wrote:
Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.
Morning Adolf
I predict that mein Fuhrer will live a very long time, will have very paltry savings to defer his senile care costs and will cost us several hundred thousand pounds as he whinges out his days. Lets hope one of the care assistants doesn't stuff his head down the loo.
Probably for 10 years of wiping soup off his chin in a thousand pound a week state funded care home and having the nerve to labell them "inadequate individuals" for indulging in a fag at break times.
[quote][p][bold]Heinz Kiosk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wwozzer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.[/p][/quote]Morning Adolf[/p][/quote]I predict that mein Fuhrer will live a very long time, will have very paltry savings to defer his senile care costs and will cost us several hundred thousand pounds as he whinges out his days. Lets hope one of the care assistants doesn't stuff his head down the loo.[/p][/quote]Probably for 10 years of wiping soup off his chin in a thousand pound a week state funded care home and having the nerve to labell them "inadequate individuals" for indulging in a fag at break times. wwozzer
  • Score: 5

9:48am Wed 3 Sep 14

FoysCornerBoy says...

elvisimo wrote:
Before the predictable comments, how much is spent dealing with Heath issues due to obesity, problems due to lack of exercise, drink related etc. small part of a bigger picture
Probably too much. Its right that our public health authorities address the causes of ill health (including lifestyle and environmental factors which call for behaviour change). Its even more important for politicians to address the underlying causes of the causes of poor health - namely the unfair and unequal distribution of the nation's wealth. It looks as if a growing number of Scots are waking up to this and I await the outcome of their referendum in a few weeks time with great interests.
[quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: Before the predictable comments, how much is spent dealing with Heath issues due to obesity, problems due to lack of exercise, drink related etc. small part of a bigger picture[/p][/quote]Probably too much. Its right that our public health authorities address the causes of ill health (including lifestyle and environmental factors which call for behaviour change). Its even more important for politicians to address the underlying causes of the causes of poor health - namely the unfair and unequal distribution of the nation's wealth. It looks as if a growing number of Scots are waking up to this and I await the outcome of their referendum in a few weeks time with great interests. FoysCornerBoy
  • Score: 2

9:50am Wed 3 Sep 14

camerajuan says...

Raxx wrote:
Smoking is stupid, obviously. And I say that as a smoker.

But smokers are actually LESS of a burden than the healthy types. Sound non-intuitive? yep - but remember than stupid smokers like me die *young*. The bigger cost is in all those joggers and slim healthy eaters that live well into their 90s with a dozen chronic conditions.

And then of course, there's the tobacco tax revenue...
Sooooo, you're actually in favour of lighting up every day for years, living unhealthy lives and dying young from a smoking related disease than living healthily and dying later - because it'll cost the tax payer more to look after old fit people than it does to have hospices of sick younger people??

So much wrong in that sentiment I don't know where to begin.
[quote][p][bold]Raxx[/bold] wrote: Smoking is stupid, obviously. And I say that as a smoker. But smokers are actually LESS of a burden than the healthy types. Sound non-intuitive? yep - but remember than stupid smokers like me die *young*. The bigger cost is in all those joggers and slim healthy eaters that live well into their 90s with a dozen chronic conditions. And then of course, there's the tobacco tax revenue...[/p][/quote]Sooooo, you're actually in favour of lighting up every day for years, living unhealthy lives and dying young from a smoking related disease than living healthily and dying later - because it'll cost the tax payer more to look after old fit people than it does to have hospices of sick younger people?? So much wrong in that sentiment I don't know where to begin. camerajuan
  • Score: -13

10:23am Wed 3 Sep 14

Beer Monster says...

My Mum died last year of COPD, after having smoked for 50+ years. She knew that it was bad for her, and 11 years ago she quit whilst on a trip to Dublin with me. At the time she was swimming a mile a day, and had an active social life - something she never let go of right up until her untimely death.

Not long after this my Dad started seeing someone else, and filed for divorce after 30 years of marriage. Although she never let it show, this was utterly devastating to my Mum and she started smoking again, which began the downfall.

All I can ask is that you see it fit to educate rather than play the blame game regarding each others health. Life is too precious to argue over.
My Mum died last year of COPD, after having smoked for 50+ years. She knew that it was bad for her, and 11 years ago she quit whilst on a trip to Dublin with me. At the time she was swimming a mile a day, and had an active social life - something she never let go of right up until her untimely death. Not long after this my Dad started seeing someone else, and filed for divorce after 30 years of marriage. Although she never let it show, this was utterly devastating to my Mum and she started smoking again, which began the downfall. All I can ask is that you see it fit to educate rather than play the blame game regarding each others health. Life is too precious to argue over. Beer Monster
  • Score: 6

10:27am Wed 3 Sep 14

forest hump says...

Funny! The Government taxes the ar$e off tobacco and then defies you to smoke it anywhere! (I do not smoke)
Funny! The Government taxes the ar$e off tobacco and then defies you to smoke it anywhere! (I do not smoke) forest hump
  • Score: 15

11:35am Wed 3 Sep 14

Mr E says...

If its that bad then why don't they ban all consumption, sales and importation of Tobacco ? ..

And just how much would the government loose in Tax income if that happened ?
If its that bad then why don't they ban all consumption, sales and importation of Tobacco ? .. And just how much would the government loose in Tax income if that happened ? Mr E
  • Score: 11

12:07pm Wed 3 Sep 14

From the sidelines says...

camerajuan wrote:
Raxx wrote:
Smoking is stupid, obviously. And I say that as a smoker.

But smokers are actually LESS of a burden than the healthy types. Sound non-intuitive? yep - but remember than stupid smokers like me die *young*. The bigger cost is in all those joggers and slim healthy eaters that live well into their 90s with a dozen chronic conditions.

And then of course, there's the tobacco tax revenue...
Sooooo, you're actually in favour of lighting up every day for years, living unhealthy lives and dying young from a smoking related disease than living healthily and dying later - because it'll cost the tax payer more to look after old fit people than it does to have hospices of sick younger people??

So much wrong in that sentiment I don't know where to begin.
No CJ. Read the first sentence.

The rest of the comment is a pure cost/benefit analysis. No hysterical emotion required.

Come on man, get a grip on yourself.
[quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Raxx[/bold] wrote: Smoking is stupid, obviously. And I say that as a smoker. But smokers are actually LESS of a burden than the healthy types. Sound non-intuitive? yep - but remember than stupid smokers like me die *young*. The bigger cost is in all those joggers and slim healthy eaters that live well into their 90s with a dozen chronic conditions. And then of course, there's the tobacco tax revenue...[/p][/quote]Sooooo, you're actually in favour of lighting up every day for years, living unhealthy lives and dying young from a smoking related disease than living healthily and dying later - because it'll cost the tax payer more to look after old fit people than it does to have hospices of sick younger people?? So much wrong in that sentiment I don't know where to begin.[/p][/quote]No CJ. Read the first sentence. The rest of the comment is a pure cost/benefit analysis. No hysterical emotion required. Come on man, get a grip on yourself. From the sidelines
  • Score: 6

12:08pm Wed 3 Sep 14

Heinz Kiosk says...

FoysCornerBoy wrote:
elvisimo wrote:
Before the predictable comments, how much is spent dealing with Heath issues due to obesity, problems due to lack of exercise, drink related etc. small part of a bigger picture
Probably too much. Its right that our public health authorities address the causes of ill health (including lifestyle and environmental factors which call for behaviour change). Its even more important for politicians to address the underlying causes of the causes of poor health - namely the unfair and unequal distribution of the nation's wealth. It looks as if a growing number of Scots are waking up to this and I await the outcome of their referendum in a few weeks time with great interests.
Yes, so true. Good old Soviet Union where the State gave you equality of misery, you drank a lot of home brew vodka because you were so miserable and you died at 52.
Crackerjack! You couldn't make this guy's views up, could you?
[quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: Before the predictable comments, how much is spent dealing with Heath issues due to obesity, problems due to lack of exercise, drink related etc. small part of a bigger picture[/p][/quote]Probably too much. Its right that our public health authorities address the causes of ill health (including lifestyle and environmental factors which call for behaviour change). Its even more important for politicians to address the underlying causes of the causes of poor health - namely the unfair and unequal distribution of the nation's wealth. It looks as if a growing number of Scots are waking up to this and I await the outcome of their referendum in a few weeks time with great interests.[/p][/quote]Yes, so true. Good old Soviet Union where the State gave you equality of misery, you drank a lot of home brew vodka because you were so miserable and you died at 52. Crackerjack! You couldn't make this guy's views up, could you? Heinz Kiosk
  • Score: -1

12:08pm Wed 3 Sep 14

From the sidelines says...

Mr E wrote:
If its that bad then why don't they ban all consumption, sales and importation of Tobacco ? ..

And just how much would the government loose in Tax income if that happened ?
The figure you seek is in the third comment, above. Posted by craige.

Is the smoke obscuring your monitor?
[quote][p][bold]Mr E[/bold] wrote: If its that bad then why don't they ban all consumption, sales and importation of Tobacco ? .. And just how much would the government loose in Tax income if that happened ?[/p][/quote]The figure you seek is in the third comment, above. Posted by craige. Is the smoke obscuring your monitor? From the sidelines
  • Score: -3

12:25pm Wed 3 Sep 14

camerajuan says...

From the sidelines wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
Raxx wrote:
Smoking is stupid, obviously. And I say that as a smoker.

But smokers are actually LESS of a burden than the healthy types. Sound non-intuitive? yep - but remember than stupid smokers like me die *young*. The bigger cost is in all those joggers and slim healthy eaters that live well into their 90s with a dozen chronic conditions.

And then of course, there's the tobacco tax revenue...
Sooooo, you're actually in favour of lighting up every day for years, living unhealthy lives and dying young from a smoking related disease than living healthily and dying later - because it'll cost the tax payer more to look after old fit people than it does to have hospices of sick younger people??

So much wrong in that sentiment I don't know where to begin.
No CJ. Read the first sentence.

The rest of the comment is a pure cost/benefit analysis. No hysterical emotion required.

Come on man, get a grip on yourself.
Got that, and thanks to all the smokers who disagree with me. Kudos to you, watch how far I can run and hear how clean my lungs sound. Do you think I care if you spend stupid amounts of money killing yourself?

Saying something is stupid then identifying the financial benefits of it is pretty much saying "its wrong but its better if we do it".

Not a single cigarette smoked and not a lung problem in sight. My grip is pretty firm.
[quote][p][bold]From the sidelines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Raxx[/bold] wrote: Smoking is stupid, obviously. And I say that as a smoker. But smokers are actually LESS of a burden than the healthy types. Sound non-intuitive? yep - but remember than stupid smokers like me die *young*. The bigger cost is in all those joggers and slim healthy eaters that live well into their 90s with a dozen chronic conditions. And then of course, there's the tobacco tax revenue...[/p][/quote]Sooooo, you're actually in favour of lighting up every day for years, living unhealthy lives and dying young from a smoking related disease than living healthily and dying later - because it'll cost the tax payer more to look after old fit people than it does to have hospices of sick younger people?? So much wrong in that sentiment I don't know where to begin.[/p][/quote]No CJ. Read the first sentence. The rest of the comment is a pure cost/benefit analysis. No hysterical emotion required. Come on man, get a grip on yourself.[/p][/quote]Got that, and thanks to all the smokers who disagree with me. Kudos to you, watch how far I can run and hear how clean my lungs sound. Do you think I care if you spend stupid amounts of money killing yourself? Saying something is stupid then identifying the financial benefits of it is pretty much saying "its wrong but its better if we do it". Not a single cigarette smoked and not a lung problem in sight. My grip is pretty firm. camerajuan
  • Score: -6

12:35pm Wed 3 Sep 14

Service-defender says...

just ban these cancer sticks and be done with it.
just ban these cancer sticks and be done with it. Service-defender
  • Score: 5

12:45pm Wed 3 Sep 14

Raxx says...

From the sidelines wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
Raxx wrote:
Smoking is stupid, obviously. And I say that as a smoker.

But smokers are actually LESS of a burden than the healthy types. Sound non-intuitive? yep - but remember than stupid smokers like me die *young*. The bigger cost is in all those joggers and slim healthy eaters that live well into their 90s with a dozen chronic conditions.

And then of course, there's the tobacco tax revenue...
Sooooo, you're actually in favour of lighting up every day for years, living unhealthy lives and dying young from a smoking related disease than living healthily and dying later - because it'll cost the tax payer more to look after old fit people than it does to have hospices of sick younger people??

So much wrong in that sentiment I don't know where to begin.
No CJ. Read the first sentence.

The rest of the comment is a pure cost/benefit analysis. No hysterical emotion required.

Come on man, get a grip on yourself.
Spot on.

I'm a completely anti-smoking smoker. I'd ban the **** things tbh. but the article is... misleading.
[quote][p][bold]From the sidelines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Raxx[/bold] wrote: Smoking is stupid, obviously. And I say that as a smoker. But smokers are actually LESS of a burden than the healthy types. Sound non-intuitive? yep - but remember than stupid smokers like me die *young*. The bigger cost is in all those joggers and slim healthy eaters that live well into their 90s with a dozen chronic conditions. And then of course, there's the tobacco tax revenue...[/p][/quote]Sooooo, you're actually in favour of lighting up every day for years, living unhealthy lives and dying young from a smoking related disease than living healthily and dying later - because it'll cost the tax payer more to look after old fit people than it does to have hospices of sick younger people?? So much wrong in that sentiment I don't know where to begin.[/p][/quote]No CJ. Read the first sentence. The rest of the comment is a pure cost/benefit analysis. No hysterical emotion required. Come on man, get a grip on yourself.[/p][/quote]Spot on. I'm a completely anti-smoking smoker. I'd ban the **** things tbh. but the article is... misleading. Raxx
  • Score: 6

12:54pm Wed 3 Sep 14

camerajuan says...

Raxx wrote:
From the sidelines wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
Raxx wrote:
Smoking is stupid, obviously. And I say that as a smoker.

But smokers are actually LESS of a burden than the healthy types. Sound non-intuitive? yep - but remember than stupid smokers like me die *young*. The bigger cost is in all those joggers and slim healthy eaters that live well into their 90s with a dozen chronic conditions.

And then of course, there's the tobacco tax revenue...
Sooooo, you're actually in favour of lighting up every day for years, living unhealthy lives and dying young from a smoking related disease than living healthily and dying later - because it'll cost the tax payer more to look after old fit people than it does to have hospices of sick younger people??

So much wrong in that sentiment I don't know where to begin.
No CJ. Read the first sentence.

The rest of the comment is a pure cost/benefit analysis. No hysterical emotion required.

Come on man, get a grip on yourself.
Spot on.

I'm a completely anti-smoking smoker. I'd ban the **** things tbh. but the article is... misleading.
If you're still smoking, you're not anti-smoking. That's the opposite. You haven't stopped, ergo you are pro-smoking.

You can stop if you want to. Stop buying them. Stop accepting them from others. Stay away from them. You will stop. You'll be healthier, you'll have more money and you won't stink.
[quote][p][bold]Raxx[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]From the sidelines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Raxx[/bold] wrote: Smoking is stupid, obviously. And I say that as a smoker. But smokers are actually LESS of a burden than the healthy types. Sound non-intuitive? yep - but remember than stupid smokers like me die *young*. The bigger cost is in all those joggers and slim healthy eaters that live well into their 90s with a dozen chronic conditions. And then of course, there's the tobacco tax revenue...[/p][/quote]Sooooo, you're actually in favour of lighting up every day for years, living unhealthy lives and dying young from a smoking related disease than living healthily and dying later - because it'll cost the tax payer more to look after old fit people than it does to have hospices of sick younger people?? So much wrong in that sentiment I don't know where to begin.[/p][/quote]No CJ. Read the first sentence. The rest of the comment is a pure cost/benefit analysis. No hysterical emotion required. Come on man, get a grip on yourself.[/p][/quote]Spot on. I'm a completely anti-smoking smoker. I'd ban the **** things tbh. but the article is... misleading.[/p][/quote]If you're still smoking, you're not anti-smoking. That's the opposite. You haven't stopped, ergo you are pro-smoking. You can stop if you want to. Stop buying them. Stop accepting them from others. Stay away from them. You will stop. You'll be healthier, you'll have more money and you won't stink. camerajuan
  • Score: -4

12:55pm Wed 3 Sep 14

From the sidelines says...

camerajuan wrote:
From the sidelines wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
Raxx wrote:
Smoking is stupid, obviously. And I say that as a smoker.

But smokers are actually LESS of a burden than the healthy types. Sound non-intuitive? yep - but remember than stupid smokers like me die *young*. The bigger cost is in all those joggers and slim healthy eaters that live well into their 90s with a dozen chronic conditions.

And then of course, there's the tobacco tax revenue...
Sooooo, you're actually in favour of lighting up every day for years, living unhealthy lives and dying young from a smoking related disease than living healthily and dying later - because it'll cost the tax payer more to look after old fit people than it does to have hospices of sick younger people??

So much wrong in that sentiment I don't know where to begin.
No CJ. Read the first sentence.

The rest of the comment is a pure cost/benefit analysis. No hysterical emotion required.

Come on man, get a grip on yourself.
Got that, and thanks to all the smokers who disagree with me. Kudos to you, watch how far I can run and hear how clean my lungs sound. Do you think I care if you spend stupid amounts of money killing yourself?

Saying something is stupid then identifying the financial benefits of it is pretty much saying "its wrong but its better if we do it".

Not a single cigarette smoked and not a lung problem in sight. My grip is pretty firm.
Your grip on your physical health may be firm. However, your emotions have escaped your clutches and are running rampant.

"its wrong but its better if we do it" - Economically, yes, it is. (it's).
[quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]From the sidelines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Raxx[/bold] wrote: Smoking is stupid, obviously. And I say that as a smoker. But smokers are actually LESS of a burden than the healthy types. Sound non-intuitive? yep - but remember than stupid smokers like me die *young*. The bigger cost is in all those joggers and slim healthy eaters that live well into their 90s with a dozen chronic conditions. And then of course, there's the tobacco tax revenue...[/p][/quote]Sooooo, you're actually in favour of lighting up every day for years, living unhealthy lives and dying young from a smoking related disease than living healthily and dying later - because it'll cost the tax payer more to look after old fit people than it does to have hospices of sick younger people?? So much wrong in that sentiment I don't know where to begin.[/p][/quote]No CJ. Read the first sentence. The rest of the comment is a pure cost/benefit analysis. No hysterical emotion required. Come on man, get a grip on yourself.[/p][/quote]Got that, and thanks to all the smokers who disagree with me. Kudos to you, watch how far I can run and hear how clean my lungs sound. Do you think I care if you spend stupid amounts of money killing yourself? Saying something is stupid then identifying the financial benefits of it is pretty much saying "its wrong but its better if we do it". Not a single cigarette smoked and not a lung problem in sight. My grip is pretty firm.[/p][/quote]Your grip on your physical health may be firm. However, your emotions have escaped your clutches and are running rampant. "its wrong but its better if we do it" - Economically, yes, it is. (it's). From the sidelines
  • Score: 2

1:01pm Wed 3 Sep 14

miltonarcher says...

wwozzer wrote:
Heinz Kiosk wrote:
wwozzer wrote:
miltonarcher wrote:
Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.
Morning Adolf
I predict that mein Fuhrer will live a very long time, will have very paltry savings to defer his senile care costs and will cost us several hundred thousand pounds as he whinges out his days. Lets hope one of the care assistants doesn't stuff his head down the loo.
Probably for 10 years of wiping soup off his chin in a thousand pound a week state funded care home and having the nerve to labell them "inadequate individuals" for indulging in a fag at break times.
Ha ha ha ha reel em in. For the record, I left school with no qualifications of any note. As a result of using my initiative and **** hard work I started my own company now employing 6 staff. It did help that I have never been an addict so didn't have the expense of purchasing fags.

I am financially secure and more than able to look after myself. So I wont be a burden on the State. I go to the gym, run and cycle every week, never ever smoked and am never ill. As mentioned, I feel really sorry for the smokers, I've got a member of staff who smokes, when she comes in after her fix she stinks. Her teeth are falling out because of gum disease, she also has other health issues, all related to smoking. She WILL be a burden on the State!
[quote][p][bold]wwozzer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Heinz Kiosk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wwozzer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.[/p][/quote]Morning Adolf[/p][/quote]I predict that mein Fuhrer will live a very long time, will have very paltry savings to defer his senile care costs and will cost us several hundred thousand pounds as he whinges out his days. Lets hope one of the care assistants doesn't stuff his head down the loo.[/p][/quote]Probably for 10 years of wiping soup off his chin in a thousand pound a week state funded care home and having the nerve to labell them "inadequate individuals" for indulging in a fag at break times.[/p][/quote]Ha ha ha ha reel em in. For the record, I left school with no qualifications of any note. As a result of using my initiative and **** hard work I started my own company now employing 6 staff. It did help that I have never been an addict so didn't have the expense of purchasing fags. I am financially secure and more than able to look after myself. So I wont be a burden on the State. I go to the gym, run and cycle every week, never ever smoked and am never ill. As mentioned, I feel really sorry for the smokers, I've got a member of staff who smokes, when she comes in after her fix she stinks. Her teeth are falling out because of gum disease, she also has other health issues, all related to smoking. She WILL be a burden on the State! miltonarcher
  • Score: -1

1:06pm Wed 3 Sep 14

Heinz Kiosk says...

camerajuan wrote:
From the sidelines wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
Raxx wrote:
Smoking is stupid, obviously. And I say that as a smoker.

But smokers are actually LESS of a burden than the healthy types. Sound non-intuitive? yep - but remember than stupid smokers like me die *young*. The bigger cost is in all those joggers and slim healthy eaters that live well into their 90s with a dozen chronic conditions.

And then of course, there's the tobacco tax revenue...
Sooooo, you're actually in favour of lighting up every day for years, living unhealthy lives and dying young from a smoking related disease than living healthily and dying later - because it'll cost the tax payer more to look after old fit people than it does to have hospices of sick younger people??

So much wrong in that sentiment I don't know where to begin.
No CJ. Read the first sentence.

The rest of the comment is a pure cost/benefit analysis. No hysterical emotion required.

Come on man, get a grip on yourself.
Got that, and thanks to all the smokers who disagree with me. Kudos to you, watch how far I can run and hear how clean my lungs sound. Do you think I care if you spend stupid amounts of money killing yourself?

Saying something is stupid then identifying the financial benefits of it is pretty much saying "its wrong but its better if we do it".

Not a single cigarette smoked and not a lung problem in sight. My grip is pretty firm.
Yep, don't smoke, don't drink, don't go with no wimmin; you're pretty durn immortal aren't you? Hope you're like Baldrick, got the bullet with your number in your pocket. Oh dear, as I recall it didn't help poor Baldrick.
[quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]From the sidelines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Raxx[/bold] wrote: Smoking is stupid, obviously. And I say that as a smoker. But smokers are actually LESS of a burden than the healthy types. Sound non-intuitive? yep - but remember than stupid smokers like me die *young*. The bigger cost is in all those joggers and slim healthy eaters that live well into their 90s with a dozen chronic conditions. And then of course, there's the tobacco tax revenue...[/p][/quote]Sooooo, you're actually in favour of lighting up every day for years, living unhealthy lives and dying young from a smoking related disease than living healthily and dying later - because it'll cost the tax payer more to look after old fit people than it does to have hospices of sick younger people?? So much wrong in that sentiment I don't know where to begin.[/p][/quote]No CJ. Read the first sentence. The rest of the comment is a pure cost/benefit analysis. No hysterical emotion required. Come on man, get a grip on yourself.[/p][/quote]Got that, and thanks to all the smokers who disagree with me. Kudos to you, watch how far I can run and hear how clean my lungs sound. Do you think I care if you spend stupid amounts of money killing yourself? Saying something is stupid then identifying the financial benefits of it is pretty much saying "its wrong but its better if we do it". Not a single cigarette smoked and not a lung problem in sight. My grip is pretty firm.[/p][/quote]Yep, don't smoke, don't drink, don't go with no wimmin; you're pretty durn immortal aren't you? Hope you're like Baldrick, got the bullet with your number in your pocket. Oh dear, as I recall it didn't help poor Baldrick. Heinz Kiosk
  • Score: 1

1:08pm Wed 3 Sep 14

SPIKEISLANDTRADER says...

The government , take it in 1 hand and give it back with their other . Only fair I think . We ALL have a vice , but smokers are HIT hardest . So PAY the revenue back to every smoker that needs hospital treatment . And dont MOAN .
The government , take it in 1 hand and give it back with their other . Only fair I think . We ALL have a vice , but smokers are HIT hardest . So PAY the revenue back to every smoker that needs hospital treatment . And dont MOAN . SPIKEISLANDTRADER
  • Score: 6

1:12pm Wed 3 Sep 14

Heinz Kiosk says...

miltonarcher wrote:
wwozzer wrote:
Heinz Kiosk wrote:
wwozzer wrote:
miltonarcher wrote:
Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.
Morning Adolf
I predict that mein Fuhrer will live a very long time, will have very paltry savings to defer his senile care costs and will cost us several hundred thousand pounds as he whinges out his days. Lets hope one of the care assistants doesn't stuff his head down the loo.
Probably for 10 years of wiping soup off his chin in a thousand pound a week state funded care home and having the nerve to labell them "inadequate individuals" for indulging in a fag at break times.
Ha ha ha ha reel em in. For the record, I left school with no qualifications of any note. As a result of using my initiative and **** hard work I started my own company now employing 6 staff. It did help that I have never been an addict so didn't have the expense of purchasing fags.

I am financially secure and more than able to look after myself. So I wont be a burden on the State. I go to the gym, run and cycle every week, never ever smoked and am never ill. As mentioned, I feel really sorry for the smokers, I've got a member of staff who smokes, when she comes in after her fix she stinks. Her teeth are falling out because of gum disease, she also has other health issues, all related to smoking. She WILL be a burden on the State!
Well said Baldrick. Nothing's gonna kill you is it?
Always makes me chuckle when someone drops at 48 with a coronary embolism while jogging and all the slack jawed yokels babble about just not understanding-he was so fit, blah , blah.
The Old Testament has wise words though I'm sure no non--smokers read it
"Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature? "
[quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wwozzer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Heinz Kiosk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wwozzer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.[/p][/quote]Morning Adolf[/p][/quote]I predict that mein Fuhrer will live a very long time, will have very paltry savings to defer his senile care costs and will cost us several hundred thousand pounds as he whinges out his days. Lets hope one of the care assistants doesn't stuff his head down the loo.[/p][/quote]Probably for 10 years of wiping soup off his chin in a thousand pound a week state funded care home and having the nerve to labell them "inadequate individuals" for indulging in a fag at break times.[/p][/quote]Ha ha ha ha reel em in. For the record, I left school with no qualifications of any note. As a result of using my initiative and **** hard work I started my own company now employing 6 staff. It did help that I have never been an addict so didn't have the expense of purchasing fags. I am financially secure and more than able to look after myself. So I wont be a burden on the State. I go to the gym, run and cycle every week, never ever smoked and am never ill. As mentioned, I feel really sorry for the smokers, I've got a member of staff who smokes, when she comes in after her fix she stinks. Her teeth are falling out because of gum disease, she also has other health issues, all related to smoking. She WILL be a burden on the State![/p][/quote]Well said Baldrick. Nothing's gonna kill you is it? Always makes me chuckle when someone drops at 48 with a coronary embolism while jogging and all the slack jawed yokels babble about just not understanding-he was so fit, blah , blah. The Old Testament has wise words though I'm sure no non--smokers read it "Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature? " Heinz Kiosk
  • Score: 0

1:13pm Wed 3 Sep 14

Block41row0sfc says...

Kirsty666 wrote:
Simple answer don't treat them £16m saved then there is £84m left to go stop employing Balfour Beatty employ your own staff that saves £???? Probably take that down a fair few million get rid of high pay for some of council management stop expenses there you go HCC likely down by over half now!
How much do smokers pay tax?
[quote][p][bold]Kirsty666[/bold] wrote: Simple answer don't treat them £16m saved then there is £84m left to go stop employing Balfour Beatty employ your own staff that saves £???? Probably take that down a fair few million get rid of high pay for some of council management stop expenses there you go HCC likely down by over half now![/p][/quote]How much do smokers pay tax? Block41row0sfc
  • Score: 3

1:51pm Wed 3 Sep 14

ConradUK says...

wwozzer wrote:
miltonarcher wrote:
Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.
Morning Adolf
seig heil mein fuhrer, oh that we could all live such a pure and enlightened life as you
[quote][p][bold]wwozzer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.[/p][/quote]Morning Adolf[/p][/quote]seig heil mein fuhrer, oh that we could all live such a pure and enlightened life as you ConradUK
  • Score: 0

1:57pm Wed 3 Sep 14

SPIKEISLANDTRADER says...

You never hear a FUNERAL DIRECTOR , moan about Smokers !! we really are their staple diet , every time we have another COFFIN NAIL !
You never hear a FUNERAL DIRECTOR , moan about Smokers !! we really are their staple diet , every time we have another COFFIN NAIL ! SPIKEISLANDTRADER
  • Score: -4

2:03pm Wed 3 Sep 14

Charlie Bucket says...

SPIKEISLANDTRADER wrote:
You never hear a FUNERAL DIRECTOR , moan about Smokers !! we really are their staple diet , every time we have another COFFIN NAIL !
Why, yes, I think you're right. It's not that EVERYBODY dies, after all. Only smokers.
[quote][p][bold]SPIKEISLANDTRADER[/bold] wrote: You never hear a FUNERAL DIRECTOR , moan about Smokers !! we really are their staple diet , every time we have another COFFIN NAIL ![/p][/quote]Why, yes, I think you're right. It's not that EVERYBODY dies, after all. Only smokers. Charlie Bucket
  • Score: 6

2:05pm Wed 3 Sep 14

wwozzer says...

miltonarcher wrote:
wwozzer wrote:
Heinz Kiosk wrote:
wwozzer wrote:
miltonarcher wrote:
Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.
Morning Adolf
I predict that mein Fuhrer will live a very long time, will have very paltry savings to defer his senile care costs and will cost us several hundred thousand pounds as he whinges out his days. Lets hope one of the care assistants doesn't stuff his head down the loo.
Probably for 10 years of wiping soup off his chin in a thousand pound a week state funded care home and having the nerve to labell them "inadequate individuals" for indulging in a fag at break times.
Ha ha ha ha reel em in. For the record, I left school with no qualifications of any note. As a result of using my initiative and **** hard work I started my own company now employing 6 staff. It did help that I have never been an addict so didn't have the expense of purchasing fags.

I am financially secure and more than able to look after myself. So I wont be a burden on the State. I go to the gym, run and cycle every week, never ever smoked and am never ill. As mentioned, I feel really sorry for the smokers, I've got a member of staff who smokes, when she comes in after her fix she stinks. Her teeth are falling out because of gum disease, she also has other health issues, all related to smoking. She WILL be a burden on the State!
Great, so you're a successful, busy and fit little Nazi.
[quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wwozzer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Heinz Kiosk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wwozzer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.[/p][/quote]Morning Adolf[/p][/quote]I predict that mein Fuhrer will live a very long time, will have very paltry savings to defer his senile care costs and will cost us several hundred thousand pounds as he whinges out his days. Lets hope one of the care assistants doesn't stuff his head down the loo.[/p][/quote]Probably for 10 years of wiping soup off his chin in a thousand pound a week state funded care home and having the nerve to labell them "inadequate individuals" for indulging in a fag at break times.[/p][/quote]Ha ha ha ha reel em in. For the record, I left school with no qualifications of any note. As a result of using my initiative and **** hard work I started my own company now employing 6 staff. It did help that I have never been an addict so didn't have the expense of purchasing fags. I am financially secure and more than able to look after myself. So I wont be a burden on the State. I go to the gym, run and cycle every week, never ever smoked and am never ill. As mentioned, I feel really sorry for the smokers, I've got a member of staff who smokes, when she comes in after her fix she stinks. Her teeth are falling out because of gum disease, she also has other health issues, all related to smoking. She WILL be a burden on the State![/p][/quote]Great, so you're a successful, busy and fit little Nazi. wwozzer
  • Score: 3

2:24pm Wed 3 Sep 14

excusemoi says...

miltonarcher wrote:
Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.
I'm not a smoker and never have been, but i still get the odd puffer in front of me and i get the stench in my face. It's vile to say the least. Passive smoking is gross. It's an addiction i know, and must be really hard to give up. I feel so sad for the smoker's children, please don't let them inhale your used smoke. Try to get help and give up this habit, just think of how healthy you will feel and all the extra cash in your pocket! And your children will thank you. xx
[quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.[/p][/quote]I'm not a smoker and never have been, but i still get the odd puffer in front of me and i get the stench in my face. It's vile to say the least. Passive smoking is gross. It's an addiction i know, and must be really hard to give up. I feel so sad for the smoker's children, please don't let them inhale your used smoke. Try to get help and give up this habit, just think of how healthy you will feel and all the extra cash in your pocket! And your children will thank you. xx excusemoi
  • Score: 2

2:31pm Wed 3 Sep 14

excusemoi says...

Raxx wrote:
Smoking is stupid, obviously. And I say that as a smoker.

But smokers are actually LESS of a burden than the healthy types. Sound non-intuitive? yep - but remember than stupid smokers like me die *young*. The bigger cost is in all those joggers and slim healthy eaters that live well into their 90s with a dozen chronic conditions.

And then of course, there's the tobacco tax revenue...
Talk about trying to belittle the situation. Do you really want to die 'young'? I'm sure you don't, it's not impossible to give up smoking. You can do it you know... there are many smokers young and old who end up on the wards with serious smoking related diseases, it's never too late too give up! Please give it a go.
[quote][p][bold]Raxx[/bold] wrote: Smoking is stupid, obviously. And I say that as a smoker. But smokers are actually LESS of a burden than the healthy types. Sound non-intuitive? yep - but remember than stupid smokers like me die *young*. The bigger cost is in all those joggers and slim healthy eaters that live well into their 90s with a dozen chronic conditions. And then of course, there's the tobacco tax revenue...[/p][/quote]Talk about trying to belittle the situation. Do you really want to die 'young'? I'm sure you don't, it's not impossible to give up smoking. You can do it you know... there are many smokers young and old who end up on the wards with serious smoking related diseases, it's never too late too give up! Please give it a go. excusemoi
  • Score: 0

2:39pm Wed 3 Sep 14

miltonarcher says...

camerajuan wrote:
Raxx wrote:
From the sidelines wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
Raxx wrote:
Smoking is stupid, obviously. And I say that as a smoker.

But smokers are actually LESS of a burden than the healthy types. Sound non-intuitive? yep - but remember than stupid smokers like me die *young*. The bigger cost is in all those joggers and slim healthy eaters that live well into their 90s with a dozen chronic conditions.

And then of course, there's the tobacco tax revenue...
Sooooo, you're actually in favour of lighting up every day for years, living unhealthy lives and dying young from a smoking related disease than living healthily and dying later - because it'll cost the tax payer more to look after old fit people than it does to have hospices of sick younger people??

So much wrong in that sentiment I don't know where to begin.
No CJ. Read the first sentence.

The rest of the comment is a pure cost/benefit analysis. No hysterical emotion required.

Come on man, get a grip on yourself.
Spot on.

I'm a completely anti-smoking smoker. I'd ban the **** things tbh. but the article is... misleading.
If you're still smoking, you're not anti-smoking. That's the opposite. You haven't stopped, ergo you are pro-smoking.

You can stop if you want to. Stop buying them. Stop accepting them from others. Stay away from them. You will stop. You'll be healthier, you'll have more money and you won't stink.
Spot on!
[quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Raxx[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]From the sidelines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Raxx[/bold] wrote: Smoking is stupid, obviously. And I say that as a smoker. But smokers are actually LESS of a burden than the healthy types. Sound non-intuitive? yep - but remember than stupid smokers like me die *young*. The bigger cost is in all those joggers and slim healthy eaters that live well into their 90s with a dozen chronic conditions. And then of course, there's the tobacco tax revenue...[/p][/quote]Sooooo, you're actually in favour of lighting up every day for years, living unhealthy lives and dying young from a smoking related disease than living healthily and dying later - because it'll cost the tax payer more to look after old fit people than it does to have hospices of sick younger people?? So much wrong in that sentiment I don't know where to begin.[/p][/quote]No CJ. Read the first sentence. The rest of the comment is a pure cost/benefit analysis. No hysterical emotion required. Come on man, get a grip on yourself.[/p][/quote]Spot on. I'm a completely anti-smoking smoker. I'd ban the **** things tbh. but the article is... misleading.[/p][/quote]If you're still smoking, you're not anti-smoking. That's the opposite. You haven't stopped, ergo you are pro-smoking. You can stop if you want to. Stop buying them. Stop accepting them from others. Stay away from them. You will stop. You'll be healthier, you'll have more money and you won't stink.[/p][/quote]Spot on! miltonarcher
  • Score: 1

2:47pm Wed 3 Sep 14

excusemoi says...

Charlie Bucket wrote:
Kirsty666 wrote:
Simple answer don't treat them £16m saved then there is £84m left to go stop employing Balfour Beatty employ your own staff that saves £???? Probably take that down a fair few million get rid of high pay for some of council management stop expenses there you go HCC likely down by over half now!
You dumb bitch go kill yourself.
You have been reported to the Echo for abuse of speech.
[quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Kirsty666[/bold] wrote: Simple answer don't treat them £16m saved then there is £84m left to go stop employing Balfour Beatty employ your own staff that saves £???? Probably take that down a fair few million get rid of high pay for some of council management stop expenses there you go HCC likely down by over half now![/p][/quote]You dumb bi[b][/b]tch go kill yourself.[/p][/quote]You have been reported to the Echo for abuse of speech. excusemoi
  • Score: -2

2:51pm Wed 3 Sep 14

excusemoi says...

miltonarcher wrote:
wwozzer wrote:
Heinz Kiosk wrote:
wwozzer wrote:
miltonarcher wrote:
Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.
Morning Adolf
I predict that mein Fuhrer will live a very long time, will have very paltry savings to defer his senile care costs and will cost us several hundred thousand pounds as he whinges out his days. Lets hope one of the care assistants doesn't stuff his head down the loo.
Probably for 10 years of wiping soup off his chin in a thousand pound a week state funded care home and having the nerve to labell them "inadequate individuals" for indulging in a fag at break times.
Ha ha ha ha reel em in. For the record, I left school with no qualifications of any note. As a result of using my initiative and **** hard work I started my own company now employing 6 staff. It did help that I have never been an addict so didn't have the expense of purchasing fags.

I am financially secure and more than able to look after myself. So I wont be a burden on the State. I go to the gym, run and cycle every week, never ever smoked and am never ill. As mentioned, I feel really sorry for the smokers, I've got a member of staff who smokes, when she comes in after her fix she stinks. Her teeth are falling out because of gum disease, she also has other health issues, all related to smoking. She WILL be a burden on the State!
Well i am very pleased to hear you have done well for yourself. And NO smoking!!! Brilliant stuff. Do you have any vacancies for a legal eagle?
[quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wwozzer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Heinz Kiosk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wwozzer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.[/p][/quote]Morning Adolf[/p][/quote]I predict that mein Fuhrer will live a very long time, will have very paltry savings to defer his senile care costs and will cost us several hundred thousand pounds as he whinges out his days. Lets hope one of the care assistants doesn't stuff his head down the loo.[/p][/quote]Probably for 10 years of wiping soup off his chin in a thousand pound a week state funded care home and having the nerve to labell them "inadequate individuals" for indulging in a fag at break times.[/p][/quote]Ha ha ha ha reel em in. For the record, I left school with no qualifications of any note. As a result of using my initiative and **** hard work I started my own company now employing 6 staff. It did help that I have never been an addict so didn't have the expense of purchasing fags. I am financially secure and more than able to look after myself. So I wont be a burden on the State. I go to the gym, run and cycle every week, never ever smoked and am never ill. As mentioned, I feel really sorry for the smokers, I've got a member of staff who smokes, when she comes in after her fix she stinks. Her teeth are falling out because of gum disease, she also has other health issues, all related to smoking. She WILL be a burden on the State![/p][/quote]Well i am very pleased to hear you have done well for yourself. And NO smoking!!! Brilliant stuff. Do you have any vacancies for a legal eagle? excusemoi
  • Score: -2

2:56pm Wed 3 Sep 14

excusemoi says...

wwozzer wrote:
miltonarcher wrote:
wwozzer wrote:
Heinz Kiosk wrote:
wwozzer wrote:
miltonarcher wrote:
Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.
Morning Adolf
I predict that mein Fuhrer will live a very long time, will have very paltry savings to defer his senile care costs and will cost us several hundred thousand pounds as he whinges out his days. Lets hope one of the care assistants doesn't stuff his head down the loo.
Probably for 10 years of wiping soup off his chin in a thousand pound a week state funded care home and having the nerve to labell them "inadequate individuals" for indulging in a fag at break times.
Ha ha ha ha reel em in. For the record, I left school with no qualifications of any note. As a result of using my initiative and **** hard work I started my own company now employing 6 staff. It did help that I have never been an addict so didn't have the expense of purchasing fags.

I am financially secure and more than able to look after myself. So I wont be a burden on the State. I go to the gym, run and cycle every week, never ever smoked and am never ill. As mentioned, I feel really sorry for the smokers, I've got a member of staff who smokes, when she comes in after her fix she stinks. Her teeth are falling out because of gum disease, she also has other health issues, all related to smoking. She WILL be a burden on the State!
Great, so you're a successful, busy and fit little Nazi.
Please do not bring Nazi's into this. That is so inappropriate. It's below the belt.
[quote][p][bold]wwozzer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wwozzer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Heinz Kiosk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wwozzer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.[/p][/quote]Morning Adolf[/p][/quote]I predict that mein Fuhrer will live a very long time, will have very paltry savings to defer his senile care costs and will cost us several hundred thousand pounds as he whinges out his days. Lets hope one of the care assistants doesn't stuff his head down the loo.[/p][/quote]Probably for 10 years of wiping soup off his chin in a thousand pound a week state funded care home and having the nerve to labell them "inadequate individuals" for indulging in a fag at break times.[/p][/quote]Ha ha ha ha reel em in. For the record, I left school with no qualifications of any note. As a result of using my initiative and **** hard work I started my own company now employing 6 staff. It did help that I have never been an addict so didn't have the expense of purchasing fags. I am financially secure and more than able to look after myself. So I wont be a burden on the State. I go to the gym, run and cycle every week, never ever smoked and am never ill. As mentioned, I feel really sorry for the smokers, I've got a member of staff who smokes, when she comes in after her fix she stinks. Her teeth are falling out because of gum disease, she also has other health issues, all related to smoking. She WILL be a burden on the State![/p][/quote]Great, so you're a successful, busy and fit little Nazi.[/p][/quote]Please do not bring Nazi's into this. That is so inappropriate. It's below the belt. excusemoi
  • Score: -2

3:01pm Wed 3 Sep 14

miltonarcher says...

Problem on here is its impossible to have a rational debate with smokers. They are addicted so, as you can see from some of the bizarre comments, they will do and say anything to justify their habit. I guess there is also an element of jealousy. They probably hate the fact they don't have the clean lungs and healthier life style of non-smokers. Listen, grow some and give up, you know you want to.
Problem on here is its impossible to have a rational debate with smokers. They are addicted so, as you can see from some of the bizarre comments, they will do and say anything to justify their habit. I guess there is also an element of jealousy. They probably hate the fact they don't have the clean lungs and healthier life style of non-smokers. Listen, grow some and give up, you know you want to. miltonarcher
  • Score: 0

3:02pm Wed 3 Sep 14

miltonarcher says...

excusemoi wrote:
miltonarcher wrote:
wwozzer wrote:
Heinz Kiosk wrote:
wwozzer wrote:
miltonarcher wrote:
Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.
Morning Adolf
I predict that mein Fuhrer will live a very long time, will have very paltry savings to defer his senile care costs and will cost us several hundred thousand pounds as he whinges out his days. Lets hope one of the care assistants doesn't stuff his head down the loo.
Probably for 10 years of wiping soup off his chin in a thousand pound a week state funded care home and having the nerve to labell them "inadequate individuals" for indulging in a fag at break times.
Ha ha ha ha reel em in. For the record, I left school with no qualifications of any note. As a result of using my initiative and **** hard work I started my own company now employing 6 staff. It did help that I have never been an addict so didn't have the expense of purchasing fags.

I am financially secure and more than able to look after myself. So I wont be a burden on the State. I go to the gym, run and cycle every week, never ever smoked and am never ill. As mentioned, I feel really sorry for the smokers, I've got a member of staff who smokes, when she comes in after her fix she stinks. Her teeth are falling out because of gum disease, she also has other health issues, all related to smoking. She WILL be a burden on the State!
Well i am very pleased to hear you have done well for yourself. And NO smoking!!! Brilliant stuff. Do you have any vacancies for a legal eagle?
Do you smoke?
[quote][p][bold]excusemoi[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wwozzer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Heinz Kiosk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wwozzer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.[/p][/quote]Morning Adolf[/p][/quote]I predict that mein Fuhrer will live a very long time, will have very paltry savings to defer his senile care costs and will cost us several hundred thousand pounds as he whinges out his days. Lets hope one of the care assistants doesn't stuff his head down the loo.[/p][/quote]Probably for 10 years of wiping soup off his chin in a thousand pound a week state funded care home and having the nerve to labell them "inadequate individuals" for indulging in a fag at break times.[/p][/quote]Ha ha ha ha reel em in. For the record, I left school with no qualifications of any note. As a result of using my initiative and **** hard work I started my own company now employing 6 staff. It did help that I have never been an addict so didn't have the expense of purchasing fags. I am financially secure and more than able to look after myself. So I wont be a burden on the State. I go to the gym, run and cycle every week, never ever smoked and am never ill. As mentioned, I feel really sorry for the smokers, I've got a member of staff who smokes, when she comes in after her fix she stinks. Her teeth are falling out because of gum disease, she also has other health issues, all related to smoking. She WILL be a burden on the State![/p][/quote]Well i am very pleased to hear you have done well for yourself. And NO smoking!!! Brilliant stuff. Do you have any vacancies for a legal eagle?[/p][/quote]Do you smoke? miltonarcher
  • Score: 1

3:30pm Wed 3 Sep 14

camerajuan says...

Heinz Kiosk wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
From the sidelines wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
Raxx wrote:
Smoking is stupid, obviously. And I say that as a smoker.

But smokers are actually LESS of a burden than the healthy types. Sound non-intuitive? yep - but remember than stupid smokers like me die *young*. The bigger cost is in all those joggers and slim healthy eaters that live well into their 90s with a dozen chronic conditions.

And then of course, there's the tobacco tax revenue...
Sooooo, you're actually in favour of lighting up every day for years, living unhealthy lives and dying young from a smoking related disease than living healthily and dying later - because it'll cost the tax payer more to look after old fit people than it does to have hospices of sick younger people??

So much wrong in that sentiment I don't know where to begin.
No CJ. Read the first sentence.

The rest of the comment is a pure cost/benefit analysis. No hysterical emotion required.

Come on man, get a grip on yourself.
Got that, and thanks to all the smokers who disagree with me. Kudos to you, watch how far I can run and hear how clean my lungs sound. Do you think I care if you spend stupid amounts of money killing yourself?

Saying something is stupid then identifying the financial benefits of it is pretty much saying "its wrong but its better if we do it".

Not a single cigarette smoked and not a lung problem in sight. My grip is pretty firm.
Yep, don't smoke, don't drink, don't go with no wimmin; you're pretty durn immortal aren't you? Hope you're like Baldrick, got the bullet with your number in your pocket. Oh dear, as I recall it didn't help poor Baldrick.
Well well, the Cabaret has arrived!

I don't smoke - not even once as a bullied pressured kid at a horrendous secondary school, I drink very occasionally and I have been with the same woman for 6 years.

Not immortal, thats impossible despite what Christopher Lambert tries to teach us, but darn sure I'm cleaner, healthier and smell much better than any 20 a day muppet.

Not a Blackadder fan - too young. but thanks for playing. I'm sure someone understood.
[quote][p][bold]Heinz Kiosk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]From the sidelines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Raxx[/bold] wrote: Smoking is stupid, obviously. And I say that as a smoker. But smokers are actually LESS of a burden than the healthy types. Sound non-intuitive? yep - but remember than stupid smokers like me die *young*. The bigger cost is in all those joggers and slim healthy eaters that live well into their 90s with a dozen chronic conditions. And then of course, there's the tobacco tax revenue...[/p][/quote]Sooooo, you're actually in favour of lighting up every day for years, living unhealthy lives and dying young from a smoking related disease than living healthily and dying later - because it'll cost the tax payer more to look after old fit people than it does to have hospices of sick younger people?? So much wrong in that sentiment I don't know where to begin.[/p][/quote]No CJ. Read the first sentence. The rest of the comment is a pure cost/benefit analysis. No hysterical emotion required. Come on man, get a grip on yourself.[/p][/quote]Got that, and thanks to all the smokers who disagree with me. Kudos to you, watch how far I can run and hear how clean my lungs sound. Do you think I care if you spend stupid amounts of money killing yourself? Saying something is stupid then identifying the financial benefits of it is pretty much saying "its wrong but its better if we do it". Not a single cigarette smoked and not a lung problem in sight. My grip is pretty firm.[/p][/quote]Yep, don't smoke, don't drink, don't go with no wimmin; you're pretty durn immortal aren't you? Hope you're like Baldrick, got the bullet with your number in your pocket. Oh dear, as I recall it didn't help poor Baldrick.[/p][/quote]Well well, the Cabaret has arrived! I don't smoke - not even once as a bullied pressured kid at a horrendous secondary school, I drink very occasionally and I have been with the same woman for 6 years. Not immortal, thats impossible despite what Christopher Lambert tries to teach us, but darn sure I'm cleaner, healthier and smell much better than any 20 a day muppet. Not a Blackadder fan - too young. but thanks for playing. I'm sure someone understood. camerajuan
  • Score: -1

3:49pm Wed 3 Sep 14

Heinz Kiosk says...

miltonarcher wrote:
Problem on here is its impossible to have a rational debate with smokers. They are addicted so, as you can see from some of the bizarre comments, they will do and say anything to justify their habit. I guess there is also an element of jealousy. They probably hate the fact they don't have the clean lungs and healthier life style of non-smokers. Listen, grow some and give up, you know you want to.
Your difficulty is that Adolf was indeed a psychotic ant-smoker. Stalin was a psychotic smoker, as was Mao Tse Tung. So the argument is between smokers who wiped out about 120 million humans and the antis who did the same to much lesser numbers. Guess the antis win.....
On the other hand...Churchill was a good ole cigar boy.
[quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: Problem on here is its impossible to have a rational debate with smokers. They are addicted so, as you can see from some of the bizarre comments, they will do and say anything to justify their habit. I guess there is also an element of jealousy. They probably hate the fact they don't have the clean lungs and healthier life style of non-smokers. Listen, grow some and give up, you know you want to.[/p][/quote]Your difficulty is that Adolf was indeed a psychotic ant-smoker. Stalin was a psychotic smoker, as was Mao Tse Tung. So the argument is between smokers who wiped out about 120 million humans and the antis who did the same to much lesser numbers. Guess the antis win..... On the other hand...Churchill was a good ole cigar boy. Heinz Kiosk
  • Score: 0

4:05pm Wed 3 Sep 14

Linesman says...

When I was a teenager and started smoking, there were no associated health warnings.

If you visited your doctor, the chances were that there would either be a full ashtray on their desk, or they would be smoking a pipe.

We enjoyed smoking, and were unaware of the dangers, so it is hard to criticise them now.

What is more worrying is that, despite the warnings on the packets, the warnings in the media, advice given by the NHS and the ever increasing cost of tobacco products, youngsters are still starting smoking.

I am pleased that, after a tough battle, I was able to quit thirty years ago, but the after-effects remain.
When I was a teenager and started smoking, there were no associated health warnings. If you visited your doctor, the chances were that there would either be a full ashtray on their desk, or they would be smoking a pipe. We enjoyed smoking, and were unaware of the dangers, so it is hard to criticise them now. What is more worrying is that, despite the warnings on the packets, the warnings in the media, advice given by the NHS and the ever increasing cost of tobacco products, youngsters are still starting smoking. I am pleased that, after a tough battle, I was able to quit thirty years ago, but the after-effects remain. Linesman
  • Score: 1

4:28pm Wed 3 Sep 14

cantthinkofone says...

miltonarcher wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
Raxx wrote:
From the sidelines wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
Raxx wrote:
Smoking is stupid, obviously. And I say that as a smoker.

But smokers are actually LESS of a burden than the healthy types. Sound non-intuitive? yep - but remember than stupid smokers like me die *young*. The bigger cost is in all those joggers and slim healthy eaters that live well into their 90s with a dozen chronic conditions.

And then of course, there's the tobacco tax revenue...
Sooooo, you're actually in favour of lighting up every day for years, living unhealthy lives and dying young from a smoking related disease than living healthily and dying later - because it'll cost the tax payer more to look after old fit people than it does to have hospices of sick younger people??

So much wrong in that sentiment I don't know where to begin.
No CJ. Read the first sentence.

The rest of the comment is a pure cost/benefit analysis. No hysterical emotion required.

Come on man, get a grip on yourself.
Spot on.

I'm a completely anti-smoking smoker. I'd ban the **** things tbh. but the article is... misleading.
If you're still smoking, you're not anti-smoking. That's the opposite. You haven't stopped, ergo you are pro-smoking.

You can stop if you want to. Stop buying them. Stop accepting them from others. Stay away from them. You will stop. You'll be healthier, you'll have more money and you won't stink.
Spot on!
Absolutely.

It's a simple decision after all! Just stop doing it eh?

I recommend you both become addiction counsellors. :)
[quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Raxx[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]From the sidelines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Raxx[/bold] wrote: Smoking is stupid, obviously. And I say that as a smoker. But smokers are actually LESS of a burden than the healthy types. Sound non-intuitive? yep - but remember than stupid smokers like me die *young*. The bigger cost is in all those joggers and slim healthy eaters that live well into their 90s with a dozen chronic conditions. And then of course, there's the tobacco tax revenue...[/p][/quote]Sooooo, you're actually in favour of lighting up every day for years, living unhealthy lives and dying young from a smoking related disease than living healthily and dying later - because it'll cost the tax payer more to look after old fit people than it does to have hospices of sick younger people?? So much wrong in that sentiment I don't know where to begin.[/p][/quote]No CJ. Read the first sentence. The rest of the comment is a pure cost/benefit analysis. No hysterical emotion required. Come on man, get a grip on yourself.[/p][/quote]Spot on. I'm a completely anti-smoking smoker. I'd ban the **** things tbh. but the article is... misleading.[/p][/quote]If you're still smoking, you're not anti-smoking. That's the opposite. You haven't stopped, ergo you are pro-smoking. You can stop if you want to. Stop buying them. Stop accepting them from others. Stay away from them. You will stop. You'll be healthier, you'll have more money and you won't stink.[/p][/quote]Spot on![/p][/quote]Absolutely. It's a simple decision after all! Just stop doing it eh? I recommend you both become addiction counsellors. :) cantthinkofone
  • Score: 2

4:28pm Wed 3 Sep 14

cantthinkofone says...

FFS....
FFS.... cantthinkofone
  • Score: 1

4:39pm Wed 3 Sep 14

Charlie Bucket says...

excusemoi wrote:
Charlie Bucket wrote:
Kirsty666 wrote:
Simple answer don't treat them £16m saved then there is £84m left to go stop employing Balfour Beatty employ your own staff that saves £???? Probably take that down a fair few million get rid of high pay for some of council management stop expenses there you go HCC likely down by over half now!
You dumb bitch go kill yourself.
You have been reported to the Echo for abuse of speech.
Like I give a shit.
[quote][p][bold]excusemoi[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Kirsty666[/bold] wrote: Simple answer don't treat them £16m saved then there is £84m left to go stop employing Balfour Beatty employ your own staff that saves £???? Probably take that down a fair few million get rid of high pay for some of council management stop expenses there you go HCC likely down by over half now![/p][/quote]You dumb bi[b][/b]tch go kill yourself.[/p][/quote]You have been reported to the Echo for abuse of speech.[/p][/quote]Like I give a sh[b][/b]it. Charlie Bucket
  • Score: 2

4:47pm Wed 3 Sep 14

jackryan05 says...

miltonarcher wrote:
Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.
But you are quite happy to walk down a street with diesel cars pumping out far more in the way of toxicity than 100 smokers sharing a room with you, or put another way, seal yourself in a garage with fifty smokers chain smoking for an hour, as bad as that would be, now try it with a diesel powered car, thats right you are dead, put it in perspective for gods sake.
[quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.[/p][/quote]But you are quite happy to walk down a street with diesel cars pumping out far more in the way of toxicity than 100 smokers sharing a room with you, or put another way, seal yourself in a garage with fifty smokers chain smoking for an hour, as bad as that would be, now try it with a diesel powered car, thats right you are dead, put it in perspective for gods sake. jackryan05
  • Score: 6

4:52pm Wed 3 Sep 14

miltonarcher says...

jackryan05 wrote:
miltonarcher wrote:
Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.
But you are quite happy to walk down a street with diesel cars pumping out far more in the way of toxicity than 100 smokers sharing a room with you, or put another way, seal yourself in a garage with fifty smokers chain smoking for an hour, as bad as that would be, now try it with a diesel powered car, thats right you are dead, put it in perspective for gods sake.
Sorry to hear of your addiction
[quote][p][bold]jackryan05[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.[/p][/quote]But you are quite happy to walk down a street with diesel cars pumping out far more in the way of toxicity than 100 smokers sharing a room with you, or put another way, seal yourself in a garage with fifty smokers chain smoking for an hour, as bad as that would be, now try it with a diesel powered car, thats right you are dead, put it in perspective for gods sake.[/p][/quote]Sorry to hear of your addiction miltonarcher
  • Score: -1

4:53pm Wed 3 Sep 14

miltonarcher says...

Heinz Kiosk wrote:
miltonarcher wrote:
Problem on here is its impossible to have a rational debate with smokers. They are addicted so, as you can see from some of the bizarre comments, they will do and say anything to justify their habit. I guess there is also an element of jealousy. They probably hate the fact they don't have the clean lungs and healthier life style of non-smokers. Listen, grow some and give up, you know you want to.
Your difficulty is that Adolf was indeed a psychotic ant-smoker. Stalin was a psychotic smoker, as was Mao Tse Tung. So the argument is between smokers who wiped out about 120 million humans and the antis who did the same to much lesser numbers. Guess the antis win.....
On the other hand...Churchill was a good ole cigar boy.
??? Try a rational post next time
[quote][p][bold]Heinz Kiosk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: Problem on here is its impossible to have a rational debate with smokers. They are addicted so, as you can see from some of the bizarre comments, they will do and say anything to justify their habit. I guess there is also an element of jealousy. They probably hate the fact they don't have the clean lungs and healthier life style of non-smokers. Listen, grow some and give up, you know you want to.[/p][/quote]Your difficulty is that Adolf was indeed a psychotic ant-smoker. Stalin was a psychotic smoker, as was Mao Tse Tung. So the argument is between smokers who wiped out about 120 million humans and the antis who did the same to much lesser numbers. Guess the antis win..... On the other hand...Churchill was a good ole cigar boy.[/p][/quote]??? Try a rational post next time miltonarcher
  • Score: 0

6:58pm Wed 3 Sep 14

Stubs says...

Smoking is bad for you. Trust me.
Smoking is bad for you. Trust me. Stubs
  • Score: -1

8:13pm Wed 3 Sep 14

Huffter says...

Smokers die younger - thus easing the pension crisis and housing crisis.
Smokers die younger - thus easing the pension crisis and housing crisis. Huffter
  • Score: 2

9:11pm Wed 3 Sep 14

Perroman says...

ALL OF US UK SMOKERS SHOULD STOP!!!
Imagine the faces of the bleating non smokers on here when they realise the tax we used to pay on tobacco is no longer there and their own tax bills have to take a massive hike to make up for it!!!! Can't wait!!!
Now, bring on the trolls!!
ALL OF US UK SMOKERS SHOULD STOP!!! Imagine the faces of the bleating non smokers on here when they realise the tax we used to pay on tobacco is no longer there and their own tax bills have to take a massive hike to make up for it!!!! Can't wait!!! Now, bring on the trolls!! Perroman
  • Score: -1

9:48pm Wed 3 Sep 14

southamptonadi says...

miltonarcher wrote:
wwozzer wrote:
Heinz Kiosk wrote:
wwozzer wrote:
miltonarcher wrote:
Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.Morning AdolfI predict that mein Fuhrer will live a very long time, will have very paltry savings to defer his senile care costs and will cost us several hundred thousand pounds as he whinges out his days. Lets hope one of the care assistants doesn't stuff his head down the loo.Probably for 10 years of wiping soup off his chin in a thousand pound a week state funded care home and having the nerve to labell them "inadequate individualsI smoke, I can easily go out cycle 100 miles, I do plenty of cycle touring and have even cycled from Jon o groats to lands end with camping gear, I smoked and drunk beer all the way down, we'll not literally.

I've not had a day off sick from work in over ten years, I've also not been admitted to hospital since I was a child.

Maybe I will give up then get killed cycling, who knows.

I am going to give up but purely so I can save for a wedding.
[quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wwozzer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Heinz Kiosk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wwozzer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: Predictable brain dead comments from the addicts. Mind you, when I see these inadequate individuals indulging in their disgusting habit, puffing away I usually feel sorry for them. At least in these more enlightened times we don't have to put up with the stench on our clothes and breathing in the noxious fumes.[/p][/quote]Morning Adolf[/p][/quote]I predict that mein Fuhrer will live a very long time, will have very paltry savings to defer his senile care costs and will cost us several hundred thousand pounds as he whinges out his days. Lets hope one of the care assistants doesn't stuff his head down the loo.[/p][/quote]Probably for 10 years of wiping soup off his chin in a thousand pound a week state funded care home and having the nerve to labell them "inadequate individualsI smoke, I can easily go out cycle 100 miles, I do plenty of cycle touring and have even cycled from Jon o groats to lands end with camping gear, I smoked and drunk beer all the way down, we'll not literally. I've not had a day off sick from work in over ten years, I've also not been admitted to hospital since I was a child. Maybe I will give up then get killed cycling, who knows. I am going to give up but purely so I can save for a wedding. southamptonadi
  • Score: 0

7:53am Thu 4 Sep 14

Heinz Kiosk says...

miltonarcher wrote:
Heinz Kiosk wrote:
miltonarcher wrote:
Problem on here is its impossible to have a rational debate with smokers. They are addicted so, as you can see from some of the bizarre comments, they will do and say anything to justify their habit. I guess there is also an element of jealousy. They probably hate the fact they don't have the clean lungs and healthier life style of non-smokers. Listen, grow some and give up, you know you want to.
Your difficulty is that Adolf was indeed a psychotic ant-smoker. Stalin was a psychotic smoker, as was Mao Tse Tung. So the argument is between smokers who wiped out about 120 million humans and the antis who did the same to much lesser numbers. Guess the antis win.....
On the other hand...Churchill was a good ole cigar boy.
??? Try a rational post next time
I wouldn't want to own up, even under a pseudonym, to an inability to understand my native language, but then I'm literate and smoke the odd cigar.
Try to read a book. You might benefit.
[quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Heinz Kiosk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: Problem on here is its impossible to have a rational debate with smokers. They are addicted so, as you can see from some of the bizarre comments, they will do and say anything to justify their habit. I guess there is also an element of jealousy. They probably hate the fact they don't have the clean lungs and healthier life style of non-smokers. Listen, grow some and give up, you know you want to.[/p][/quote]Your difficulty is that Adolf was indeed a psychotic ant-smoker. Stalin was a psychotic smoker, as was Mao Tse Tung. So the argument is between smokers who wiped out about 120 million humans and the antis who did the same to much lesser numbers. Guess the antis win..... On the other hand...Churchill was a good ole cigar boy.[/p][/quote]??? Try a rational post next time[/p][/quote]I wouldn't want to own up, even under a pseudonym, to an inability to understand my native language, but then I'm literate and smoke the odd cigar. Try to read a book. You might benefit. Heinz Kiosk
  • Score: 0

7:55am Thu 4 Sep 14

Heinz Kiosk says...

Linesman wrote:
When I was a teenager and started smoking, there were no associated health warnings.

If you visited your doctor, the chances were that there would either be a full ashtray on their desk, or they would be smoking a pipe.

We enjoyed smoking, and were unaware of the dangers, so it is hard to criticise them now.

What is more worrying is that, despite the warnings on the packets, the warnings in the media, advice given by the NHS and the ever increasing cost of tobacco products, youngsters are still starting smoking.

I am pleased that, after a tough battle, I was able to quit thirty years ago, but the after-effects remain.
In passing they buy hard drugs from horrible degenerate syphilitic creatures who couldn't be a role model for a sewer rat, so you're up against some pretty odd psychology.
[quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: When I was a teenager and started smoking, there were no associated health warnings. If you visited your doctor, the chances were that there would either be a full ashtray on their desk, or they would be smoking a pipe. We enjoyed smoking, and were unaware of the dangers, so it is hard to criticise them now. What is more worrying is that, despite the warnings on the packets, the warnings in the media, advice given by the NHS and the ever increasing cost of tobacco products, youngsters are still starting smoking. I am pleased that, after a tough battle, I was able to quit thirty years ago, but the after-effects remain.[/p][/quote]In passing they buy hard drugs from horrible degenerate syphilitic creatures who couldn't be a role model for a sewer rat, so you're up against some pretty odd psychology. Heinz Kiosk
  • Score: 0

8:16am Thu 4 Sep 14

Heinz Kiosk says...

try this Archer, for a "debate"
There's no merit in climbing mountains. I have no objection to the NHS treating falls at my expense. I'm glad my sons preferred soccer to rugby but have no problem with the horrendous cost of crush injuries caused by collapsing packs. I wouldn't bungee jump. Repairing detached retinas is pricey and sometimes needs many ops.
I do not get self-righteous and froth about these pursuits. I don't produce, continuously, reams of stupid propaganda, like ASH. What is it about smoking that brings out the feudal? Search me.
try this Archer, for a "debate" There's no merit in climbing mountains. I have no objection to the NHS treating falls at my expense. I'm glad my sons preferred soccer to rugby but have no problem with the horrendous cost of crush injuries caused by collapsing packs. I wouldn't bungee jump. Repairing detached retinas is pricey and sometimes needs many ops. I do not get self-righteous and froth about these pursuits. I don't produce, continuously, reams of stupid propaganda, like ASH. What is it about smoking that brings out the feudal? Search me. Heinz Kiosk
  • Score: 1

8:40am Thu 4 Sep 14

forest hump says...

Heinz Kiosk wrote:
try this Archer, for a "debate"
There's no merit in climbing mountains. I have no objection to the NHS treating falls at my expense. I'm glad my sons preferred soccer to rugby but have no problem with the horrendous cost of crush injuries caused by collapsing packs. I wouldn't bungee jump. Repairing detached retinas is pricey and sometimes needs many ops.
I do not get self-righteous and froth about these pursuits. I don't produce, continuously, reams of stupid propaganda, like ASH. What is it about smoking that brings out the feudal? Search me.
It would be of interest to see the collective cost of sports injuries! (and call any pursuit sport) I am a non smoker but agree with your sentiments. Also, the pastimes you mention are not taxed out of almost existence. And they have not been a heavy contribution to the demise of the Public House in this country.
[quote][p][bold]Heinz Kiosk[/bold] wrote: try this Archer, for a "debate" There's no merit in climbing mountains. I have no objection to the NHS treating falls at my expense. I'm glad my sons preferred soccer to rugby but have no problem with the horrendous cost of crush injuries caused by collapsing packs. I wouldn't bungee jump. Repairing detached retinas is pricey and sometimes needs many ops. I do not get self-righteous and froth about these pursuits. I don't produce, continuously, reams of stupid propaganda, like ASH. What is it about smoking that brings out the feudal? Search me.[/p][/quote]It would be of interest to see the collective cost of sports injuries! (and call any pursuit sport) I am a non smoker but agree with your sentiments. Also, the pastimes you mention are not taxed out of almost existence. And they have not been a heavy contribution to the demise of the Public House in this country. forest hump
  • Score: 0

1:32pm Thu 4 Sep 14

Charlie Bucket says...

Perroman wrote:
ALL OF US UK SMOKERS SHOULD STOP!!!
Imagine the faces of the bleating non smokers on here when they realise the tax we used to pay on tobacco is no longer there and their own tax bills have to take a massive hike to make up for it!!!! Can't wait!!!
Now, bring on the trolls!!
Err, you've openly said something designed to inflame an argument. By the very definition of the word, YOU are the troll.
[quote][p][bold]Perroman[/bold] wrote: ALL OF US UK SMOKERS SHOULD STOP!!! Imagine the faces of the bleating non smokers on here when they realise the tax we used to pay on tobacco is no longer there and their own tax bills have to take a massive hike to make up for it!!!! Can't wait!!! Now, bring on the trolls!![/p][/quote]Err, you've openly said something designed to inflame an argument. By the very definition of the word, YOU are the troll. Charlie Bucket
  • Score: 0

3:06pm Thu 4 Sep 14

Heinz Kiosk says...

Charlie Bucket wrote:
Perroman wrote:
ALL OF US UK SMOKERS SHOULD STOP!!!
Imagine the faces of the bleating non smokers on here when they realise the tax we used to pay on tobacco is no longer there and their own tax bills have to take a massive hike to make up for it!!!! Can't wait!!!
Now, bring on the trolls!!
Err, you've openly said something designed to inflame an argument. By the very definition of the word, YOU are the troll.
There isn't an "argument "The whole premise of the headline is tosh, isn't it? Smokers don't become "ageing"; they tend to pass away prematurely. So it's a bit like having an "argument "about whether the atomic weight of gold makes President Hollande move faster or slower from one filly to the next.
[quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Perroman[/bold] wrote: ALL OF US UK SMOKERS SHOULD STOP!!! Imagine the faces of the bleating non smokers on here when they realise the tax we used to pay on tobacco is no longer there and their own tax bills have to take a massive hike to make up for it!!!! Can't wait!!! Now, bring on the trolls!![/p][/quote]Err, you've openly said something designed to inflame an argument. By the very definition of the word, YOU are the troll.[/p][/quote]There isn't an "argument "The whole premise of the headline is tosh, isn't it? Smokers don't become "ageing"; they tend to pass away prematurely. So it's a bit like having an "argument "about whether the atomic weight of gold makes President Hollande move faster or slower from one filly to the next. Heinz Kiosk
  • Score: 0
Post a comment

Remember you are personally responsible for what you post on this site and must abide by our site terms. Do not post anything that is false, abusive or malicious. If you wish to complain, please use the ‘report this post’ link.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree