Legal disclaimer

The opinions expressed by the authors on this blog and those providing comments are theirs alone, and do not reflect the opinions of the Freedom2Choose organisation or any member thereof. Freedom2Choose is not responsible for the accuracy of any of the information supplied by the blog Authors.

Friday, 30 July 2010

Resistance is NOT futile!

clip_image001

Stop ASH from using YOUR money against YOU-the smoker

Stop CRUK from using YOUR money against YOU-the smoker

Stop this government from using YOUR money against YOU

 

image

Smoking is legal, smoking is enjoyable to millions, tobacco is a multi -£billion industry worldwide that employs hundreds of thousands of workers. Don’t let them use your tobacco taxes against you. Buy your tobacco & cigarettes from abroad. It is perfectly legal to do so for personal usage!

The Resistance. Stop funding the Smoking Ban. Buy your tobacco Abroad.

More information: www.freedom2choose.info www.smokersjustice.co.uk 

Facebook

 

Thursday, 29 July 2010

Thank you, thank you, thank you boss…

…now kiss my lilly white arse!

Two pieces of ‘news’ crossed my path today and I’m not in a conciliatory or humble mood after reading this pap:

0,,10273~3748565,00Now open at Elland Road, sin bin for smokers 

ELLAND ROAD - SMOKING AREAS

Smoking areas within the stadium...

The club has been creating additional areas inside Elland Road stadium to enable fans to smoke on a matchday.

Fans in the South Stand, East Stand, North Stand, North East Corner, and South East Corner will have access to smoking areas for the 2010/11 season.

The areas in the North Stands are newly constructed and the areas are adjacent to the turnstiles and exit gates so can be primarily used once the game has started.

Any fans using these areas are encouraged to following the instructions of the stewards in maintaining a clear passage to exits in case of use.

How very kind of you, the next time I buy my season ticket for the princely sum of £480 I will doff my cap and whisper a little prayer to your kindness in allowing me into your new, super dooper sin bin for smokers.

CEO Shaun Harvey said: "We've put these facilities into place so people who need to smoke will have the opportunity to do so in an authorised area rather than in the stands or toilets which causes significant discomfort to other fans.

"We hope fans will appreciate these measures taken and restrict their smoking to these areas so as not to spoil the enjoyment of others.

"Unfortunately, these areas will not exist in the North West Corner or the West Stand as there is insufficient space for them to be incorporated in those stands. They will remain non-smoking stands."

Oh thank you Shaun for your clubs benevolence which has brought me to tears whilst writing this. And what do you mean “We’ve put these facilities into place so people who NEED to smoke?”  How about we WANT to smoke? I suppose that does not fit into the anti smokers agenda when they see us as drug addicts driven by need and have no choice, smokers choose to smoke, period!

Was the smoking ban being ignored in the stands Shaun? Is that why the patronising board at Elland Road gave smokers their sin bins?

New boss, same old, same old.

smoking_outsideRelax ladies, your safe, relatively speaking, for now.

And now the shiny new coalition government has decided not to implement the previous NuLabour bansterbator’s “outside smoking ban” but let the SmokeFree fake charities know that they were not ‘rolling back’ the ban. Who’s kissing lilly white arses now?

Smokers will continue lighting up outside pubs and offices after ministers yesterday scrapped plans to extend the ban.

Phewww, that saves me some jail time for smacking some no mark ‘enforcer’ in the mouth as he berates me for sitting outside the Jovial Monk having a fag whilst freezing my nuts off.

The last government had proposed enlarging ‘smoke-free’ zones to include the areas around building entrances, but this has been shelved.

Good, I’m glad that that particular piece of crap has been shelv…SHELVED! What do you mean shelved??? Does that mean when you’ve ran out of ideas (if you ever had any) you will look on the shelves, dust something down that has been lost in your dim and distant memory and say “that’ll do, can’t be seen to be doing nothing, after all, it’s only smokers and our friends at Fake Charities “R” Us tell me that they are a dying breed so harassing them will provoke no sympathy, even if they are passed their three score and ten.”

Anne Milton, public health minister, said: ‘We have studied the smokefree legislation and decided not to proceed with the planned review.’

Well Anne, I’ll just wait till you and your coalition has it’s feet well and truly under the Westmonster table before I sigh a sigh of relief.

She added: ‘We are not rolling back the smoking ban, nor are we deploying austerity as an excuse for deregulation.

Well of course you and your new boss, Cleggy, are not ‘rolling back the smoking ban’ Anne, you told us as much when you rolled out your much vaunted  ‘Great Repeal Act’ of Labours 600 new iniquitous laws, and there is none so iniquitous than the smoking ban experiment.

Hey, but don’t listen to us, we are scum, you have said as much in your diatribe above, no, listen to the vested interests that want your our money:

But doctors and health campaigners fear further proposals to cut the rates of lung cancer and other smoking related diseases could also be scrapped. 

These include banning cigarettes being displayed at the front of shops or being sold in vending machines, both put forward in Labour’s Health Act last year.

A spokesman for the British Medical Association said: ‘The BMA is extremely concerned that the Government will not implement the 2009 Health Act.

‘These laws are vital as they will help put an end to the loopholes that allow tobacco to be advertised to children.

Can you hear the squealing? The squealing of suckling pigs as they are taken away from their mothers governments teats!

Doff my cap I wont!

Wednesday, 28 July 2010

The war on smoking is not over, the battle for Britain is about to begin!

 

ASH say a lot but debate nothing, they make choices on my behalf without my consent or authority, they are a charity not a government in being, they monopolise the media where those like me are not able to debate as they turn off comments, in fact for the most part they use the media as propaganda outlets no different to the Deutsche Beobachter, Jews were not allowed equal representation in that publication just as most comments by ASH disbar debate by smokers and this is why I will have my say at any venue that accepts free speech, free expression and why I want to take the fight to ASH.

The public health charity, Action on Smoking and Health (ASH), has responded to a call by a group of MPs for the re-introduction of smoking in pubs, arguing that research proves there is little public support for such a measure.

That certainly is not what the people are saying at all, one of the top bills for which repeal or amendment is demanded is the Health act of 2006… how can you say that the reverse is true when this event is happening as we speak?

The growth of websites and facebook pages testify to the growing resistance to the anti smoking lobby, climb out of your ivory tower and look at the real world!

Even the MOD denounce you they maintain that the taxation that you demand pays Al Qaeda and other terrorist organisations that are killing our troops in Afghanistan by encouraging the smuggling of tobacco and sales on the black market. You may of course accuse smokers who buy on the black market of the same but the bottom line is that you created the situation not the smokers.

In fact ASH says its research, conducted between 2007 and 2010 by YouGov, suggests the opposite to be true, i.e. that smokers would welcome an extension of the smoking ban rather than a relaxation of the law.

In addition, ASH says that returning to “the bad old days of smoky pubs” would be a disastrous move because:

  • recent research from the University of Bath shows how smoke-free legislation has accelerated the reduction in heart attacks (a drop of 2.5% on top of the long-term trend) and saved the NHS in England more than £8 million in the first year…

To start with ASH began with outrageous claims of the drop in heart attack rates, until the official figures proved you wrong so why should anyone believe these?

You say you saved £8 million, fine but that £8million now pays the benefits of those who ASH put out of work keeping children on the poverty line because the pub their parent worked at is now closed. That is before the £millions of pounds lost to revenue as more smokers buy abroad or on the Black market, every £ lost to revenue is a £ less the NHS receives!

  • with every passing year, the smoke-free law gets more and more popular and now commands the support of 80% of English adults with support growing fastest among smokers…

I think my opening paragraph covers that particular piece of propaganda, Dr. Joseph Goebbels will give you an ‘F’ for that effort!

“The receptivity of the great masses is very limited, their intelligence is small, but their power of forgetting is enormous. In consequence of these facts, all effective propaganda must be limited to a very few points and must harp on these in slogans until the last member of the public understands what you want him to understand by your slogan. As soon as you sacrifice this slogan and try to be many-sided, the effect will piddle away, for the crowd can neither digest nor retain the material offered. In this way the result is weakened and in the end entirely cancelled out. “

“The function of propaganda is, for example, not to weigh and ponder the rights of different people, but exclusively to emphasize the one right which it has set out to argue for. Its task is not to make an objective study of the truth, in so far as it favours the enemy, and then set it before the masses with academic fairness; its task is to serve our own right, always and unflinchingly.”

Adolph Hitler, Mein Kampf writing about propaganda!

Hitler also said: “If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.”

It is these tactics ASH use, this is the view of the British public that ASH holds, and they clearly hold us all with complete and utter contempt.

  • in response to claims that the law has been bad for the licensed trade, government figures show the number of premises licensed for “on sales” actually increased by 5% the year England and Wales went smoke free

  • the law has worked well and if anything the Government should be looking at ways to strengthen it.

That was years ago, what is the current situation, is it so dire that you dare not use up to date figures?

You say the law has worked well, if the intent was to kill off the pub trade and put 100,000 on the dole then yes it has worked really well, strengthening a bad law makes the situation worse, is that what you honestly advocate?

Martin Dockrell, ASH’s Director of Policy and Research, said: “All the evidence points to high and growing support for the smoke-free law, including among smokers. There just isn’t the evidence to support a return to the bad old days of smoky pubs and clubs. Instead of rolling back a law that is working well, we would urge the Government to focus on a comprehensive tobacco control strategy that will continue to drive down smoking rates and improve public health.”

I think Martin, in light of the case presented against your statement, you had better get a new cause, this one is blowing up in your face!

Like you Martin I have an urge, I would urge every free thinking citizen to join the fight against your brand of tyranny. I urge them to lobby their MP’s to repeal this abomination of law, to cease funding your organisation which has caused so much damage to our country.

I would urge smokers to seek out legitimate means of obtaining tobacco products by joining the resistance and make use of the excellent guide to dealing with customs procedure presented by Smoking Hot.

I have no doubt that Martin Dockrell will not come out to honestly debate his beliefs, it is not ASH’s policy to debate with those who disagree with them so the only choice is to bring on the debate with ASH in absentia, I have previously asked that they do so and they have declined, to do so as is their right, so let them not be surprised when people open debate with out them, they have abdicated their right to object when they stand condemned in the court of public opinion because they refuse to defend their position in open debate.

ASH started this war against the smoking minority, they seek to remove a legitimate freedom, all free peoples have the right to maintain their freedom , to fight for freedoms lost or in jeopardy, when freedom is denied to any minority then freedom is denied to all.

The text of the full article may be found here.

John Watson

 

The Dutch are still going strong

Two years ago, on July 1st 2008, the smoking ban was introduced in Holland.

Some 1200 pub owners joined forces, put their money together and challenged the ban through lawsuits. They won several cases, especially those in appeal. But they also lost one at the highest appeal level, where the case of two cafés was sent back to a lower court. That latter one was lost, but Café "De Kachel" and Café Victoria will go to the highest court again to fight against this ruling, using different arguments as in the first high court appeal. This case is expected to run within 6 months.

Parallel to this criminal law procedure, Café De Kachel is fighting the ban by administrative law too, which will lead to the administrative high court that has ruled in our favour a couple of times before. The date for this lawsuit is also not known yet.

So the legal procedures are still going on.

But these procedures have influenced politics as well. After the June elections a new government is being formed and the latest developments show that this formation of a new government may well lead to a coalition of parties in which the anti-ban parties will have a majority.

Not willing to wait for the outcome of this complex formation process, the Liberal party (VVD) has now announced an initiative in parliament to exempt the small bar owners without staff from the ban. The proposal will be presented for voting in the parliament after the parliamentary recess which will end on September 6.

It looks like a majority of the current parties will vote in favour of this proposal. So we keep our fingers crossed!

Meanwhile, most of the bars (some 80% - with or without staff) keep sticking their middle finger up and allow smoking. Even the latest defeat in court did not change that. I hear little news about enforcement of the ban. With their legal procedures, the joint bar owners have created a no man's land where even the law enforcers don't know what they have to do. The smoking ban has become a real PITA for the outgoing government and they want to get rid of this hot potatoe ASAP. And that will go the Dutch way: by compromise (the 'polder model').

For now, chaos rules!

Tuesday, 27 July 2010

“No shit” Sherlock goes PC!

is2 WTF did I do?

I eagerly awaited the coming of the modern day Sherlock Holmes as portrayed by the BBC, and I was not dissapointed.  With the pairing of two actors that are at the top of their game at this moment in time, Benedict Cumerbatch as Holmes and Martin Freeman, (the office) as Dr John Watson (the same name as one of our guest writers, funnily enough,) and they both were superb.

Cumerbactch played the quintessential Holmes to a tee and was an equal to, if not better than all the stereotypical Sherlock's I’ve known from my film and TV youth, this ‘modern day’ Sherlock  was contemptuous of his fellow humans, especially where thinking was concerned (I can see fellow libertarian bloggers nodding in agreement, especially DP.) Everyone around him was not worthy of thinking, they did not think, period!

The writers, none other than Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss, the former is the new writing supremo and overall head honcho  for Dr. Who and the latter an actor in said Dr. Who, amongst other things. So the writing pedigree was there, the actors worthy of their respective parts were in place and the writing was crisp, manic but with subdued logic and all the quirks of Sherlock were there too…all except one!

This ‘modern’ day Sherlock was trying to give up smoking?!?

Here is Moffat’s babbling about his ‘hero’:

Co-created by Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss, Sherlock stars Benedict Cumberbatch as the new Sherlock Holmes and Martin Freeman as his loyal friend, Doctor John Watson. Rupert Graves plays Inspector Lestrade.

The iconic details from Conan Doyle's original books remain – they live at the same address of 221b Baker Street, have the same names and, somewhere out there, Moriarty is waiting for them.

Hmm, let me see, which ‘iconic’ detail was missing from this exciting episode? The pipe for instance, maybe the cigarettes that Holmes smoked when he needed to think.

Scene:

Hazy camera work homing in on Holmes lying down clears to see him in some state other than normal. Holmes is holding his arm at the joint in the classic heroin addict fashion, bent at the elbow. Watson walks in saying, “what are you doing?”

Holmes says, “Nicotine patch, helps me think, it’s impossible to sustain a smoking habit in London these days, bad news for brainwork!” as he shows to camera three very large patches on his arm.

Watson asks: “Is that three patches?” “It’s a three patch problem!” Holmes replies.

Later Holmes and Lestrade compare patches as both are giving up the filthy weed!

Thank you Moffat and Gattiss for being ‘right on’ the PC button, and this was after the 9pm watershed ffs so there is no excuse by saying you were thinking of the chiiildren.

A very enjoyable first episode was torn asunder as the writers decided that it was ‘not on message’ to show Holmes smoking his iconic pipe or cheroots that aided his thinking processes as surely as playing the violin and a syringe of cocaine or two!  Lets see if Holmes or Lestrade decide that patches are bloody useless and by the third and final episode both decide that the ‘filthy weed’ is more suitable for aiding the thought processes and consign the patches to the bin where they belong!

God give me strength!

200px-Sherlock_Holmes_Portrait_Paget Sherlock Holmes in a 1904 illustration by Sidney Paget

 

Monday, 26 July 2010

The lady is not for turning!

By guest author John Watson

SCOT_member_orgs_web










SCOT (Scottish Coalition on Tobacco) says:
“that the previous comprehensive strategy was now out of date and it was time for a robust new strategy suitable for Scotland’s particular challenges and opportunities, “
I ask don’t you think that this is a long winded way of saying we’ve failed?
Sheila Duffy says:
“There is a now a clear need for a new comprehensive tobacco control strategy for Scotland.”

Could it be because the measures that ASH’s self proclaimed confidence trick on politicians throughout the world has failed and now Scotland has to pay the price?
She goes on to say:
“That strategy should include the key aims of preventing young people from starting to smoke, encouraging smokers to quit, reducing exposure to second-hand smoke, and tackling health inequalities caused by smoking. It must set ambitious and achievable targets and be fully resourced to meet its aims.
What to do? Should we enable acts of parliament that will kill off the leisure industry and the small retailers? Wait you’ve already done that! Should we educate them? You obviously think not, that would mean giving them the information then allow them to think for themselves and shock horror, make a decision! You don’t want that do you!

It does not fit in with your agenda does it? The same applies to those who may not want to quit smoking, it is their choice to make so why is it that you believe it is yours?

Excuse me while I stop laughing! Reduce exposure to second hand smoke? Where are you living Sheila, the moon? Smokers cannot smoke inside public buildings, factories, pubs ect. Are you now saying they cannot smoke at home either?

Health equalities caused by smoking? If the money your organisations have wasted were put into finding real work with decent pay then there would not be be health inequalities for any reason now would there?

Who is going to pay then Sheila? I know you’ll get the hard pressed poor taxpayer to fund it, make them poorer and the problem worse, you have some really good ideas don’t you Sheila?
“It is now six years since the publication of ‘A Breath of Fresh Air for Scotland’, the first ever tobacco control action plan for Scotland and its twenty actions have now been reached, superseded, or surpassed. These have been very successful, highly supported, and are reaping health benefits for Scotland in terms of reduced smoking rates and increased health benefits.
Who writes this stuff, Ernie Wise? You mean closed pubs and threatening to close small retail outlets don’t you?
“However, tobacco addiction is a deep-rooted public health problem in our country and despite clear in-roads being made, the harm caused by smoking and second-hand smoke within our society is still of major concern. We need to continue to improve our public health record and reduce the health inequalities caused by smoking.
Translation: Smokers refuse to obey me, we are failing, all that money on junk science and we cannot beat them. They need more persecution and terror to persuade them! That did not work for Hitler so why do you think it will work for you?

“Smoking remains Scotland’s biggest killer with 13,500 smoking attributable deaths every year. Smoking and tobacco use inflicts a significant health and economic cost to Scotland, disproportionately borne by the poorest members of society. It costs the economy £837 million each year and the NHS in Scotland an annual £409 million a year.
What she does not say is that the smokers whom she appears to despise and persecute pays for three non smokers per smoker treated on the NHS, now isn’t that value for money Sheila? Anyone can spout statements that x causes y but where is the evidence?
“The tobacco industry is made up of multi-national profit driven companies which aim to keep smokers buying their brands whilst recruiting new smokers to replace those who quit or die. This has a subsequent massive impact on our public health and our economy. Therefore it’s vital that we continue to tackle tobacco, encourage smokers to quit and prevent young people taking the habit up. Special attention must also be paid to those areas where smoking rates remain high and increased efforts made to reach smokers and those who may start to smoke. This will pay long term dividends in reduced costs to society and will be hugely beneficial in making Scotland a healthier society and place to live and work.
Are you suggesting then that it is illegal for a legitimate company to make a profit Sheila? Closing them down would have a devastating effect on jobs and the economy, just look at the £ billions they pay in taxation! The loss of NI contributions would ravage the NHS and pensions ect. Is it your aim to completely destroy Scotland economically then?

“The other home nations of the UK already have, or are all currently working on, new tobacco control strategies as part of public health policy. Scotland needs to do the same and address the continuing need to reduce smoking and protect people from second-hand smoke. Scotland needs a new robust strategy which takes into account our own particular needs, challenges, and opportunities. “

More to point Sheila the other home nations are getting just a tad annoyed with your constant interference in their private lives! Don’t you think its time to quit? After all, power is the worst addiction of all.

Adolf Hitler learned the consequences of his addiction to power, stealing freedom from the people, those very people paid a very heavy price for his stupidity.

Will you go down in history for the same reason?
John Watson

Sunday, 25 July 2010

the [smoker] peasants are revolting…

And about time too!

The Borg may have said “all resistance is futile” but in the face of the UK smoking ban experiment we smokers think differently.

When a biological individual is altered to encompass the Borg's various cybernetic implants and hardware, they lose all sense of individuality, and become a drone, and part of the Borg commune. By way of a network of advanced subspace communications channels the individual will be absorbed into the Borg 'Collective' -a hive mind, or singular consciousness which incorporates all drones everywhere. It is this control mechanism that drives the entire Borg unit with devastating efficiency.

After individuality has been stripped, and assimilation into the collective has taken place, a typical Borg drone will be programmed for certain ship tasks, like any vessel crew member. But drawing on the knowledge and experience of all Borg, and all archived encounters, technology, tactical information and scientific data, the Borg collective is closer to perfection than any organic crew operating under a Command structure hierarchy.

From the very first day of the UK smoking ban resistance fighters voted with their feet and left the pubs to the oncoming Tsunami of righteous anti smoking beardy types that wanted a smokefree pub in which to drink their shandies, thus filling the gap vacated by the dirty, filthy smoker.

These modern day resistance fighters have invented The Smoky-Drinky place.

One of the first Smoky-Drinky pubs was Merv’s place:

 

So entrenched now is the Smoky-Drinky place that they even give out awards for the best ones.

One who knows about such things is Leg-iron:

These things make Smoky-drinky small and isolated. There are Smoky-drinkies everywhere but we can't find or talk to each other because we are always wary of strangers. That wariness is what makes Leafar's site so difficult to maintain. A great idea but we're paranoid about ASH infiltrators. Smoky-drinky is not illegal as long as we stick to the rules, but there are many who would like to make us illegal and these days they need only the flimsiest of pretexts.
What we need is a flag flying over that shack. One we can recognise and approach, knowing that we are kindred spirits.

And here’s one I made earlier…err, that one of Leg-iron’s many readers put together:

Jolly-smoking-rogerThe Happy Smokers Smoky-Drinky place.

Viva la Revolution!

But wait, the revolution does not stop there.

Whenever I think of ASH I change the name to CASH in my head, so for ASH think CASH, your cash, the cash that is prised from your purses and wallets by HMR&C. Now in the past, many decades ago now, we expected our the government, when it came budget time, that they would stick a penny or two on a pint of beer and around a penny or two more on a packet of fags or tobacco. But that was before the likes of the fake charity CASH started getting big bucks by the back door to hammer the smoker, (a 10% rise in tax in the 2010 budget would be in the interests of the smokers own good, obviously.)

The irony of all this is that they, the fake charities, are taking your tax money, you know, that 10% that CASH was pushing the government to cosh you over your financial head with, will benefit because they are subsidised by your the government with your tobacco taxes. And that other fake charity, Alcohol Concern, use the same principles as CASH does, TAX, TAX, TAX, (we need your money to stay in a job!)

But we smokers and drinkers needn’t be used like this! We are under the yoke auspices of that kindly and benevolent group of countries called the EU where, surprise, surprise, the other satellite states that make up the EU have tobacco and alcohol products that are dirt cheap compared to the UK. So why pay the British government your hard earned taxes for these products when you can go abroad and fill your boots?

Here cometh that other revolution I wrote about earlier.

pIRATE 12 It’s my money and the tax man ain’t getting it!

Now, I do not have a passport, haven’t for decades, but since the late eighties I’ve been buying my tobacco cheap from friends and friends of friends in the many pubs I used to frequent at grossly reduced prices. They always did the ‘booze cruses’ and had many shiny baubles in the shape of Benson & Hedges, Silk Cut or Golden Virginia etc. and I had a never ending supply of smokes. That tailed off after that fateful day on Sunday 01/07.  No smoking in pubs, no me, I was not welcome so consequently my supply dried up.

I have now just filled in the form for a passport. Next thing to do is find out how border control works? I don’t have a clue…but I know a man that does, nudge nudge, wink wink.

The enemy (the government) aren't listening because we are not hurting them. Well it's time we did. There is no need to wait for our supposed leaders in the campaign against the smoking ban because, to be quite frank, they aren't achieving anything anyway. Parliament just pats them on the head and sends them away with nothing. They do great work but nobody there listens ... it's time to stop being nice!

And if you have no idea of how much you pay in tax for your enjoyment of tobacco in this country…

YOU are in control of whether they get that money or not. lt's the tax on tobacco/cigarettes and it is not an insignificant amount.
A pack of 20 cigarettes cost on average
£5.70 and from that £5.70 the government get £4.40! ... yes £4.40.
Golden Virginia tobacco costs
£12.12 and from that the government get £8.60 ... yes £8.60 (source)
The government then use that money to fund such as ASH and other anti-smoking groups. So YOU are paying your enemies to treat you like pariahs. ls that insanity or what?
A single smoker who smokes 20 cigarettes a day pays the government £39.90 a week, which is £2074.80 a year. 40 a day ... £4149.60 a year!  STOP PAYING THEM!

Too bloody right I am stopping paying them N2D, I am a proud smoker but not THAT proud.

Don’t be a revolting peasant, be a peasant in revolt!

----------------------------------------------------------------

If you, a smoker, are in any doubt that we are persecuted then you should take a look at Pat Nurse’s blog. Pat Nurse is a freelance court reporter and sees many sides of life that most ‘ordinary’ people do not see, and most probably would not want to see.

Being a smoker herself she is increasingly perturbed with the number of court cases involving smokers who have been harassed by the smoking police. One particular case, out of many, has spurred her on to do something about it.

Pat will, in due course, put up a paypal appeal for smokers that fall foul of these cretins and their ‘smokers are a cash cow for the council’ mentality and this blog will put a link to it on the side panel.

Friday, 23 July 2010

Imitation? Is it the sincerest form of flattery…

…in Sheila Duffy’s case?

Following on from the last post here it was intimated by John Watson in his letter to  crASH Scotland's head honcho that no comments were allowed, as indeed they are not.

Some wag has made a mirror of the said Ms Duffy’s blog with that lady’s first post copied there. The only difference between both blogs, apart from the fact that one uses Wordpress and the other Blogger, is that the mirror blog has no restrictions on comments…which many people have used to vent their spleen.

Can’t wait for Duffy’s next post…on both sites.

Thursday, 22 July 2010

The lady doth protest too much!

Sheila Duffy, Chief Executive of ASH Scotland, has started blogging. In her first ever post she gets her knickers in a twist about the tobacco companies taking the (Scottish) legislators to court over the tobacco display ban and a few other harebrained bans she and her cohorts wish to see implemented.

Below regular contributor to this blog, John Watson, sends a letter to Ms Duffy:

Dear Sheila,

I too have been giving thought to industry a great deal lately; I too am angry, angry at the vast swathes of legislation enabled and proposed by your organisation that wilfully sets out to destroy industries, not just the tobacco industry but the leisure industry, the vending industry, the retail industry, and numerous other industries related to smoking. I have some questions that, as a member of the public who subsidises your organisation through taxation, that I believe demand answers.

By what right or legislation do you arbitrarily decide that a company has no right to challenge legislation or policies that are not in that companies best interests?

You clearly object to anyone challenging policy or legislation and then go on to compound that by publically attempting to sway a matter which is, by your own admission, still under legal consideration. Are you not then guilty of attempting to pervert the course of justice in this matter?

You and your organisation have consistently denied any form of negotiation directly with the tobacco industry, you state that the tobacco battle is over and there is no need for you to talk to them. Unless, of course, you demand money from them to pay for your legislation, in which case, it could then be assumed that it is merely an attempt to blackmail those companies. If there is no need to talk to them or the smoking public then you have won, so what possible reason can there be for your continued existence?

What the governments of Canada, Australia or any other sovereign nation choose to do is a matter for their own consciences and it will eventually be the will of the their people that decides if they are right or not, the fact that Canada has an over 50% smuggling rate for tobacco is testament enough to the effects of the work of the anti smoking lobby. Of course since you choose to bring other sovereign nations into a domestic matter of the UK then I am sure you will agree it is not only right, fair and proper that smokers who object to your organisations methods, should join together to fight them, and that includes those citizens who work for the tobacco industry and that industry itself who are trying to protect the continued employment of those citizens, all is fair in love and war is it not?

Going to court is in reality the fundamental right of the tobacco companies or anyone else who believes that your policies are detrimental to their way of life, and their means of earning a living. Are you honestly saying that you believe they have no right to recourse under the law?

Unless you can prove beyond any shadow of doubt that smokers are responsible for these deaths then this statement you have made accuses every government, the tobacco industry and every shopkeeper who retails those products of murder and conspiracy to murder. If, as you claim, you have indisputable evidence then it is your duty under the law, and in fact under the health and safety at work act, to ensure prosecution, why have you not done so?

The key word here is ‘understanding’ which has no basis in law. Would you not agree then that OFT (Office of Fair Trading) recognise this in their decision and that your only objection is that you and your organisation failed to get the desired result?
So that is what those of us trying to work for public health are up against. The vast profits tobacco companies make at the expense of people’s lives and wellbeing are ploughed back into more and more sophisticated marketing and recruiting practices, and into pursuing costly legal action against policies and legislation designed to reduce the deaths, diseases and anguish caused by tobacco.
Wrong Sheila, 100% wrong, it is a question of equality and freedom, there is no reason why smoking and non smoking premises cannot work side by side, you know it, I know it, and the public knows it, what you are fighting is an ideal, one of freedom, one which former servicemen and women fought for, that today’s military fight to maintain, one which more and more civilians are beginning to fight for. An Ideal mankind has fought for and won for millennia, you are in a war that you cannot win, From Xerxes to Attila, from Salamis to Port Stanley. Regimes and Empires like Rome, Greece, even to a degree the British Empire fell because freedoms were impinged upon. The Health Acts imposed on us are no better than the Nuremburg decrees; at least Jews were allowed houses even if they were slums, smokers get shelters not legally fit for swine to inhabit. It is merely a comparison but I am sure you will consider invoking Godwin’s law (which has no legal basis) would you not agree that only a Nazi would require shielding by Godwin’s law?

I too believe that the health of our nation, the future generations, are very worth fighting for but not at the cost of freedom for a quarter of the nation, after all Sheila of what use is health if you are not free to enjoy it?

Unlike your statement Sheila this is posted where the people may express their views freely, they may find that some will disagree with their posts but that is all part of being free is it not?

The link for which this post is based is below:

http://sheilaashscotland.wordpress.com/

Tuesday, 20 July 2010

The shape of things to come…

for the smoker!
FASCISM Three un Lucky Strikes and your out!
A new anti-smoking ordinance in municipal parks and recreation areas stipulating a possible jail term for three-time offenders is being condemned by a Georgia-based trade organization for retail tobacco shops.
Where are the smokers in this scenario? Are they (we) so self loathing of ourselves (themselves) that we (them) masochistically take beating, after beating, after metaphorical beating!

The trade organization for retail tobacco shops in Denville, New Jersey are saying what Freedom2Choose have been saying from the very beginning.
"We can only assume that the council has been duped by anti-smoking forces who use unscientific and often false claims to support their outlandish allegations," said Chris McCalla, legislative director of the International Premium Cigar & Pipe Retailers Association (IPCPR).
Yes the council in your town has most certainly been ‘duped’ as you say. Not only that, national governments have been ‘duped’ by “anti smoking forces” the world over, who have persistently lied, fabricated, and faked statistics in order to make you, the smoker, feel worthless and a burden on society, even the ‘new society’ that our new Prime Monster talks about!
The township council, in a 7-0 vote last Tuesday night, adopted the anti-smoking ordinance which includes parking lots, bleachers, playgrounds and adjoining sidewalks among the prohibited locations.
Locally I know nothing about my council and how it works and have never attended any council meetings and I can only conclude from the above that nobody in Denville does either. I can’t believe that there was absolutely no opposition to such a far reaching ordinance?
While first-and-second-time  [smoking] offenders face only fines and/or community service, anyone caught smoking for a third time risks "any combination of fine, imprisonment and community service determined by the municipal court," according to the ordinance.
And the anti-smokers say they don’t despise you, they don’t want to denormalise you, they don’t want to stigmatise you…they just want you to give up that that they most hate…YOU! You and your hateful habit of smoking tobacco.
"This is over the top as far as abuse of individual rights goes," IPCPR's McCalla said in a statement provided by his organization.
"Many municipalities have banned smoking on city properties, but few equal the onerous penalties implied with Denville's ban," he said.
Yes Mr. McCalla it is most definitely and abuse, but individual rights go well out of the window where tobacco control fascists are concerned, a suicidal lunatic who straps xxx number of pounds of Semtex around their waist and killing xxx number of innocent people around them has more rights than a smoker, and they are dead! Oh, wait, smokers and their SHS has killed more people than the first and second worlds put together…even your dog! Maybe smokers should be put into gas chambers because they wouldn’t conform to ‘Arian’ perceptions of the perfect human being.
In response, Mayor Ted Hussa said the ordinance is aimed more at education than in actually sending anyone to jail.
Education, or Re-education…now where have I heard that before?
"If it gets enforced once, I'd be happy. It's just there to scare people," Hussa said.
And there it goes, a politician admitting that his main goal in life is to SCARE PEOPLE!  Which is what Tobacco Control is all about, as if there wasn’t a clue in the title, scare people then you can control them.
Hussa added that, with many children present in parks and recreation areas and in light of medical evidence on second-hand smoke health risks, that it is not unreasonable to restrict smoking.
Nothing is unreasonable when you bring the children into play for your atrocious behaviour, ask Sadam Hussain, sorry, you can’t because he was executed because of his Hitleresque  modus operandi.
Founded in 1933, the IPCRP provides assistance to retailers "to fight repressive and onerous tobacco legislation," according to its website.[Ed: Can’t find a link to that website, wonder why?] In Massachusetts, for example, the group is opposing a proposal that would require tobacco retailers to post photos of cancerous lungs.
So, the IPCRP has been fighting such things since 1933, so when did our own version of the IPCRP come into action? Do we have one??
Oh, and those cancerous lungs:
"You have no idea where these pictures are from or if they're doctored," spokesman Tony Tortorici charged.
Yes we do Tony, they are doctored, make no mistake!

All UK residents take a chill pill, this is America and it would never happen here…would it?

Sunday, 18 July 2010

Firebug-The UK tour

 Posted in absentia by Phil Johnson, Chairman of Freedom2Choose.

Firebug

Here is a story that deviates from the norm as ASH (spit), CRUK (spit) do not enter into the equation. Unfortunately tobacco Control do-to a certain degree.

One of our members goes by the name of Juliette Tworsey, a pretty girl with a penchant for music. To that end she formed a group a while back that are quickly gaining a name for themselves over in the States.

Firebug1

From leading in bigger name bands Firebug have quickly risen up the musical ranks so that they now star as the main attraction at concerts.

Juliette is a girl full of life, every day is a new challenge as she and the boys march relentlessly onward in the music world. However, she has one major gripe – the smoking ban! She said, ”it is ridiculous when playing inside that anything up to 70% of your audience are hanging around the exit doors, or even outside, because they can’t smoke indoors. In the States, when we do an outside gig it is fantastic as everyone stands together to enjoy the music – smokers & non smokers alike, the whole atmosphere just lights up!”

The good news is that Firebug are coming over here very, very soon folks. Here is a list of their tour dates.


Upcoming Shows
28 Jul 2010 21:30 Dublin Castle London, UK, UNITED KINGDOM
29 Jul 2010 22:00 Riff's Bar Swindon, Wiltshire, UNITED KINGDOM
30 Jul 2010 22:30 The Wilmington Arms London, UNITED KINGDOM Find Tickets
1st of Aug 2010 12:00 Sonisphere Festival Knebworth Knebworth, Hertfordshire, UNITED KINGDOM Find Tickets

Read more: http://www.myspace.com/firebug#ixzz0u1gkTsKh

Have any f2c’ers in the London/Swindon/Knebworth areas the free time to go see Firebug? Juliette has assured me that Freedom2Choose T-shirts will be worn to promote the cause for as Juliette says herself, “Tobacco Control are going too far when they interfere with peoples human rights. We never have a problem with smokers/non smokers but TC has created one!”

Clipboard02
 Click picture to enlarge

Blogger Tags: , , , , ,

Friday, 16 July 2010

Put ASH out on it’s ASS!

We’ve known it for years, ASH and Tobacco Control are nothing but liars in the pay of big pharmaceutical companies. Both take their thirty pieces of silver from big pharma to push their useless NRT products. Now ASH have bowed to the inevitable knowledge that NRT patches and gum are virtually useless.

And for years now, ASH, Tobacco Control and the pharmaceutical industry have been equating smoking with drug addiction.

Now, it seems, ASH is not so sure.
Habit, not nicotine, prompts cigarette cravings
Are smokers hooked on nicotine, or on the habit of smoking itself? That's the question posed by an ingenious study on smokers who worked as flight attendants, which found cravings for the next cigarette were just as strong on short-haul as long-haul flights. The study authors say this suggests nicotine replacement therapy may not be the most effective way to help someone quit smoking.

No, NRT is not the “most effective”, it’s next to useless but it’s nice to see that you are not calling smokers addi…
What do we know already?

Nicotine is an addictive substance, and that's part of what makes smoking hard to quit. However, many people stop smoking for weeks or even months but take up the habit again much later, when all nicotine cravings should be gone. People often say they start smoking again because of stress, or because they're in a situation they associate with smoking, such as having drinks with friends who smoke.
I suppose that lying is a hard addiction habit to give up eh.
We know NRT can improve people's chances of giving up smoking, but it doesn't mean you won't start smoking again. In one study, 9 in 100 people quit smoking for a year with the help of NRT, but only 5 in 100 were non-smokers eight years later. We also know that other types of support, such as advice from a doctor, nurse or counsellor, can help.
You can read the rest of the above here. We at Freedom2Choose know there’s only one way to stop smoking and it is definitely not coercion, denormalisation nor smoking bans! Willpower is best, always!


It’s time Mr. Clegg, Mr. Cameron, to decommission ASH. It’s not fit for purpose.

Update: Oh the lies by Tobacco Control just keep being uncovered.

A bad week for the tobacco control lobby just got worse. In advance of the publication next week of a "damning dossier that details how health officials and anti-smoking charities teamed up to push the tobacco display ban through Parliament despited discredited costings and unproved health assumptions will be presented at Parliament next week"
 H/T to Simon Clarke and Taking Liberties for update above.

Update 2: Here's an article written by Steve Cross from F2C for Forces network that I think is worth reading. It's all about the fraud that is NRT.

Are you listening Mr. Clegg & Co?

Smoking bans, any smoking bans, are not wanted nor asked for and the American city of  Waukesha in Wisconsin has politicians lining up to get rid of the newly introduced smoking ban there. Are you listening Clegg and Co?

Transcript of video:

The statewide workplace smoking ban that went into effect last week is starting to spark debate among candidates for Wisconsin Governor.

Republican candidate, Mark Neumann of Waukesha, calls it a "classic example" of government overstepping its bounds. He says the smoking ban is not in his top-25 priorities if elected, but says he would sign a repeal if it made it to his desk.

"Last Friday night when we went out for a beer and a fish fry the place was smoke-free," said Neumann. "On a personal level, I very much enjoyed that. But as Governor it's a different kind of decision. I believe it's an issue that should come down to local control."

His opponent in the Republican primary, Milwaukee County Executive, Scott Walker, has since taken a similar stance publicly.

"I've said for the past year-and-a-half during the debate that I don't think the government should be involved in telling small businesses what they should or shouldn't do in a variety of issues," said Walker.

Democratic candidate Tom Barrett, who has spoken out in favor of the ban, has criticized Walker's approach.

"When I read Mark Neumann's comments on the smoking ban, I wondered to myself how long it would take Scott Walker to flip flop," said Barrett in a statement. "It's clear Walker will say and do anything in this campaign, even if it means blatantly contradicting himself within just a few days or hours."

Walker denies changing his views. He says he was focused on officially entering the race last week.

"Because I said at the time, it was premature for me to be talking about it when I was filing 15,000 signatures, I wanted to talk about that -- in no way constitutes a position change."

The ban would have to be repealed by the state legislature before it could be signed by whoever is elected Governor. Which party will control the Statehouse will also be decided by November elections.

All three candidates say job creation remains their top priority.

Wednesday, 14 July 2010

Nazis, Smokers, foster parents, John Gaunt and Freedom of speech!

blogbanner
John Gaunt lost his job because he  invoked Godwin's Law, thank goodness suntalk radio gave him a job where the righteous do not have a say, but an opinion.

A non statuted law that righteous people envoke when they don't like the arguement, and is often used when someone, anyone, argues their case against authoritarianism. Nowadays you can be unashamedly kicked out of a job because you defend smokers. Can you remember when signs used to say “no Irish, Blacks or homosexuals?”. In this case Jon defended the rights of smokers to be caring, sharing individuals. But one man is not standing for this. He clearly is no pushover! He is no pushover where liberty is concerned. He draws the line spectacularly! And he pulls no punches.

So what has he done to incur the wrath of the righteous?  Well he called a councillor a Nazi because he dared to challenge him for saying that “smokers shouldn’t be allowed to foster children”. He, Jon Gaunt, is a never smoker but the pettiness of some people really got to him.
Listen to the interview below, it’s explosive!





Tuesday, 13 July 2010

Take these chains-err, no, you don’t know what’s good for you! Who’s your Nanny?

emma_thompson_nannymcphee2
So nanny is being shown the door. After years of faithful service she has been told to pack her bags and be on her way. From here on we will run our own lives, without her constant chivvying – making our own choices, for good or ill.
Now your talking Jeremy! Oh, you were being sarcastic
Andrew Lansley, the trim 58-year-old health secretary, is impatient with Government efforts to make us fitter or slimmer or healthier. He even took an ill-advised pop at Jamie Oliver, the irrepressible chef and public hero, for his campaign to improve school meals.
I’m warming to Jamie Andrew Lansley by the minute, even though he is a tory. (Sorry, the socialist within me comes to the fore sometimes.)
Reports that the Food Standards Agency was to be abolished were denied yesterday, but last week's revelation that funding of the Government's Change4life campaign to curb soaring obesity rates is to be handed to food firms including Mars, Cadbury and Coca Cola, was not. The direction of travel is clear. When it comes to deciding what is good or bad for us, we are on our own.
We are on our own eh Jeremy, to make our own decisions I suspect…no?
Some will welcome this – those robust individuals who abjure Government regulation as unwarranted intrusion into individual lives. Not me, however. I am an unashamed paternalist – we just need to think more cleverly about paternalism.
Oh Jeremy, you must be a politician masquerading as a human being? “abjure,”  “paternalism!” and “think more cleverly.” In other words you are saying that the plebs just don’t get it so we  you just have to hide the knuckle dusters behind your back while rephrasing the [rhetorical] questions.
OK, I’m being a bit harsh here, not giving you a fair hearing. So, go on, make me see the error of my misspent youth and subsequent dotage? Point me to a sage of all wisdom who I can believe in and mend my life's errors! I need a hero FFS!
Julian le Grand, professor of health policy at the London School of Health Economics and a former No 10 adviser to Tony Blair, has an interesting take on this – he calls it libertarian paternalism. Instead of requiring people to make healthy choices – by giving up smoking, taking more exercise, eating healthily – he has suggested turning things around so the automatic default option is the healthy option, and people have to choose deliberately to depart from it.

Among his suggestions are a proposal for a smoking permit, which smokers would have to produce when buying cigarettes, an "exercise hour" to be provided by all large companies for their employees and a ban on salt in processed food.

The beauty of this idea is that instead of opting in to healthy schemes, people would have to opt out to make the unhealthy choice – by buying a smoking permit, choosing not to participate in the exercise hour or adding salt at the table. The ingenious thing about this approach is that it preserves individual choice, and can therefore be defended against charges of a "nanny state". You are not being made to do anything or being banned from anything. There is no prohibition. It is a softer form of paternalism.
Oh FFS, chain me up now, it’s for my own good!
A study last month showed, more than 1,000 heart attacks were prevented.

Of course it did Jeremey, of course it did.
We may not like nanny but we are going to miss her.
Yes we are Jeremy [missing nanny]. Now it’s time for your meds and don’t forget “A spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down.”

My apologies for the lead picture, posted the wrong one. Here’s nanny as we would like to see her/him:

MARY_POPPINS-5

Oh, and the link at the bottom of the page, well, it says it all really.

Monday, 12 July 2010

The death penalty and the smoking ban-a do not touch from the coalition!

All we asked for was an amendment to the smoking ban here in the UK, we might as well do a Raoul Moat, he gets more sympathy than a smoker!





Well done the coalition, you bunch of W......!

H/T to them that must not be talked about.

Update, this blogger is more erudite than I on the subject above, and he pulls no punches!

Sunday, 11 July 2010

Smoking is a burning issue in Milwaukee. Elect me and I will repeal the smoking ban…

…maybe.
Controversy over Wisconsin's new smoking ban is lighting up the race for governor [ed: smoking ban, lighting up the race…geddit?].
It centers on one candidate's take on the new law.
Who lit this particular match I wonder?
Republican Scott Walker told a newspaper reporter on Saturday that, if elected, he would sign a repeal of the ban.
Way to go Scott, If I was a smoking resident of your fair city I’d vote for y..oh.
But earlier this week, Walker said it was too early to consider exemptions to the smoking ban.
There’s always going to be a butt, I just new it! Hmmm, to early huh? I mean, it’s not as if there is no historical evidence where smoking bans are concerned.
But hey, I’m digressing and interrupting a bunfight between to ideologically opposed political parties who’s candidates for mayor are fighting each other to pull the taxpayers purse strings, right? Wrong:
The new comments come one day after his republican challenger Mark Neumann said he would sign a repeal of the ban if elected.
That’s a big “if” Mark (and would you still fight for the disaffected smoker/property rights/small buisnesses  if you don’t win?) 
Siding with the new Jews and Blacks is surely a vote loser, depriving you of public money office...surely?
Walker's campaign said he's been consistent on the issue, but his opponents don't see it that way.
"I'm a business guy and when we say something we stay put on what we say, and it is what it is with Scott," said Mark Neumann. "Let the people decide."
Mark, Scott, sign the effing paper to repeal this stupid ban!
And Mark, Scott, I am watching this with baited breath even though the video leaves me just as perplexed as the Wisconsin voters!
I guess there’s no business like show political business.
I leave you with Harry Hill and his hilarious skit on one of our notorious bansterbators, who wants to take the fun out of cooking (and eating,) Jamie Oliver:

Saturday, 10 July 2010

Smoking bans are all about health ... except when they're not

Good morning pariahs, non-persons and social lepers.

Toronto’s Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, the largest mental-health facility in the country, has backtracked on a plan to ban smoking from its grounds.

“It’s not a change that was made for clinical reasons,” said Susan Pigott, vice-president of communications and community engagement at CAMH.

While smoking has come under increasing restrictions elsewhere in recent years, the mental-health community has been reluctant to act because of the pervasive view that patients already struggling with mental illness shouldn’t be forced to endure the stress of giving up a habit that many say helps to calm them.

That means that when mental-health centres such as CAMH move to ban smoking, they are likely to be met with resistance from patients – and perhaps even staff concerned about the effect on the psychological state of those in their care.

But those concerns aren’t what prompted CAMH to retreat from its proposal to ban smoking entirely.

Rather, Ms. Pigott said the policy was changed after businesses and residents near the centre’s three main Toronto sites spoke out about having patients smoke in front of their stores or on their lawns.
That's right. It matters not a jot to Canadian care administrators if their self-righteous ban is in the best interests of their smoker patients. Even when concerns are expressed by their own staff as to the wellbeing of those they are employed to protect.

But once real people - you know, those who don't enjoy tobacco - protest at having to look at a smoker or two, heaven and earth must be moved to accommodate them.

In other news, shares in 'Yellow Badge Manufacturing Inc.' made great gains this week.

Thursday, 8 July 2010

ASH to Ashes and the sound of squealing

The heat is on, in these days of crushing governmental debt, to curb public expenditure. Freedom2Choose has made no secret that it wants the coalition government to start by starving fake charities like ASH and so called ‘health’ quangos that are not fit for purpose to stop them leaching money for failed stop smoking policies.

There has been a groundswell of dissent against the smoking ban in pubs and clubs since the 1st of July 2007 with MP’s joining forces with freedom of choice groups, most notably the Save Our Pubs & Clubs campaign led by conservative MP Greg Knight calling for an amendment to allow smoking back in pubs and clubs.

The latest MP to join the ranks of MPs to call for smoking to be allowed back in public houses is Brian Binley who has initiated an EDM (Early Day Motion.) His EDM states:
"Any review should consider a balanced and proportionate amendment to the legislation, which allows for segregated smoking rooms or areas within pubs, bars and clubs provided that effective smoke extraction systems of an authorised standard are installed, enabling smokers to be accommodated in comfort indoors without impacting on non smokers and staff whilst reducing intrusive noise to many who live close to such establishments, thus helping to safeguard the future of many in the licensed trade. And that any changes to the smoking ban legislation thereafter should be made on the basis of evidence, fairness, proportionality recognising the importance of such institutions to the nation’s social life and community wellbeing."
With this latest attack on the anti business smoking ban it was inevitable that the pigs would start squealing as they could smell the aroma of apple sauce:
Responding to a call by a group of MPs for the re-introduction of smoking in pubs, ASH said that there was little public support for such a measure. In fact, ASH research suggests the opposite to be true - ie that smokers would welcome an extension of the smoking ban rather than a relaxation of the law.
ASH and their research has been pulled to pieces by numerous bloggers and writers of note.

To bolster their argument that pubs should die and smokers should shiver in the cold to have a smoke they turned to the ‘heart attack’ miracle much vaunted by the MSM but roundly trashed by those that have a closer look.
Recent research from the University of Bath shows how smokefree legislation has accelerated the reduction in heart attacks (a drop of 2.5% on top of the long term trend) and saved the NHS in England more than £8 million in the first year.
And of course us smokers just lurv the ban, innit’
With every passing year the smokefree law gets more and more popular and now commands the support of 80% of English adults with support growing fastest among smokers.
And, of course, the much welcomed smoking ban has not harmed pubs and clubs, in fact (to them (ASH) in their dreamlike state) are positively thriving:
In response to claims that the law has been bad for the licensed trade, government figures show the number of premises licensed for "on sales" actually increased by 5% the year England and Wales went smokefree.
I’ll finish with their number one mouthpiece Martin (dogbreath) Dockrell:
"All the evidence points to high and growing support for the smokefree law, including among smokers. There just isn't the evidence to support a return to the bad old days of smoky pubs and clubs. Instead of rolling back a law that is working well, we would urge the Government to focus on a comprehensive tobacco control strategy that will continue to drive down smoking rates and improve public health."
Apple sauce Martin?

pigletsfreerange_jup Feeding time for the pigs will soon be over.

Tuesday, 6 July 2010

I suppose a 'thank you' is out of the question

Despite the protestations of financially illiterate anti-smoking lunatics, smokers contribute more than their fair share to the public purse.

For example, smokers cost the NHS, according to the government, £2.7bn. At the same time, they contribute to the exchequor, again according to the government, £8.8bn (rounded to one decimal place ... and rather more accurate than the cost guesstimate).

So, a £6.1bn surplus to the country, then.

Well, actually, it's more than that once you add VAT (£1.5bn) and pension savings (around £20bn)

But for some reason, the fact that smokers contribute a tax surplus to the economy of around £27bn is lost amidst the noise from those who do the exact opposite and actually do drain money from the state.

Just one of those things, I suppose.

However, it would seem that there is now another reason for smokers to be lauded.

Non-smokers Pay Lower Critical Illness Premiums

According to a recent research carried out by Moneysupermarket and dedicated to the 3rd anniversary of the smoking ban in the UK, ex-smokers managed to save a total of £10,000 since 2007.
Now, insurance is a zero sum game. Risk is calculated to achieve a given profit margin for the insurer and the premiums set as a result. So for every policyholder who saves money, someone else pays extra.

If such savings are being made by non-smokers, it follows that smokers are paying more ... unless the insurance companies have decided to unilaterally cut their profit margins, of course. Hardly likely, eh?

Great news for non-smokers, then. They get their health care paid for by smokers and also benefit from lower insurance premiums covered by tobacco users.

You'd think they would be laying palm leaves in our paths by now, wouldn't you? Still, we're not proud - a simple 'thank you' would suffice.

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails

Pages on this blog