Popping out for a smoke......

Ludicrous in my opinion.

I smoke and I see a non smokers point of view but, why should there be a carpet ban? Why shouldn't there be the option to run your pub as one or the other. If a non smoker does not wish to go in a smoky environment, they can go to another pub, its not as if this country is short of them!

Why not ban alcohol too? Just as many people are killed directly and indirectly through alcohol.

Stupid

Hope you're not smoking in the foyer.

As a non smoker I will be able to actually enjoy popping into a pub (any pub) for a drink now and not have the experience ruined by a smoker.

Long over due in my book!

I'm happy for you, I am. I totally agree non smokers should be able to enjoy everything that comes with a pub without having to put up with second hand smoke but, there are still plenty of us who enjoy a pint and a smoke.... Why shouldn't we have the option.... You don't need to have it this way in EVERY pub!

Sense at last.

Smokers have ruined my health, my clothes and my life. They are the most arrogant, selfish pigs.

JonnyT

I don't smoke. And I would always choose a non-smoking restaurant/bar/club over one where smoking is allowed - all other issues suitably considered. But I can see how the smokers may be feeling a little disenfranchised this morning.

Take heart. It's not personal. We've allowed successive governments to chip away at individual 'freedoms' for so long we no longer see for what it truly is.

These people are 'elected' to govern us by democratic process ( ) and so logically, they represent what the majority want. Of course, that isn't true in reality. The over-arching interests of the ruling elite (and I don't mean Parliament) have and always will dictate (I choose my words very carefully) what best suits their interests and the interests of those they represent.

It would be encouraging, though purely romantic, to assume we could organise another Cromwellian overthrow of the 'forces of darkness', but they are these days, far too well dug in and too well protected from such heroic/anarchic acts.

A full frontal assault on the system would be madness and ultimately, not in our own personal best interests. The basic infrastructure and methods of maintenance suit us all on a basic level very well. So it falls to the individual to carry out small, frequent and personally useful acts of sabotage on the establishment, while utilising what benefits it does allow to full advantage.

If my datafeed hadn't just lured me into taking a long Cable position on what I believed to be an extremely Bullish setup on Cable at 08:01 I would not have had the time nor will to compose such a telling, thrusting piece on the erosion of individual liberties. But waiting for the datafeed machine to re-boot after being savagely beaten for failing to recognise a five minute bar that had persisted for over an hour..

Luckily for me, Mammon sits at my shoulder this morning and the Bull move was correct, just displayed rather unusually. Which has, as a benefit I suppose, given me something else to ponder this morning.

JonnyT said:

Smokers have ruined my health, my clothes and my life. They are the most arrogant, selfish pigs.

Click to expand...

Still haven't been able to quit?

I've never smoked cigarettes, though I'll admit to being an arrogant pig.

JonnyT

Thanks for being a good sport.

I couldn't resist the temptation....

About time,

I have never understood this belief from smokers that they have the right to smoke where and when they like.

One company I worked for there was this unwritten rule that smokers could take a 5-10 minute break every hour to have a cigarette. The non-smokers then started to take the same breaks during the day for a virtual cigarette break. We were soon stopped from taking this 'Unecessary break'.

Spot the odd one out...

smoking is a killer

drinking to excess is a killer

excessive sex is a killer

getting wound up over goverment policies is a killer

I'm not saying ALL pubs should allow smoking, just to have the option of being one or the other. Maybe all pubs should only play the top ten music in the charts as its deemed the 'most popular' and therefore why should there be a choice?

But its not choice.

You give the no smoker no choice. Suffer the smoke or don't go out.

The majority of people in this Country don't smoke, accept that smoking is costing non smokers millions every year in fee's to NHS.

This is democracy.

JonnyT

I agree with the banning of smoking in SOME pubs, the choice to drink in a non smoking environment should be available. The choice to also drink and smoke should also be available, thats democracy.

As for the cost of smoking on the NHS, er, how much is spent every year on alcohol related fights, car accidents, murders, disease......................

Why not let the market (us) decide...pubs can be smoking or non smoking but not both ...that way both smoker and non smokers will have outlets they can use and the decision will ultimately be ours and not determined by yet more govt interference.
Having said that , I absolutely agree with JT's comments on health costs etc ..Perhaps it is time we moved health care to a pay for what you take basis ...that is if you choose to smoke and we have a system where you pay for your health care via a premium then you would find yourself paying a higher premium. Of course there will be the argument this discriminates against those less well off....well hey they will have to choose won't they ...pay health care premiums or subscribe to Sky Family etc ..time govt stepped out and started taking the view that we have choices and we should take responsibility for them.

JonnyT said:

But its not choice.

You give the no smoker no choice. Suffer the smoke or don't go out.

The majority of people in this Country don't smoke, accept that smoking is costing non smokers millions every year in fee's to NHS.

This is democracy.

JonnyT

Click to expand...

hmm not quite, now a while back i was aware that the tax revenue this country receives from ciggies was a multiple over of any NHS treatment cost that smokers needed., so based on that smokers subsidise the non smokers.. at the time I think it was 500 million health costs against 1.5 billion tax revenues received ..... something like that...

maybe some might get the recent figures.........

but........ maybe smokers should use this time now and push to Start to not smoke...

False I'm afraid.

91% of UK cigarettes are exported and 94% of tax revenue is tax on the makers not the purchasers of cigarettes in this county. Another myth put about by Forest.

JonnyT

fxmarkets said:

hmm not quite, now a while back i was aware that the tax revenue this country receives from ciggies was a multiple over of any NHS treatment cost that smokers needed., so based on that smokers subsidise the non smokers.. at the time I think it was 500 million health costs against 1.5 billion tax revenues received ..... something like that...

maybe some might get the recent figures.........

but........ maybe smokers should use this time now and push to Start to not smoke...

Click to expand...

Its not just about tax though is it.

I don't care if a smoker subsidises my treatment, I don't want to have to receive treatment for smoking related illnesses because I don't smoke.

The Dept. of Health says that treating smoking-related diseases costs £1.7b a year, and the Treasury receives around £8b a year in tobacco duty.

(As a sanity check: say 23% of 60m people smoke, at an average of 8 fags a day, and a packet costs £5, and 60% of the price is duty, then that's £6b to the Treasury -- very rough figures but it's only a sanity check.)

chrisw said:

I'm not saying ALL pubs should allow smoking, just to have the option of being one or the other. Maybe all pubs should only play the top ten music in the charts as its deemed the 'most popular' and therefore why should there be a choice?

Click to expand...

??
With a smoking ban, it is either all or nothing. A part ban or giving places the options won't work. People will look at revenue and allow smoking because they will be to worried about losing profit.

Well said Adrian. The point is as a non smoker currently you do not have a choice as people smoke in all public places. Unless of course you never leave your home.

Perhaps we should also point out that 90% of deaths in House fires are caused by cigarettes.

The equation regarding the NHS is also more complex than suggested by Forest. For example we wouldn't need as many beds, consultants, nurses, porters and Hospitals if smoking were totally banned. Its not just the serious illnesses but costs such as days off for throat infections, more coughs and colds. The cost if smoking to the economy is massive.

Smoking is like me building a nuclear reactor in my shed. Yes it will affect my health but my neighbours whether they like it or not will also be affected. i.e. EXTREMELY SELFISH

JonnyT