[BBC News] Business support for smoking ban

[Lonan3]

Everything else in your post is both questionable and irrelevant.

As is the content of all of your posts.

[Stu Peters]

Some good posts in this thread - as well as the usual intolerant "I don't do it so you can't" fascists.

 

I've been making the point for ages (as does Brad) that IF it's so bad for us all, the Governments should just ban tobacco sales, so that those of us with Lack of Moral Fibre CAN give them up once and for all. I certainly wouldn't pay black market prices for smokes and reckon quitting (or more to the point STAYING off them) would be so much easier if cigarettes weren't available everywhere I go. We're junkies (although whether we're addicted to the nicotine or the habit itself is another debate), and the answer is cold turkey with no option to fall off the wagon.

 

I heard once that IOMG rakes in £55,000 a DAY in tobacco taxes though, so it's not surprising that smokes are still on sale. I remember a news story from the UK that said tobacco taxes grossed (IIRC)£9.5 billion, of which £7 billion was 'profit' - so I would dispute the local health experts who say all the taxes raised here go on smoking-related healthcare (I'm sure - as in most things - that we generally mirror the UK stats /1000).

 

To Lonan3's well-constructed argument, the difference here is that we've been allowed (encouraged even) to smoke ever since Walter Raleigh brought tobacco from the New Colonies (if you believe Bob Newhart, anyway), so whilst DWatterson might not be allowed to do 'plenty of things in bars, clubs and restaurants', chances are that he never could. Although dwarf throwing contests were NEVER a great idea...

 

To all those who think smoking is a sick aberration akin to paedophilia, and that drinking to excess is perfectly acceptable, I would just point you to the newspaper or court reports on the other Manx news websites. Strikes me that booze is involved in almost EVERY reported crime - most of it anti-social, disruptive or just plain nasty. And I'm not just citing major excess - the sniff of a barmaid's apron seems to turn many normally bright and friendly people into leering, lairy, loud arseholes. And the more, the messier.

 

BTW I'm not anti-drinking - but we've brought up a generation of alcoholics who think moderation is for wimps.

 

Bill Hicks was MUCH more than a comic. His observation that Governments like the idea of anaesthetised beery masses watching reality TV and paying lots of taxes (HOW much of every pint of that processed water is tax??) was a snapshot of the 1990's that's even more astute today. He reckoned we should all smoke dope instead - any crashes would be at 4mph and nobody would fight.

[lectro]

As a lifelong non-smoker I am totally against the ban. Yesterday I was at my place in Spain. A local restaurant had at first set aside an area for smokers when the ban came in. His trade went down. Then he made the whole restaurant non-smoking. Trade down some more. Now he has a sign up on the door telling people that it is a 'smoking only' restaurant. It was packed out with happy diners when we went on Monday.

 

 

All that shows is that if establishments have a choice some will suffer others won't. The same happened when the Railway went no smoking. People in groups which had a smoker usually didn't go because the smoker wouldn't exercise their right to slowly kill them self outside for 5 minutes for the benefit of others. If the playing fields are level i.e. the ban applies to all establishments like in Ireland then no-one's trade suffers. In fact in Ireland there has been an increase in revenue in pubs, restaurants, hotels - not a decline. There is a decline in alcohol sales (but overall profits are up) and that's due to other factors - enforced drink driving laws, change in drinking habits, and mostly the cost. It's well documented. As is the improvement in the health of the staff.

 

Of all the places in the world, Ireland is the last place I thought it would work. But it does and it's made fuck all difference to the smokers - most bars have set up heaters, canopies and benches outside for the smokers. Where it has made a difference is for the non-smokers (the majority of the adult population) and the staff and generally anyone who wants to socialise without having to ingest second hand smoke and smell like an ashtray. Smokers can still have their precious first hand smoke and smell like an ashtray if they want - but just not inside. No rights taken away. No huge nanny state conspiracy. Just common sense and respect for other people's health. Anyway - stop whining it's going to happen. You'll adapt. You'll survive.... well until you die of lung or throat cancer

[slinkydevil]

In fact in Ireland there has been an increase in revenue in pubs, restaurants, hotels - not a decline. There is a decline in alcohol sales (but overall profits are up) and that's due to other factors - enforced drink driving laws, change in drinking habits, and mostly the cost. It's well documented. As is the improvement in the health of the staff.

 

What is your source for this information, as everything I can find says the opposite.

[Lonan3]

FOOD FOR THOUGHT?

[Albert Tatlock]

In fact in Ireland there has been an increase in revenue in pubs, restaurants, hotels - not a decline.

That propaganda is straight out of your arse.

 

Guinness sales slumped 9 per cent in Ireland in the second half of last year, as wine and spirits grew in popularity and more people chose to drink at home instead of in pubs. In Scotland cigarette sales have gone up by 5% since the ban was brought in. A similar outcome resulted from bans in Ireland and Spain and experts say a rise in the number of people smoking at home is behind the increase.

 

All that's happended is that smoking and drinking, as predicted by many previous posts on this forum including some of my own, has shifted into the home. I would rather have seen a ban on smoking in front of children and allowed smoking to continue in certain premises such as smoking pubs and clubs where entry was restricted to those adults capable of making an informed choice.

[keyboarder]

Everything else in your post is both questionable and irrelevant.

As is the content of all of your posts.

 

Ooooh, get her!! What an unprovoked hissy fit!! You obviously haven't read my posts - if you do you'll see that they are invariably relevant to their relative threads. You silly person.

[Lost Login]

That is a line that Diageo who produce guiness have been reeling out every year as an explanation to the stock market of the poor performance of Guiness in Ireland. I think they sell more Guiness now in Africa. The 9% may be a headline grabbing figure but the consumption of Guiness has fallen consistently since at least 1999. Normally by 3 or 4% per annum but there have been big flucuations within that. Warm wetaher is bad for Guiness sales

 

At the same time Guiness has fallen sales of Magners Cider and Murphy's have grown so whilst the smoking ban may have had an effect on turnover Guiness is not an accurate barometer of it. Generally it is loosing out in the market place just as Mild has basically already disappeared from pubs in the UK and the sales of Bitter have declined over the years

 

Guinness sales slumped 9 per cent in Ireland in the second half of last year, as wine and spirits grew in popularity and more people chose to drink at home instead of in pubs.

[Pragmatopian]

To Lonan3's well-constructed argument, the difference here is that we've been allowed (encouraged even) to smoke ever since Walter Raleigh brought tobacco from the New Colonies (if you believe Bob Newhart, anyway), so whilst DWatterson might not be allowed to do 'plenty of things in bars, clubs and restaurants', chances are that he never could. Although dwarf throwing contests were NEVER a great idea...

 

Shame, I used to enjoy a good dwarf throwing contest I know it's seen by some as a dirty word, but there is such a thing as 'progress' which means that it is sometimes acceptable or even desirable to change the way we do things to take into account new knowledge or technologies. Heresy, I know: next thing they'll stop us burning witches and beating our servants with sticks!

 

To all those who think smoking is a sick aberration akin to paedophilia, and that drinking to excess is perfectly acceptable, I would just point you to the newspaper or court reports on the other Manx news websites. Strikes me that booze is involved in almost EVERY reported crime - most of it anti-social, disruptive or just plain nasty. And I'm not just citing major excess - the sniff of a barmaid's apron seems to turn many normally bright and friendly people into leering, lairy, loud arseholes. And the more, the messier.

 

Would agree on that, but it is possible to drink responsibly: however careful you are as a smoker in an enclosed environment you can't avoid creating a risk to others, albeit one that in itself is not an immediate danger. If someone drives dangerously through an estate, then they're creating an immediate risk to the people around them - it's irresponsible and few would condone it. Smoking has a cumulative effect from exposure over many years to many peoples' smoke, but although you can't immediately and directly see the impact does not mean you're contributing to it. Sadly I've known and loved many people who have died from smoking-related diseases - some smokers, some not. If banning smoking in public places prevents some non-smokers from getting sick and creates an incentive for some smokers to give up too then I'm all for it. And yes I know there are other risks we create for each other that we either can't avoid or would find extremely difficult to avoid, but this is a very clear one that is very easy to address. I think taking responsibility for your own actions and their impact on those around you is part of being a good citizen. If that's being a fascist then call me Mussolini.

[Pragmatopian]

FOOD FOR THOUGHT?

 

Look at the source (Head of Business Recovery and Restructuring at BDO Stoy Hayward) and the date (November 2004 - well before any UK ban). I think I can smell an ulterior motive in the message. I've seen a lot of lazy journalism in the last few years with trade press and even the BBC reporting company marketing press releases as fact.

 

It seems difficult to get any unbiased figures on the economic impact of smoking bans (believe me, I've been trying for the last half hour) - most studies are sponsored by pro or anti smoking interest groups or others with a particular axe to grind. There's plenty of data out there - I have to say that a lot of the 'negative impact' articles and data seem to come in the run-up to bans or immediately afterwards.

[keyboarder]

Some good posts in this thread - as well as the usual intolerant "I don't do it so you can't" fascists.

 

How facile. Much more fascistic, don't you think, to say "I do it, so you have to too"

 

I've been making the point for ages (as does Brad) that IF it's so bad for us all, the Governments should just ban tobacco sales, so that those of us with Lack of Moral Fibre CAN give them up once and for all. I certainly wouldn't pay black market prices for smokes and reckon quitting (or more to the point STAYING off them) would be so much easier if cigarettes weren't available everywhere I go. We're junkies (although whether we're addicted to the nicotine or the habit itself is another debate), and the answer is cold turkey with no option to fall off the wagon.

 

So you're a junky, therefore everyone else should get your drug of choice forced down them as well. How fascistic.

 

I heard once that IOMG rakes in £55,000 a DAY in tobacco taxes though, so it's not surprising that smokes are still on sale. I remember a news story from the UK that said tobacco taxes grossed (IIRC)£9.5 billion, of which £7 billion was 'profit' - so I would dispute the local health experts who say all the taxes raised here go on smoking-related healthcare (I'm sure - as in most things - that we generally mirror the UK stats /1000).

 

So it's everyone's patriotic duty to smoke?

 

To Lonan3's well-constructed argument, the difference here is that we've been allowed (encouraged even) to smoke ever since Walter Raleigh brought tobacco from the New Colonies (if you believe Bob Newhart, anyway), so whilst DWatterson might not be allowed to do 'plenty of things in bars, clubs and restaurants', chances are that he never could. Although dwarf throwing contests were NEVER a great idea...

 

Grasping at straws here, it's been a while since tobacco use was systematically encouraged. Far from it, the (UK) government spends a lot of money on advertising the risks.

 

To all those who think smoking is a sick aberration akin to paedophilia, and that drinking to excess is perfectly acceptable

 

Eh?? Who on earth are these people you are addressing here? Wrong board I think. However:-

 

I would just point you to the newspaper or court reports on the other Manx news websites. Strikes me that booze is involved in almost EVERY reported crime - most of it anti-social, disruptive or just plain nasty. And I'm not just citing major excess - the sniff of a barmaid's apron seems to turn many normally bright and friendly people into leering, lairy, loud arseholes. And the more, the messier.

 

So what? That's a different issue altogether. Two wrongs etc, etc...

 

BTW I'm not anti-drinking - but we've brought up a generation of alcoholics who think moderation is for wimps.

 

Bill Hicks was MUCH more than a comic. His observation that Governments like the idea of anaesthetised beery masses watching reality TV and paying lots of taxes (HOW much of every pint of that processed water is tax??) was a snapshot of the 1990's that's even more astute today. He reckoned we should all smoke dope instead - any crashes would be at 4mph and nobody would fight.

 

Another red herring. Besides, government shouldn't base policy on material from comedic routines.

[Pragmatopian]

...government shouldn't base policy on material from comedic routines.

 

Too late...

[Declan]

I don't think we smokers have much to say about this. There is overwhelming support for a ban, and to be honest I think the other side have won this arguement. Disappointing, but that's life.

 

What would be nice though, would be if the Government stopped gloating and recognised that this will inconvenience some people and that rather than stamping up and down how wonderful they are for doing it, if they could introduce it in as painless a way as possible and in a manner that causes least inconvenience. They need to recognise that this measure, no matter how justified, will impact on some people's lives.

 

So why if this is a caring and decent Government why are they bringing it in in March? When it is blowing a hooley, and pissing with rain. Rather than in the summer, allowing people to make the adjustment in a more pleasant environment. Do it in May or June, even this May or June since the decision has been made, and allow a smoother transition.

[Albert Tatlock]

I don't think we smokers have much to say about this. There is overwhelming support for a ban, and to be honest I think the other side have won this arguement. Disappointing, but that's life.

 

What would be nice though, would be if the Government stopped gloating and recognised that this will inconvenience some people and that rather than stamping up and down how wonderful they are for doing it, if they could introduce it in as painless a way as possible and in a manner that causes least inconvenience. They need to recognise that this measure, no matter how justified, will impact on some people's lives.

 

So why if this is a caring and decent Government why are they bringing it in in March? When it is blowing a hooley, and pissing with rain. Rather than in the summer, allowing people to make the adjustment in a more pleasant environment. Do it in May or June, even this May or June since the decision has been made, and allow a smoother transition.

...and of course there is TT week when lots of English people will be over. Their ban comes in on 1st July.

[John Wright]

I am a non smoker. I was brought up by a father who smoked 80 a day from joining up in 1939 to a week before he died in 2003. His last week ws made miserabel because soem nurse at Nobles wouldn't help him outside for the odd ciggy and when he complained they doped him.

 

I am happy with the Spanish ban which is partial and choice rtelated at this stage. Most establishments below a certain size cannot have separate area, so they choose smoking or non smoking and on the doors have a red no entry sign with a ciggie or a green circle with a ciggie to let you know.

 

Most have good airconditioning and what is more sound proof non sound pollution escape double doors.

 

Result you can choose where to go. I don't mind a meal in a restaurant with a smoker or in a non smoking restaurant as long as the food is good. No longer drink to suport my partners struggle to stop so thats not an issue at present

 

I do hate the smell on my clothes the next morning however.