Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Even UKIP voters back the plan that cigarettes be sold in p

SystemSystem Posts: 12,183
edited July 2013 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Even UKIP voters back the plan that cigarettes be sold in plain packaging

It’s being said that one of the reasons why the government has deferred the decision on cigarettes being sold in plain packaging is because of UKIP. CON ministers in particular didn’t want to provide ammunition for the most well-known of political smokers, Nigel Farage.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,970
    Perhaps the distinction to be made here is between an issue that people support, and an issue that people think is a national priority.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,318
    FPT (but more relevant to this):-

    Rather than faffing about with plain packaging etc isn't the obvious answer for those who care about smoking-related deaths/illnesses to ban smoking and the sale of cigarettes?

    If smoking is legal then it is illogical to place excessive limits on how it is sold/marketed.

    Just to be clear I don't smoke and don't much care one way or the other about this issue. But if harm to health is the deciding factor then it makes no sense to allow any smoking at all. The same could, of course, be said of alcohol etc.

    Our approach to legislation on these "lifestyle" issues does appear a bit muddled.


  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    Taking steps to stop people smoking would seem to be a priority
    RobD said:

    Perhaps the distinction to be made here is between an issue that people support, and an issue that people think is a national priority.

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Then let UKIP put it in their 2015 manifesto......

    Darned thing democracy - politicians having to win elections.....
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    This is odd - this article which Edmundintokyo linked to in the last thread seems to indicate that EU-wide rules on cigarette packaging are indeed likely to be introduced, and quite soon:

    http://news.yahoo.com/cigarette-pack-warnings-not-plain-wrappers-eu-committee-215357782.html

    I haven't seen references to this in the context of the UK government decision.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,318
    And completely O/T:

    I hate the way that people talk of rising house prices as a good thing. Inflation is never a good thing. The only reason why a house should go up in value is if it has been genuinely improved e.g. an extra bedroom or whatever not because of a bubble and insufficient supply.

    We will have a sensible economy when house prices are stable, people buy houses to live in them, there is a supply of good quality property for rent on medium/long-term leases and newspapers are not full of articles about how houses are going up in value by 2% a month or whatever.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,012
    edited July 2013
    Cyclefree said:

    FPT (but more relevant to this):-

    Rather than faffing about with plain packaging etc isn't the obvious answer for those who care about smoking-related deaths/illnesses to ban smoking and the sale of cigarettes?

    If smoking is legal then it is illogical to place excessive limits on how it is sold/marketed.

    Just to be clear I don't smoke and don't much care one way or the other about this issue. But if harm to health is the deciding factor then it makes no sense to allow any smoking at all. The same could, of course, be said of alcohol etc.

    Our approach to legislation on these "lifestyle" issues does appear a bit muddled.


    Exactly. It's not a policy and not not a policy.

    Like asking people who want to buy ciggies to recite their 8x tables first. In French.

    And mike, 46% of 12% isn't going to change the world anytime soon although I like the fact that UKIP voters are now seen as the bellwether of government policy.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    edited July 2013
    To whom?

    Do you expect Ed or Nick to gain lots of votes by making this a defining issue of the 2015 GE?

    Taking steps to stop people smoking would seem to be a priority

    RobD said:

    Perhaps the distinction to be made here is between an issue that people support, and an issue that people think is a national priority.

  • GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    The issue has a much wider impact than is accounted for in this question.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    Wht a stupid comment.

    To whom?

    Do you expect Ed or Nick to gain lots of votes by making this a defining issue of the 2015 GE?

    Taking steps to stop people smoking would seem to be a priority

    RobD said:

    Perhaps the distinction to be made here is between an issue that people support, and an issue that people think is a national priority.

  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,885
    Agar looks quality. Handy with bat and ball. Ominous times...
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    It’s being said that one of the reasons why the government has deferred the decision on cigarettes being sold in plain packaging is because of UKIP. CON ministers in particular didn’t want to provide ammunition for the most well-known of political smokers, Nigel Farage.
    By whom?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,970

    Taking steps to stop people smoking would seem to be a priority

    RobD said:

    Perhaps the distinction to be made here is between an issue that people support, and an issue that people think is a national priority.

    Hm, I think this measure is all about stopping people starting. Although I question how much bearing a shiny packet has on teenagers wanting to start smoking in the first place - very little I'd imagine. Hiding them away would surely be a more logical measure.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Central Lobby ‏@CentralLobby

    .@alisonseabeck asks at #pmqs about @CarersUK research showing 90% of carers lose out in welfare changes http://polho.me/1bhTGJG #PHcarefocusCarers UK ‏@CarersUK 1

    shocking story on @Channel4News shows #carers caring for severely disabled grandson hit by #bedroomtax http://www.channel4.com/news/catch-up/display/playlistref/100713/clipid/100713_4ON_BEDTAX_VT

    Carers UK ‏@CarersUK 1h

    My husband has Huntington's. I've suffered 2 strokes caring for him: yet we're refused help to cover the #bedroomtax http://carersuk.org/get-involved/bedroom-tax-campaign/your-letters-to-the-prime-minister

    Carers UK ‏@CarersUK 1

    '#bedroomtax is having a shocking impact on families already struggling to care for disabled loved ones' @Independent http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/governments-bedroom-tax-forces-carers-to-cut-back-on-food-8698451.html

    CIH ‏@CIHhousing 5h

    Applications to hardship fund surge 300% in first month of #bedroomtax http://ow.ly/mTnQf via @insidehousing
    Same old nasty party.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    edited July 2013

    This is odd - this article which Edmundintokyo linked to in the last thread seems to indicate that EU-wide rules on cigarette packaging are indeed likely to be introduced, and quite soon:

    http://news.yahoo.com/cigarette-pack-warnings-not-plain-wrappers-eu-committee-215357782.html

    I haven't seen references to this in the context of the UK government decision.

    There was a suggestion that HMG would have to compensate the cigarette manufacturers for the value of their brands if they forced through plain packaging.

    http://order-order.com/2013/04/30/soubrys-5-billion-plain-packaging-costs-silence/
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,318
    Does the EU still subsidise tobacco farmers?
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,441
    Cyclefree said:

    Does the EU still subsidise tobacco farmers?


    and hemp ones.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,667
    Australia will have to mess up badly not to win from here. Pre-Ashes over-confidence from many in England looks ever so slightly hubristic right now. Our batting is desperately weak.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    So that's a "no" then!

    You want them to fight this battle (which is worth fighting) now so they lose the war (which is not).

    If its such a brilliant idea I look forward to all 3 parties campaigning on it- in the meantime your motives are engagingly transparent!

    Wht a stupid comment.

    To whom?

    Do you expect Ed or Nick to gain lots of votes by making this a defining issue of the 2015 GE?

    Taking steps to stop people smoking would seem to be a priority

    RobD said:

    Perhaps the distinction to be made here is between an issue that people support, and an issue that people think is a national priority.

  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited July 2013
    As easy a choice as plain packaging is for anyone not being lobbied, the bedroom tax just isn't going to go away as an issue and lib dems and tories best get used to it being one which dogs them all the way till 2015.
    SwindonCarersCentre ‏@SwindonCarers 17m

    Carers deliver ‘bedroom tax’ letters to No. 10 http://tinyurl.com/qb8eqah

    P'ways Thru Dementia ‏@pathwaydementia 4m

    Just reading some of the letters carers have written to their MPs regarding the bedroom tax, truly heartbreaking
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,441
    Mick_Pork said:

    As easy a choice as plain packaging is for anyone not being lobbied, the bedroom tax just isn't going to go away as an issue and lib dem and tories best get used to it being one which dogs them all the way till 2015.


    SwindonCarersCentre ‏@SwindonCarers 17m

    Carers deliver ‘bedroom tax’ letters to No. 10 http://tinyurl.com/qb8eqahP'ways Thru

    Dementia ‏@pathwaydementia 4m

    Just reading some of the letters carers have written to their MPs regarding the bedroom tax, truly heartbreaking


    Is Labour going to change it ? No, they're just going to make themselves look stupid by getting their base riled up only to have to deflate them. Pointless Ed in action.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    FPT (I finally got the table to fit!)

    tim said:

    michael burke ‏@menburke 2h
    ONS: #Construction is lower now even than in 2008/09 http://bit.ly/1dm5mJI When Osborne says housing is recovering, he means higher prices

    The usual suspects appear to have missed the construction data, as they did the manufacturing and export announcements.
    Good at cheering on bubble though.

    Not unlike your ability to miss every single good piece of economic news. A coincidence I'm sure. You are in absolutely no position to accuse others of being selective.

    I get the very strong impression that economics isn't exactly your strong point.
    You are quite right, Max, econometrics is not tim's area of expertise.

    The Construction data released this morning may not be "good" in absolute terms but relative to the previous quarter they were flat which represents a big improvement on recent trends.

    This bodes well for Q2 GDP as can be seen from the following ONS table:
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    Percentage Change
    Public|% GDP|Release|Month|Q 2013 | Q 2013 |M 2013 |M 2013
    | |date |of |on same| on prev.|on same|on prev
    | | |GDP |Q 2012 | Q 2013 |M 2012 |M 2013
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    09 Jul May -1.9 | 0.2 | -2.3 0.0
    Prod. 15.2 11 Jun Apr -1.9 | 0.4 | -1.4 -0.1
    09 May Q1 -2.6 | 0.3 | -2.0 0.0
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    12 Jul May -4.8 | 0.0 | -4.8 0.0
    Const. 6.3 14 Jun Apr : | : | -2.2 4.6
    10 May Q1 -6.3 | -2.4 | : :
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    25 Jul May | |
    Serv. 77.8 28 Jun Apr 1.8 | 0.8 | 2.0 0.2
    23 May Q1 1.3 | 0.5 | 1.2 0.0
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    20 Jun May 0.7 | 0.7 | 1.9 2.1
    Retail 22 May Apr 0.8 | 0.9 | 0.8 -1.1
    18 Apr Q1 0.4 | 0.5 | -0.4 -0.5
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    Agri. 0.7 Not available monthly
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    The "Q 2013 on previous Q 2013" is the key column.

    The problem with construction is the massive fall in output which followed the financial crisis and which was much larger than the general fall in GDP. On the year on year figures, further note should be taken of the distortions caused by May 2013 having one more bank holiday than May 2012.

    This is shown in the ONS introduction to the above table:

    The most recent estimate of gross domestic product (GDP) confirmed the UK economy grew by 0.3% in the first quarter of 2013 following a contraction of 0.2% in Q4 2012. Construction output has contrasted these recent movements, falling by 2.4% in Q1 2013 after a short-lived return to growth (0.8%) in the previous quarter.

    Looking at the longer term trend, GDP has fallen by 3.9% in the five years since the first quarter of 2008, whereas construction output has fallen by 18.9% over the same time period.

    Construction estimates are highly responsive to the economic cycle and have provided some of the largest downward contributions to GDP. In terms of volume, construction output fell to £23,669 million in Q1 2013. This is the lowest level since Q1 1999 and £309 million below the previous trough in Q3 2009.


    Given the cold weather depressed Q1 resulted in a contraction of -2.4%, flat monthly and quarterly figures for May (and to May) are, in context, good outcomes and bode well for Q2 2013 GDP growth being solid.

    The good news just won't stop coming, tim, even in areas of great diffculty for the economy.

    And before you bang on about house prices, GDP growth is driven by volume not value.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,318
    Mick_Pork said:

    As easy a choice as plain packaging is for anyone not being lobbied, the bedroom tax just isn't going to go away as an issue and lib dem and tories best get used to it being one which dogs them all the way till 2015.


    SwindonCarersCentre ‏@SwindonCarers 17m

    Carers deliver ‘bedroom tax’ letters to No. 10 http://tinyurl.com/qb8eqah

    P'ways Thru Dementia ‏@pathwaydementia 4m

    Just reading some of the letters carers have written to their MPs regarding the bedroom tax, truly heartbreaking


    I thought that disabled people were being made exempt from the rules on spare bedrooms. Or did I dream that?

    If not, it is unkind to force carers into this position. Those caring for the disabled are exactly the sort of people who should be helped by a properly designed welfare system. It is those who are unreasonably occupying a house too large for their needs at taxpayers' expense who should be affected not those who genuinely need the space.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,971
    RobD said:

    Taking steps to stop people smoking would seem to be a priority

    RobD said:

    Perhaps the distinction to be made here is between an issue that people support, and an issue that people think is a national priority.

    Hm, I think this measure is all about stopping people starting. Although I question how much bearing a shiny packet has on teenagers wanting to start smoking in the first place - very little I'd imagine. Hiding them away would surely be a more logical measure.
    I've never smoked, and never wanted to. But I wonder if there is a limit to what the government can do wrt smoking to try to prevent people starting the habit.

    Take drink-driving. It is rightly seen socially as a no-no - you should not drink-drive. Yet people still do it despite the laws, punishments and social tut-tutting.

    I honestly don't know what the answer is to this one. But I was well aware of the harm cigarettes could cause when I was a kid in the eighties, and I doubt anyone is unaware now.

    But people still smoke. Perhaps we should just educate them of the dangers, and let them get on with it? The same could be said for other minor addictive drugs as well, which is why I continually flip-flop on legalisation of cannabis ...
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,885

    Australia will have to mess up badly not to win from here. Pre-Ashes over-confidence from many in England looks ever so slightly hubristic right now. Our batting is desperately weak.

    Yup, all that hubris going into the series and talk of a whitewash looks stupid now. The Aussie camp is always fired up and our batting has been suspect for a while (something we saw in the NZ series). Stupid selection also doesn't help, not picking Compton was silly and taking Bell after 20 matches of awful form makes little sense. Joe Root needs to smarten up as well.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400
    AveryLP said:

    FPT (I finally got the table to fit!)

    tim said:

    michael burke ‏@menburke 2h
    ONS: #Construction is lower now even than in 2008/09 http://bit.ly/1dm5mJI When Osborne says housing is recovering, he means higher prices

    The usual suspects appear to have missed the construction data, as they did the manufacturing and export announcements.
    Good at cheering on bubble though.

    Not unlike your ability to miss every single good piece of economic news. A coincidence I'm sure. You are in absolutely no position to accuse others of being selective.

    I get the very strong impression that economics isn't exactly your strong point.
    You are quite right, Max, econometrics is not tim's area of expertise.

    The Construction data released this morning may not be "good" in absolute terms but relative to the previous quarter they were flat which represents a big improvement on recent trends.

    This bodes well for Q2 GDP as can be seen from the following ONS table:
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    Percentage Change
    Public|% GDP|Release|Month|Q 2013 | Q 2013 |M 2013 |M 2013
    | |date |of |on same| on prev.|on same|on prev
    | | |GDP |Q 2012 | Q 2013 |M 2012 |M 2013
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    09 Jul May -1.9 | 0.2 | -2.3 0.0
    Prod. 15.2 11 Jun Apr -1.9 | 0.4 | -1.4 -0.1
    09 May Q1 -2.6 | 0.3 | -2.0 0.0
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    12 Jul May -4.8 | 0.0 | -4.8 0.0
    Const. 6.3 14 Jun Apr : | : | -2.2 4.6
    10 May Q1 -6.3 | -2.4 | : :
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    25 Jul May | |
    Serv. 77.8 28 Jun Apr 1.8 | 0.8 | 2.0 0.2
    23 May Q1 1.3 | 0.5 | 1.2 0.0
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    20 Jun May 0.7 | 0.7 | 1.9 2.1
    Retail 22 May Apr 0.8 | 0.9 | 0.8 -1.1
    18 Apr Q1 0.4 | 0.5 | -0.4 -0.5
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    Agri. 0.7 Not available monthly
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    The "Q 2013 on previous Q 2013" is the key column.

    The problem with construction is the massive fall in output which followed the financial crisis and which was much larger than the general fall in GDP. On the year on year figures, further note should be taken of the distortions caused by May 2013 having one more bank holiday than May 2012.

    This is shown in the ONS introduction to the above table:

    The most recent estimate of gross domestic product (GDP) confirmed the UK economy grew by 0.3% in the first quarter of 2013 following a contraction of 0.2% in Q4 2012. Construction output has contrasted these recent movements, falling by 2.4% in Q1 2013 after a short-lived return to growth (0.8%) in the previous quarter.

    Looking at the longer term trend, GDP has fallen by 3.9% in the five years since the first quarter of 2008, whereas construction output has fallen by 18.9% over the same time period.

    Construction estimates are highly responsive to the economic cycle and have provided some of the largest downward contributions to GDP. In terms of volume, construction output fell to £23,669 million in Q1 2013. This is the lowest level since Q1 1999 and £309 million below the previous trough in Q3 2009.


    Given the cold weather depressed Q1 resulted in a contraction of -2.4%, flat monthly and quarterly figures for May (and to May) are, in context, good outcomes and bode well for Q2 2013 GDP growth being solid.

    The good news just won't stop coming, tim, even in areas of great diffculty for the economy.

    And before you bang on about house prices, GDP growth is driven by volume not value.

    Also it seemed like the construction figures had a positive component for house building, even if repair and maintenance was dragging them down.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,441

    RobD said:

    Taking steps to stop people smoking would seem to be a priority

    RobD said:

    Perhaps the distinction to be made here is between an issue that people support, and an issue that people think is a national priority.

    Hm, I think this measure is all about stopping people starting. Although I question how much bearing a shiny packet has on teenagers wanting to start smoking in the first place - very little I'd imagine. Hiding them away would surely be a more logical measure.
    I've never smoked, and never wanted to. But I wonder if there is a limit to what the government can do wrt smoking to try to prevent people starting the habit.

    Take drink-driving. It is rightly seen socially as a no-no - you should not drink-drive. Yet people still do it despite the laws, punishments and social tut-tutting.

    I honestly don't know what the answer is to this one. But I was well aware of the harm cigarettes could cause when I was a kid in the eighties, and I doubt anyone is unaware now.

    But people still smoke. Perhaps we should just educate them of the dangers, and let them get on with it? The same could be said for other minor addictive drugs as well, which is why I continually flip-flop on legalisation of cannabis ...
    It's simply the inconsistency of humanity, we pick on things at random for fashion's sake and ignore the bigger issues around us which have more impact. We're nothing if not fickle.

  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,970
    edited July 2013



    I've never smoked, and never wanted to. But I wonder if there is a limit to what the government can do wrt smoking to try to prevent people starting the habit.

    Bugger.. hit submit too soon.

    Anyway, we must be approaching a break-even point where the monies raised by cigarette duties covers the extra burden bought onto the NHS by smokers. I wonder if there have been any recent studies by the treasury on this.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    Mick_Pork said:

    As easy a choice as plain packaging is for anyone not being lobbied, the bedroom tax just isn't going to go away as an issue and lib dem and tories best get used to it being one which dogs them all the way till 2015.


    SwindonCarersCentre ‏@SwindonCarers 17m

    Carers deliver ‘bedroom tax’ letters to No. 10 http://tinyurl.com/qb8eqahP'ways Thru

    Dementia ‏@pathwaydementia 4m

    Just reading some of the letters carers have written to their MPs regarding the bedroom tax, truly heartbreaking
    Is Labour going to change it ? No, they're just going to make themselves look stupid by getting their base riled up only to have to deflate them. Pointless Ed in action.

    Probably so. Doesn't make it any less sh*tty and repugnant a policy though.

    It absolutely is getting their base riled up and some of the lib dem base too which will help them until the truth dawns on their activists.
    Samuel Miller ‏@Hephaestus7

    Lib Dem activists vote against bedroom tax - Top stories - http://Scotsman.com http://www.scotsman.com/news/scottish-news/top-stories/lib-dem-activists-vote-against-bedroom-tax-1-2842808#.UUccRtkgERw.twitter

    Chuka Umunna ‏@ChukaUmunna

    The #BedroomTax is just so cruel and unfair. Sign the Streatham Wells Labour petition against it here http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/stop-the-bedroom-tax.html

  • Cyclefree said:

    Does the EU still subsidise tobacco farmers?

    Don't know about the EU but the US still does. Generally the less healthy the crop in the US the more subsidy it seems to get!
    Not really sure how much tobacco farming goes on in the EU to be honest.
  • I fail to see why the government deciding not to increase further its patrician tendencies is giving into the tobacco industry.
  • rogerhrogerh Posts: 282
    The reason for not introducing plain packaging of cigarettes or minimum alcohol is nothing to do with UKIP.It's simply that the Tories always give in to industry lobbying. Two other recent examples - not splitting the banks and the appalling ditching of reforms of the newspaper industry.

    When will Governments realise that the big companies have far too much power(due to pathetically weak competition law) and it their job to protect the public from abuse of industry power and its ill effects, not climb into bed with the perpetrators.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    OT, I'm not vouching for this, but there's a new Irish prediction market open called Predictious. They're basically modelled on Intrade, but hopefully without the part where the owner snaffles everyone's money and dies halfway up Mount Everest. You fund them in Bitcoins, which is the right way to fund things like this. Apparently they charge 2% per trade, but may change this.

    https://www.predictious.com/politics

    Hardly any liquidity there yet, but they've just opened so hopefully they'll get better. Their politics stuff is all a bit long-term right now (next presidential election, not even anything on the primaries), and you probably wouldn't want to lock your money up with them for that long until they at least build up a bit of a track record. But they say they can add more markets if you suggest them.

    Caveat puntor, obviously, but let us know if you try it.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,639
    OT Good to see the councillors in my county have some sense of proportion and realise now is not the time for rises in their allowances. Unanimous as well so not a party political issue.

    http://thelincolnite.co.uk/2013/07/lincolnshire-councillors-vote-against-allowance-rise/
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,441
    Mick_Pork said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    As easy a choice as plain packaging is for anyone not being lobbied, the bedroom tax just isn't going to go away as an issue and lib dem and tories best get used to it being one which dogs them all the way till 2015.


    SwindonCarersCentre ‏@SwindonCarers 17m

    Carers deliver ‘bedroom tax’ letters to No. 10 http://tinyurl.com/qb8eqahP'ways Thru

    Dementia ‏@pathwaydementia 4m

    Just reading some of the letters carers have written to their MPs regarding the bedroom tax, truly heartbreaking
    Is Labour going to change it ? No, they're just going to make themselves look stupid by getting their base riled up only to have to deflate them. Pointless Ed in action.
    Probably so. Doesn't make it any less sh*tty and repugnant a policy though.

    It absolutely is getting their base riled up and some of the lib dem base too which will help them until the truth dawns on their activists.
    Samuel Miller ‏@Hephaestus7

    Lib Dem activists vote against bedroom tax - Top stories - http://Scotsman.com http://www.scotsman.com/news/scottish-news/top-stories/lib-dem-activists-vote-against-bedroom-tax-1-2842808#.UUccRtkgERw.twitter

    Chuka Umunna ‏@ChukaUmunna

    The #BedroomTax is just so cruel and unfair. Sign the Streatham Wells Labour petition against it here http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/stop-the-bedroom-tax.html



    crocodile tears and posturing from Chuka what's the alternative he proposes. Nothing, zilch, nada, niente, nichts. 21 months from a GE and the best the opposition can come up with is silence.
  • Gerry_ManderGerry_Mander Posts: 621
    Mick_Pork said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    As easy a choice as plain packaging is for anyone not being lobbied, the bedroom tax just isn't going to go away as an issue and lib dem and tories best get used to it being one which dogs them all the way till 2015.


    SwindonCarersCentre ‏@SwindonCarers 17m

    Carers deliver ‘bedroom tax’ letters to No. 10 http://tinyurl.com/qb8eqahP'ways Thru

    Dementia ‏@pathwaydementia 4m

    Just reading some of the letters carers have written to their MPs regarding the bedroom tax, truly heartbreaking
    Is Labour going to change it ? No, they're just going to make themselves look stupid by getting their base riled up only to have to deflate them. Pointless Ed in action.
    Probably so. Doesn't make it any less sh*tty and repugnant a policy though.

    It absolutely is getting their base riled up and some of the lib dem base too which will help them until the truth dawns on their activists.
    Samuel Miller ‏@Hephaestus7

    Lib Dem activists vote against bedroom tax - Top stories - http://Scotsman.com http://www.scotsman.com/news/scottish-news/top-stories/lib-dem-activists-vote-against-bedroom-tax-1-2842808#.UUccRtkgERw.twitter

    Chuka Umunna ‏@ChukaUmunna

    The #BedroomTax is just so cruel and unfair. Sign the Streatham Wells Labour petition against it here http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/stop-the-bedroom-tax.html



    Are Labour prepared to make a manifesto commitment to increasing taxes on ordinary working folk so that those people who receive housing benefit can have an additional bedroom?
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413

    There was a suggestion that HMG would have to compensate the cigarette manufacturers for the value of their brands if they forced through plain packaging.

    That comes from this well-informed paper:

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/138658287/Spielman-Submission-2008

    It looks plausible, but it's hard to tell how great the risk is.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    21 months from a GE and the best the opposition can come up with is silence.

    Quite. If there are disabled people suffering then I'm sure the policy can be amended. It doesn't necessarily mean it should be scrapped.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815

    Mick_Pork said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    As easy a choice as plain packaging is for anyone not being lobbied, the bedroom tax just isn't going to go away as an issue and lib dem and tories best get used to it being one which dogs them all the way till 2015.


    SwindonCarersCentre ‏@SwindonCarers 17m

    Carers deliver ‘bedroom tax’ letters to No. 10 http://tinyurl.com/qb8eqahP'ways Thru

    Dementia ‏@pathwaydementia 4m

    Just reading some of the letters carers have written to their MPs regarding the bedroom tax, truly heartbreaking
    Is Labour going to change it ? No, they're just going to make themselves look stupid by getting their base riled up only to have to deflate them. Pointless Ed in action.
    Probably so. Doesn't make it any less sh*tty and repugnant a policy though.

    It absolutely is getting their base riled up and some of the lib dem base too which will help them until the truth dawns on their activists.
    Samuel Miller ‏@Hephaestus7

    Lib Dem activists vote against bedroom tax - Top stories - http://Scotsman.com http://www.scotsman.com/news/scottish-news/top-stories/lib-dem-activists-vote-against-bedroom-tax-1-2842808#.UUccRtkgERw.twitter

    Chuka Umunna ‏@ChukaUmunna

    The #BedroomTax is just so cruel and unfair. Sign the Streatham Wells Labour petition against it here http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/stop-the-bedroom-tax.html



    crocodile tears and posturing from Chuka what's the alternative he proposes. Nothing, zilch, nada, niente, nichts. 21 months from a GE and the best the opposition can come up with is silence.

    All hot air and smoke from Chuka as we approach the butt end of this parliament.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited July 2013
    Cyclefree said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    As easy a choice as plain packaging is for anyone not being lobbied, the bedroom tax just isn't going to go away as an issue and lib dem and tories best get used to it being one which dogs them all the way till 2015.


    SwindonCarersCentre ‏@SwindonCarers 17m

    Carers deliver ‘bedroom tax’ letters to No. 10 http://tinyurl.com/qb8eqah

    P'ways Thru Dementia ‏@pathwaydementia 4m

    Just reading some of the letters carers have written to their MPs regarding the bedroom tax, truly heartbreaking
    I thought that disabled people were being made exempt from the rules on spare bedrooms. Or did I dream that?

    You were merely gullible enough to fall for the tory spin.
    C4 News FactCheck ‏@FactCheck

    New on FactCheck: FactCheck: Cameron wrong again on “bedroom tax” detail http://bit.ly/1apTjz4
    No huge crime, gullible tory eurosceptics have been falling for Cast Iron Cammie's spin on Europe for years yet they still keep coming back for more to be made a fool of.
    Cyclefree said:

    If not, it is unkind to force carers into this position. Those caring for the disabled are exactly the sort of people who should be helped by a properly designed welfare system.

    Curiously, this family looking after a disabled child doesn't seem to be too grateful for this generous tory ideological 'help'. Maybe you should just tell them they've never had it so good?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMzzkYhp0Q8

  • tim said:

    On topic.

    Can see the logic in dumping minimum alcohol pricing, like all Dave's personal policies, think Police Commissioners, it hadn't been thought through.
    But plain packaging is a no brainer, dumping it is a gift to the Tories opponents and Lynton Crosby's proximity to the issue makes it worse.

    Note that at PMQs Cameron is asked every week whether he's discussed this with Crosby.
    He chooses his words very carefully every time and says he hasn't been "lobbied" by Crosby.

    Makes a change from "I don't recall" I guess.

    Still waiting for your evidence that David Cameron has done a Blair on tobacco advertising. Or do you concede you were making things up?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,415
    Cyclefree said:

    FPT (but more relevant to this):-

    Rather than faffing about with plain packaging etc isn't the obvious answer for those who care about smoking-related deaths/illnesses to ban smoking and the sale of cigarettes?

    If smoking is legal then it is illogical to place excessive limits on how it is sold/marketed.

    Just to be clear I don't smoke and don't much care one way or the other about this issue. But if harm to health is the deciding factor then it makes no sense to allow any smoking at all. The same could, of course, be said of alcohol etc.

    Our approach to legislation on these "lifestyle" issues does appear a bit muddled.


    Oddly enough, I had exactly the same thought as I listened to this news item. There can't be many people left who aren't aware of the risks associated with smoking. There's a limit to how far we should go to try and save people from themselves.

  • I suspect that I am one of the few PBers that does still smoke.
    I remember as a 12 year old standing in the newsagents and excitedly pointing at the gold packet of B&H in the newsagents rack and saying,
    "But there for my mum, honest!'

    IMO this is from the department of 'being seen to do something' rather than trying to actually do something.

    In the interests of full disclosure, it is much more worthwhile for me to book a short break in Ljubljana and load up with fags at €36 a carton. I haven't bought packet of fags in this country for over a year.
    BTW the 2nd and 3rd sentences are for comedic effect as my mother used to smoke Players No6
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815

    Mick_Pork said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    As easy a choice as plain packaging is for anyone not being lobbied, the bedroom tax just isn't going to go away as an issue and lib dem and tories best get used to it being one which dogs them all the way till 2015.


    SwindonCarersCentre ‏@SwindonCarers 17m

    Carers deliver ‘bedroom tax’ letters to No. 10 http://tinyurl.com/qb8eqahP'ways Thru

    Dementia ‏@pathwaydementia 4m

    Just reading some of the letters carers have written to their MPs regarding the bedroom tax, truly heartbreaking
    Is Labour going to change it ? No, they're just going to make themselves look stupid by getting their base riled up only to have to deflate them. Pointless Ed in action.
    Probably so. Doesn't make it any less sh*tty and repugnant a policy though.

    It absolutely is getting their base riled up and some of the lib dem base too which will help them until the truth dawns on their activists.
    Samuel Miller ‏@Hephaestus7

    Lib Dem activists vote against bedroom tax - Top stories - http://Scotsman.com http://www.scotsman.com/news/scottish-news/top-stories/lib-dem-activists-vote-against-bedroom-tax-1-2842808#.UUccRtkgERw.twitter

    Chuka Umunna ‏@ChukaUmunna

    The #BedroomTax is just so cruel and unfair. Sign the Streatham Wells Labour petition against it here http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/stop-the-bedroom-tax.html



    Are Labour prepared to make a manifesto commitment to increasing taxes on ordinary working folk so that those people who receive housing benefit can have an additional bedroom?

    Labour will be promoting a smoking room subsidy. Smoking jackets de rigeur but walls to be painted in plain magnolia.

  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,685
    If it saves a single life it's worth it. End of story. No reason to wait.

    The idea that it might cost jobs, suggests they think it would work.
  • Life_ina_market_townLife_ina_market_town Posts: 2,319
    edited July 2013
    Sean_F said:

    Oddly enough, I had exactly the same thought as I listened to this news item. There can't be many people left who aren't aware of the risks associated with smoking. There's a limit to how far we should go to try and save people from themselves.

    There can be no justification for trying to protect the consumer (saving minors/lunatics) from himself.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    tim said:

    You're assuming it's going to save money.
    At what point to rent arrears start to null it's effect.
    Let alone the impact on carers who are saving the state a huge amount and now find themselves targeted.

    And Cameron is going to find cash for married couples this autumn.

    That carers save the state far more money is a point so obvious only an incompetent fop could have missed it.

  • In the 1970s the government took a role in legislating wage differentials for manual workers today government seeks a role in deciding the packaging of legal products. Neither is the preserve of governments. On these governments may advise they should not legislate.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,441
    tim said:


    Mick_Pork said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    As easy a choice as plain packaging is for anyone not being lobbied, the bedroom tax just isn't going to go away as an issue and lib dem and tories best get used to it being one which dogs them all the way till 2015.


    SwindonCarersCentre ‏@SwindonCarers 17m

    Carers deliver ‘bedroom tax’ letters to No. 10 http://tinyurl.com/qb8eqahP'ways Thru

    Dementia ‏@pathwaydementia 4m

    Just reading some of the letters carers have written to their MPs regarding the bedroom tax, truly heartbreaking
    Is Labour going to change it ? No, they're just going to make themselves look stupid by getting their base riled up only to have to deflate them. Pointless Ed in action.
    Probably so. Doesn't make it any less sh*tty and repugnant a policy though.

    It absolutely is getting their base riled up and some of the lib dem base too which will help them until the truth dawns on their activists.
    Samuel Miller ‏@Hephaestus7

    Lib Dem activists vote against bedroom tax - Top stories - http://Scotsman.com http://www.scotsman.com/news/scottish-news/top-stories/lib-dem-activists-vote-against-bedroom-tax-1-2842808#.UUccRtkgERw.twitter

    Chuka Umunna ‏@ChukaUmunna

    The #BedroomTax is just so cruel and unfair. Sign the Streatham Wells Labour petition against it here http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/stop-the-bedroom-tax.html

    Are Labour prepared to make a manifesto commitment to increasing taxes on ordinary working folk so that those people who receive housing benefit can have an additional bedroom?


    You're assuming it's going to save money.
    At what point to rent arrears start to null it's effect.
    Let alone the impact on carers who are saving the state a huge amount and now find themselves targeted.

    And Cameron is going to find cash for married couples this autumn.


    so far Labour have carped at the sidelines and proposed precisely nothing.

    Labour what's the point ?

    Stand aside and give the LDs a go, at least they get results.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,415
    tim said:

    Michael Savage ‏@michaelsavage
    RT @JonathanArnott: It's now official....UKIP membership hit 30,000 for the first time just 2 minutes ago.

    Dave thinks he has to get them down to 5% to stand a chance.
    Helping tobacco sales is an interesting master strategy

    I was amazed to read in an article from Daniel Finklestein that the Liberals "only" had 175,000 members in 1975. Now the Lib Dems have 49,000. In the modern era, 30,000 is rather a large number. I wonder if their membership will overtake the Conservatives' in the next Parliament.
  • I suspect that I am one of the few PBers that does still smoke.
    I remember as a 12 year old standing in the newsagents and excitedly pointing at the gold packet of B&H in the newsagents rack and saying,
    "But there for my mum, honest!'

    IMO this is from the department of 'being seen to do something' rather than trying to actually do something.

    In the interests of full disclosure, it is much more worthwhile for me to book a short break in Ljubljana and load up with fags at €36 a carton. I haven't bought packet of fags in this country for over a year.
    BTW the 2nd and 3rd sentences are for comedic effect as my mother used to smoke Players No6

    I belive B&H are still produced in the UK - there's a huge factory in Ballymena.

    It was costing me about £16 for 200 in Qatar, £15 if I bought them a duty free. You could smoke in most public places as well - even offices which was quite strange given I'm too young to remeber that being allowed in UK offices. Getting stung for £4.20 for a packet of 10 Marlboro today is making me contemplate quitting though!
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    The advertising and design industry isn't being paid tens of millions by big tobacco for a laugh. Packaging matters. If it didn't you can be certain big tobacco would hardly have wasted so much time and money lobbying against this.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,441
    Jonathan said:

    If it saves a single life it's worth it. End of story. No reason to wait.

    The idea that it might cost jobs, suggests they think it would work.

    Walt Disney politics, there are lots of things where banning would save a single life - air travel, skiing, the Labour party - should we ban them all or maybe just learn to come to terms with risk ?
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    That carers save the state far more money is a point so obvious only an incompetent fop could have missed it.

    I think there are around 6 million carers, and I guess the number affected in any way by the bedroom tax will be....????? 100,000???

    But I agree, disabled people are suffering, no matter how small a minority, then the law should be amended.
  • @Alanbrooke
    As Milton Friedman said, "living is dangerous to your health".
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,685

    In the 1970s the government took a role in legislating wage differentials for manual workers today government seeks a role in deciding the packaging of legal products. Neither is the preserve of governments. On these governments may advise they should not legislate.

    Don't be daft. Government absolutely has a regulatory role here.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,685

    Jonathan said:

    If it saves a single life it's worth it. End of story. No reason to wait.

    The idea that it might cost jobs, suggests they think it would work.

    Walt Disney politics, there are lots of things where banning would save a single life - air travel, skiing, the Labour party - should we ban them all or maybe just learn to come to terms with risk ?
    The difference is there is absolutely no cost here. Just the removal of some logos, pictures and text that benefit precisely no-one.

  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Some of the fools that choose to smoke will no doubt think that the ones in the plain pack are less lethal
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,712
    edited July 2013
    O/T:

    Glenn McGrath just mentioned on Test Match Special that his wife's art gallery has been named as one of the best 15 museums or art galleries in the world:

    http://mclemoi.com/about-me/
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,441
    tim said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    tim said:

    You're assuming it's going to save money.
    At what point to rent arrears start to null it's effect.
    Let alone the impact on carers who are saving the state a huge amount and now find themselves targeted.

    And Cameron is going to find cash for married couples this autumn.

    That carers save the state far more money is a point so obvious only an incompetent fop could have missed it.

    Dave had money to pay for a private carer, and a taxpayer funded mortgage which he maximised to pay for the spare room they slept in.

    And he still cannot see what he's doing.
    Or more likely he can't be bothered if his replies at PMQs getting basic facts wrong are anything to go by.

    yeah tim all of that, but since you're talking it all up where's the Labour proposal, what's Labour saying should be done differently, more tax or cut something else ?

    The Grand Old Duke of Ed off on manoeuvres once again.

    Meet you at the bottom of the hill.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    tim said:

    You're assuming it's going to save money.

    It obviously wont save anywhere near as much as the benefit cuts you wanted to inflict on the disabled.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,415

    @Alanbrooke
    As Milton Friedman said, "living is dangerous to your health".

    Proposals of this type always remind me of Auberon Waugh's satirical suggestion that the government should establish a National Register of Suspected Masturbators.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,850
    On cheese, I rather liked this top comment:

    "There is no mistake. Those are the correct lyrics. The full verse goes:

    "Sweet Dreams are made of cheese; Who am I to diss a brie; I travel the world and the Cheddar Cheese; Everybody's looking for Stilton."

    Anyone who says otherwise is a pop history revisionist."
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Four pounds 20 for a pack of ten cigs proves my point..only fools smoke.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,685
    They should go a step further and make fag packets look like the packaging of medical contraceptives.
  • I don't know any smokers who think they are clever by smoking.
    An enjoyable if expensive habit is probably the most optimistic reason.
    Anyway you should thank us for smoking as we die younger and therefore receive less in pension payments.

    Four pounds 20 for a pack of ten cigs proves my point..only fools smoke.

  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    I'm sure that I should care about this, but I haven't got any strong feelings about this really.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,441
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    If it saves a single life it's worth it. End of story. No reason to wait.

    The idea that it might cost jobs, suggests they think it would work.

    Walt Disney politics, there are lots of things where banning would save a single life - air travel, skiing, the Labour party - should we ban them all or maybe just learn to come to terms with risk ?
    The difference is there is absolutely no cost here. Just the removal of some logos, pictures and text that benefit precisely no-one.

    so the ad agencies, designers and marketing departments will just carry on as usual ? There's always a knock on effect somewhere. And since the end goal is zero smoking then where's the tax hole going to be filled from and what are you proposing those working in factories do to fill their time. maybe they could become HMRC employees to counteract the increase in smuggling.

    Emoting on the issue just makes bad policy. I have no issue in driving smoking down, but oversimplication based on slogans isn't the way to do it.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    Jonathan said:

    They should go a step further and make fag packets look like the packaging of medical contraceptives.

    The should force companies to make cigarettes in the shape of a penis only. That might really cut down on smoking amongst teenage boys.

  • Four pounds 20 for a pack of ten cigs proves my point..only fools smoke.

    Which will last me 2 days and I'll enjoy each one. It's about the same as you'd pay for a pint anyway.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    20 a day costs circa 3k a year..to damage ones lungs, there must be cheaper ways.. drinking bleach or something equally noxious
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815

    20 a day costs circa 3k a year..to damage ones lungs, there must be cheaper ways.. drinking bleach or something equally noxious

    Voting Labour?

  • If you want to make something attractive to teenagers have David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Milliband tell them they should not do it. Get a few photos of David, Nick and Ed hanging around a bus shelter fag in mouth (no jokes please). Now that might work.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,441

    20 a day costs circa 3k a year..to damage ones lungs, there must be cheaper ways.. drinking bleach or something equally noxious

    and about 80% of that goes to HMG.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,685
    edited July 2013


    so the ad agencies, designers and marketing departments will just carry on as usual ?

    Yes. If sport can do it, so can they.


    There's always a knock on effect somewhere.

    A few less avoidable tumors hopefully.


    And since the end goal is zero smoking then where's the tax hole going to be filled from and what are you proposing those working in factories do to fill their time. maybe they could become HMRC employees to counteract the increase in smuggling.

    Just suggests that removing branding could be effective.


    Emoting on the issue just makes bad policy. I have no issue in driving smoking down, but oversimplication based on slogans isn't the way to do it.

    This is very simple. Branding benefits no-one. It just attracts people to smoking. Smoking is a major killer. So get rid.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Max E .A pint doesnt last two days and does not play havoc with the old breathing apparatus..each fool to his own poison I suppose..not had a pint for many a year..Is it really over four quid now..
  • GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    @YossariansChild The number of smokers has fallen year on year, along with the umber of young users of illegal drugs, and the amount young people drink. The fact is, removing the legitimacy of smoking, drug taking, or drinking works.
  • Yep, buy 'em abroad.
    c €1300 and nearly £2k left for flghts and lovely Union beer at €2.20 a bottle

    20 a day costs circa 3k a year..to damage ones lungs, there must be cheaper ways.. drinking bleach or something equally noxious

  • Neil said:

    Jonathan said:

    They should go a step further and make fag packets look like the packaging of medical contraceptives.

    The should force companies to make cigarettes in the shape of a penis only. That might really cut down on smoking amongst teenage boys.

    That's not a bad idea Neil. Cigars have a far more phallic shape and it's a long time since I've seen a teenage boy hanging around a street corner sparking up a Monte Cristo No.3!
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,441
    Jonathan said:



    so the ad agencies, designers and marketing departments will just carry on as usual ?

    Yes. If sport can do it, so can they.



    There's always a knock on effect somewhere.

    A few less avoidable tumors hopefully.



    And since the end goal is zero smoking then where's the tax hole going to be filled from and what are you proposing those working in factories do to fill their time. maybe they could become HMRC employees to counteract the increase in smuggling.

    Just suggests that removing branding could be effective.



    Emoting on the issue just makes bad policy. I have no issue in driving smoking down, but oversimplication based on slogans isn't the way to do it.

    This is very simple. Branding benefits no-one. It just attracts people to smoking. Smoking is a major killer. So get rid.
    Alcohol causes early death, obesity causes early death, travel causes premature death. Where are you going to draw the line ?

  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    AB How much does HMG get from a bottle of bleach, some Labour fanatics might just do it to deprive the dreaded Ozzy of some dosh..
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,441

    AB How much does HMG get from a bottle of bleach, some Labour fanatics might just do it to deprive the dreaded Ozzy of some dosh..

    bleach about 80p to 2 quid, 20% VAT so 16p to 40p to GO and they can see if they can wash their souls clean.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,685
    edited July 2013

    Alcohol causes early death, obesity causes early death, travel causes premature death. Where are you going to draw the line ?

    That easy. You're not comparing like with like.

    Unlike food, drink and travel, branding on fags offers no benefit whatsoever. There is no cost from removing them.



  • Grandiose said:

    @YossariansChild The number of smokers has fallen year on year, along with the umber of young users of illegal drugs, and the amount young people drink. The fact is, removing the legitimacy of smoking, drug taking, or drinking works.

    You are right, and this is a good thing. The main reason though is due to the raising of the age at which people could buy cigarettes from 16 to 18. See here https://catalogue.ic.nhs.uk/publications/public-health/surveys/smok-drin-drug-youn-peop-eng-2010/smok-drin-drug-youn-peop-eng-2010-rep1.pdf

    The report also points out that teenagers get their first smokes from friends or family. So perhaps packaging will have little effect.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited July 2013
    Incidently, the tobacco industry is already shifting to include more prominent branding on the cigarettes themselves rather than the package since they pretty much know which way the wind is blowing once their lobbying money stops having the desired effect.
  • Max E .A pint doesnt last two days and does not play havoc with the old breathing apparatus..each fool to his own poison I suppose..not had a pint for many a year..Is it really over four quid now..

    Depends where you go but in the centre of Edinburgh it's often around that!
    In my defence I do go to the gym 5-6 times a week and I'm in reasonable shape. I see loads and loads of overweight people but it always seems to be smokers who get a hard time of it. Time to start taxing pasties and sausage rolls – surely no one could object to that.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    Banning a drug does not stop people using it. The examples down the years are legion.

    Drugs are with us and people are going to use them. Always have and always will. The only question is whether we want accountable companies, medical services and governments to control and monitor supply - or gangsters.

    I prefer the former. In all cases.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,441
    edited July 2013
    Jonathan said:

    Alcohol causes early death, obesity causes early death, travel causes premature death. Where are you going to draw the line ?

    That easy. You're not comparing like with like.

    Unlike food, drink and travel, branding on fags offers no benefit whatsoever. There is no cost from removing them.





    ridiculous. What benefits does alcohol offer ? Why shouldn't whisky or vodka just come in a uni-bottle with identical labels ?
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Anecdote!

    When I was a teenager and used to smoke most of the time I ponced them off other people at school, I looked far too young to get served, so the packaging was nothing to do with it. Cant see how it would make any difference.

    I like the idea that they are not shown in Supermarkets now, locked away behind metal screen.

    Secondly UKIP don't want to repeal the smoking ban in all public places, they want owners of pubs to be able to have a room where people can smoke if they like. Personally I would not go in a room with lots of people smoking and think the ban has been a good idea, but maybe that's because I don't smoke anymore.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited July 2013
    Austerity payback for Ireland

    Standard & Poor's today uprated Ireland's sovereign risk to BBB+ stable from a previous negative outlook.

    S&P stated that there was a one in three chance of Ireland's rating being uprated again in the next two years.

    “Ireland could over-achieve its fiscal targets and reduce its government debt faster than we currently expect,” S&P said. “Ireland’s economic recovery is under way.”

    Just where is BenM when you need him to comment?

    Possibly on holiday in Italy whose rating was cut today from BBB+ to BBB with a negative outlook due to its economy continuing in recession.

    No prizes too for Boy George: he keeps his top AAA rating as does Germany.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,441
    AveryLP said:

    Austerity payback for Ireland

    Standard & Poor's uprated Ireland's sovereign risk from BBB+ from stable and reaffirmed Germany's AAA rating.

    S&P stated that there was a one in three chance of Ireland's rating being uprated again in the next two years.

    “Ireland could over-achieve its fiscal targets and reduce its government debt faster than we currently expect,” S&P said. “Ireland’s economic recovery is under way.”

    Just where is BenM when you need him to comment?

    Possibly on holiday in Italy whose rating was cut today from BBB+ to BBB with a negative outlook due to its economy continuing in recession.

    No prizes too for Boy George: he keeps his top AAA rating as does Germany.

    Does anyone actually take ratings agencies seriously still ?
  • You think I am female and a mother?
    I will wear a dress to the next Dirty Dicks do if you wear a shell suit.
    Deal?
    tim said:

    I don't know any smokers who think they are clever by smoking.
    An enjoyable if expensive habit is probably the most optimistic reason.
    Anyway you should thank us for smoking as we die younger and therefore receive less in pension payments.

    Four pounds 20 for a pack of ten cigs proves my point..only fools smoke.

    It's not as simple as that, children of mothers who smoke have a much greater occurrence of respiratory illnesses, and that effect is often lifelong.

    Add to that the pre term babies, low birth weight babies, increased use of neo natal care beds, increased sudden infant death syndrome etc etc.

  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    Max E .A pint doesnt last two days and does not play havoc with the old breathing apparatus..each fool to his own poison I suppose..not had a pint for many a year..Is it really over four quid now..

    Depends where you go but in the centre of Edinburgh it's often around that!
    In my defence I do go to the gym 5-6 times a week and I'm in reasonable shape. I see loads and loads of overweight people but it always seems to be smokers who get a hard time of it. Time to start taxing pasties and sausage rolls – surely no one could object to that.
    Only thing with that is that eating unhealthy food doesn't affect people sitting in the same room as you who are eating healthily

  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815

    AveryLP said:

    Austerity payback for Ireland

    Standard & Poor's uprated Ireland's sovereign risk from BBB+ from stable and reaffirmed Germany's AAA rating.

    S&P stated that there was a one in three chance of Ireland's rating being uprated again in the next two years.

    “Ireland could over-achieve its fiscal targets and reduce its government debt faster than we currently expect,” S&P said. “Ireland’s economic recovery is under way.”

    Just where is BenM when you need him to comment?

    Possibly on holiday in Italy whose rating was cut today from BBB+ to BBB with a negative outlook due to its economy continuing in recession.

    No prizes too for Boy George: he keeps his top AAA rating as does Germany.

    Does anyone actually take ratings agencies seriously still ?
    The media more than the markets.

    And some people still think they have political weight.

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,441
    AveryLP said:

    AveryLP said:

    Austerity payback for Ireland

    Standard & Poor's uprated Ireland's sovereign risk from BBB+ from stable and reaffirmed Germany's AAA rating.

    S&P stated that there was a one in three chance of Ireland's rating being uprated again in the next two years.

    “Ireland could over-achieve its fiscal targets and reduce its government debt faster than we currently expect,” S&P said. “Ireland’s economic recovery is under way.”

    Just where is BenM when you need him to comment?

    Possibly on holiday in Italy whose rating was cut today from BBB+ to BBB with a negative outlook due to its economy continuing in recession.

    No prizes too for Boy George: he keeps his top AAA rating as does Germany.

    Does anyone actually take ratings agencies seriously still ?
    The media more than the markets.

    And some people still think they have political weight.

    Mr Pole since we will hopefully be heading into a period of good economic data between now and 2015 ( assuming the continent doesn't implode ) why not let the news speak for itself ? The sound of silence from the opposition benches is often more telling than anything the Coalition can say.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,685
    edited July 2013

    Jonathan said:

    Alcohol causes early death, obesity causes early death, travel causes premature death. Where are you going to draw the line ?

    That easy. You're not comparing like with like.

    Unlike food, drink and travel, branding on fags offers no benefit whatsoever. There is no cost from removing them.


    ridiculous. What benefits does alcohol offer ? Why shouldn't whisky or vodka just come in a uni-bottle with identical labels ?
    Ridiculous? Really? Obviously you're getting off on cigarette advertising in ways I can't possibly imagine.

    Having seen the damage both fags and booze can do am glad advertising is regulated. The case against fags is so clear, very strong measures are justified IMO. I don't think the case against booze is quite so one sided, but it is rightly controlled.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    AveryLP said:

    Austerity payback for Ireland

    Standard & Poor's today uprated Ireland's sovereign risk to BBB+ stable from a previous negative outlook.

    S&P stated that there was a one in three chance of Ireland's rating being uprated again in the next two years.

    “Ireland could over-achieve its fiscal targets and reduce its government debt faster than we currently expect,” S&P said. “Ireland’s economic recovery is under way.”

    Just where is BenM when you need him to comment?

    Possibly on holiday in Italy whose rating was cut today from BBB+ to BBB with a negative outlook due to its economy continuing in recession.

    No prizes too for Boy George: he keeps his top AAA rating as does Germany.

    No sensible person would take Standard & Poor's statements seriously, at least according to Standard & Poor's lawyers:

    http://mobilizer.instapaper.com/m?u=http://bloom.bg/1aRS8aR
  • isam said:

    Max E .A pint doesnt last two days and does not play havoc with the old breathing apparatus..each fool to his own poison I suppose..not had a pint for many a year..Is it really over four quid now..

    Depends where you go but in the centre of Edinburgh it's often around that!
    In my defence I do go to the gym 5-6 times a week and I'm in reasonable shape. I see loads and loads of overweight people but it always seems to be smokers who get a hard time of it. Time to start taxing pasties and sausage rolls – surely no one could object to that.
    Only thing with that is that eating unhealthy food doesn't affect people sitting in the same room as you who are eating healthily

    No but obesity does cost the taxpayer of which I am one.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,441
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Alcohol causes early death, obesity causes early death, travel causes premature death. Where are you going to draw the line ?

    That easy. You're not comparing like with like.

    Unlike food, drink and travel, branding on fags offers no benefit whatsoever. There is no cost from removing them.


    ridiculous. What benefits does alcohol offer ? Why shouldn't whisky or vodka just come in a uni-bottle with identical labels ?
    Ridiculous? Really? Obviously you're getting off on cigarette advertising in ways I can't possibly imagine. Having seen the damage both fags and booze can do am glad advertising is regulated. The case against fags is so clear, very strong measures are justified.
    so's the effect of booze, 9000 deaths a year, so why not move to uniform packaging on booze ? It's inconsistent not to.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Max..do not get SO off on a bender..he thinks Pasties and Sausage rolls are a staple part of the UK diet..oh woe
This discussion has been closed.