$20 for a pack of Cigarettes in Aus!!! WTF???

[Hendry]

$20 for a pack of smokes in Australia

Is this a law yet or do they have to vote on it?

This Nanny state bullshit is getting out of hand.

[incognito]

will definately open a market for organic nicotiana!

[ThunderIdeal]

which might be a good thing

[Alice]

I think it is a good thing. And I think it will be a good incentive to quit.

It would be a wise move to make the revenue on cigarettes in the from of taxes equal to the cost of smoking on health care etc, as long as we ensure that these taxes are used to pay for that health care for smokers. Then reduce the cost of health insurance etc which are higher because they support the smoking population. For this to work the taxes must be used appropriately, otherwise the government is just profiting from addiction.

People certainly have the right to smoke, but the non-smoking community should not have to pay for health problems arising from it.

And yes, I am a smoker.

[Hendry]

Hopefully it will cause and increase in cigarette smuggling. $20 bucks a pack seems like the most expensive cigarettes in the world? Anybody know of a country where they are more?

illegal cigarettes

Who elects these nanny state politicians?

[Hendry]

I think it is a good thing. And I think it will be a good incentive to quit.

People certainly have the right to smoke, but the non-smoking community should not have to pay for health problems arising from it.

And yes, I am a smoker.

What about alcohol it kills people too? Where does the nanny state stop?, $20 for a schooner would reduce drunk driving ,If gasoline was $20 dollars a liter the "road toll" would drop?

[Alice]

What about alcohol it kills people too? Where does the nanny state stop?, $20 for a schooner would reduce drunk driving ,If gasoline was $20 dollars a liter the "road toll" would drop?

Mate almost everything kills people.

I agree entirely that alcohol can be very dangerous. Just meet my father.

However many people use alcohol in moderation without any ill effects, and in some circumstances, with positive effect it would seem.

Are their positive effects of tobacco? Well as I'm a smoker I certainly convince myself that there are But I'm not sure that I believe it.

[Chiral]

Those bongs are becoming more and more expensive to smoke huh... well for those that spin they will...as for us with our durries, pouches are the way to go...the more they put em up the skinnier my rollies become...soon it will look like I'm a smokin a toothpick..cough cough...cough retch...ahh that's "spwaaatch"...ahh yes cough... that's much better...look at the size of that golly...sorry where were we.

H.

[~shameless~]

"Hopefully it will cause and increase in cigarette smuggling. $20 bucks a pack seems like the most expensive cigarettes in the world? Anybody know of a country where they are more?"

Thats what i first thought as well, not that i'm interested in buying mine from overseas, but i initially thought OK $20 , that gives the crooks another good reason too loot shops or do armed hold ups .

They will see those stats rise before they see any real noticable rise in people quitting.

[Auxin]

If the australian government truly gives a rats ass about the costs tobacco use imposes on the medical system of australia why dont they encourage the development of less carcinogenic strains of tobacco?

The majority of harm caused by tobacco comes from 1) cardiovascular harm from continual nicotine use 2) carcinogenic harm from artifacts of combustion 3) carcinogenic and cardiovascular harm from native tobacco nitrosamine compounds.

Not much you could do about nicotine, you can only reduce it so much and have people still smoke it in preference to other tobaccos. Selective breeding could reduce the resins that produce carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and amines. But most easily selective breeding could dramatically reduce, if not eliminate, the naturally occurring nitrosamine compounds found in tobacco plants. It would be quite simple since the offending nitrosamines are present in their final form in the cured tobacco and are very identifiable and mostly in their final form in the live tobacco plants! The reason low nitrosamine strains were never produced in the US was that at first it would have been an admission to the toxicity of tobacco when the companies were pretending it didnt cause cancer, and now it would be pointless from a profit standpoint because tobacco companies are banned by federal law from claiming that any single tobacco product is less hazardous than another.

It all comes down to greed or cookie cutter war-on-tobacco idiocy, if people would recognize smokers rights they would encourage the development of tobacco with a 1/4 or 1/2 reduced health risk.

Edited July 5, 2009 by Auxin

[faustus]

i think any "unnecessary" dangerous behaviour should be taxed to reflect the true social and medical cost of that behaviour. people are always claiming it's ok to engage in some form of harmful behaviour so long as it doesn't affect anybody else. well, it does, because our taxes go to subsidise the medical costs associated with that behaviour.

if you wanna gorge yourself to death on krispy kremes, then do as you please, but i think junk food should be taxed appropriately to pay for the medical costs. likewise for smoking. and i was a heavy smoker for about 10 years.

it's interesting to see the extent to which the illegal market thrives with an increase in cigarette prices. it's clear that prohibition doesn't work, perhaps regulation doesn't work either?

[Neoshaman]

was quite happy to see this announcement yeah sure its a cash grab but as faustus says the burden placed on our health system by tobacco use is ajoke IMO if you smoke it and you end up with cancer you should be forced to foot the entire medical costs of your treatment why should other tax payers who are a majority of non-smokers be forced to foot the bill for the minorities selfishness and lack of self control

Auxin thats quite a good suggestion as from my understanding its some of the additives used in processing or techniques which actaully make tobacco more harmful

the new display laws make it unlikely that crimianlls will be bothered trying to steal them from shops although i can see the possibility of delivery trucks being a soft target but if that happens too much they will probably just resort to higher security transport Personally I have never seen the value of tobacco which is highly addictive and gives one very little effect in comparison to the long term harm they do to there bodies

As for alcohol my opinion is that night clubs and pubs should be burdened with higher taxes as this is the place where the vast amount of issues with this drug result from RSA legislation is a fuckin joke IMO and pe4ople should be encoraged to reduce their drinking in such venues in order to prevent the anti-social behaviour etc etc. I mean if other things were legal I would be more then happy to pay a government imposed levy to go back into our health care system even if it be 100% of the price again we all know black market costs are inflated approx 300% from production or growth so these things would stiill be cheaper then they are now not to mention you would know exactly what your getting

[MORG]

I'd like to know if smokers ARE actually costing the health system.

Wouldn't the much higher mortality rate of smokers in their middle years drastically reduce the number of pensions we have to pay to these people after their working lives are over?

So that, it is possible smokers represent a net financial gain to the state through cigarette taxes and not collecting their pensions.

I don't know what to think.

[Chiral]

^^^ great point...

Most of the fatalities of modern day smoking are older people who started smoking when it was cool to, and it was advertised everywhere at sporting events, transport, TV and the like...every show on TV had people smoking and you could even smoke in a bar or restaurant or public transport...those people are the ones currently clogging up the health care systems will ciggarette related illness...I would imagine in about 10 years those illness's would taper off sharply with this generation of non smokers...the older ones didn't get the information on the packets and have the increased awareness and high probability of contracting cancer etc, it was very acceptable to smoke...anyone Remember the Paul Hogan Winfield commercials on TV every single day for years and years in the 70's...seems bizzare now though huh...!!! A TAX OUT the smokers will not really make more people stop but it might make anyone considering taking it up think twice...it is a filthy habit when you look at it and it caused irreparable damage to loved ones and society as a general...it is a long hard road to understanding the illness it can cause and is probably the worse social experiment of any nation at anytime.

H.

Edited July 6, 2009 by Hunab Ku

[Drake]

it is a filthy habit when you look at it and it caused irreparable damage to loved ones and society as a general...it is a long hard road to understanding the illness it can cause and is probably the worse social experiment of any nation at anytime.

H.

Very good points, but I would like to add my view on this area that I have marked in bold. I would not say it causes irreparable damage to loved ones, nor dose it do the same thing to society. At least not to a major point. Alcohol on the other hand, HAS done such irreparable damage to loved ones and society. I mean you don't see husbands beet there wives because they are smoking .

Now correct me on this information. The Asian country's many many years ago (and to this day), smokes tobacco A LOT (to my understanding). Yet there rate of cancer was pretty low. Then along came western foods, greasy, fatty foods. Before western foods came, the Asian country's would eat lots of plant stuffs, and some fish. Things like Smoking, drinking, and other chemicals are the seeds of cancer. But these foods that are RICH with animal fats and protein are the fertilizers. Just because you have a bad gene that will cause cancer dose not mean it will activate, you need something to activate it. I been doing some basic research because a FOAF has cancer. And I forget what this practice was called, but they was curing peoples cancer by putting them on a 100% plant based diet. They would show improvement within 1-2 weeks. People with stage 4 type cancer would end up living for 5 years if they were on 100% plant based diet, and did regular training.

Other things like Vitamin B17 will fight cancer. But it's not permitted importation into Australia, because of an obvious reason. They don't WANT to cure cancer, they want to find a way to TREAT IT, to make MONEY off it. And for that reason, the "eating a plant based diet to cure cancer" is looked down apon, saying that its impossible. Do you have any idea how much the pharmaceutical industry makes by keeping the population sick? Only this morning they was talking about the two genes they found that doubles you chance to get melanoma, they sead this will help to find a TREATMENT. And that's all they want to find, a treatment to sustain illness. They don't want to find a cure, they want to find a way to sustain and treat sead illness to make as much money as they can.

I been meaning to make a topic on such an idea. I need to continue my research. Sorry for getting off track in the end there . I will make the topic, once I got some research links to back up my rant .

Edited July 6, 2009 by Drake

[rastazungu]

Not only cigarettes but more ceremonial and cultural types of tobacco, ie, Shisha tobacco are being hit. I ordered $70 worth of shisha tobacco from the states last month and it got taken by customs. They wanted $450 in taxes for them to free the products. This was the first time this has happened in the last 2 years ordering it. Their category for shisha tobacco tax goes under snuff, which is a completely separate category in my opinion. Also the shisha tobacco carries most of it's weight from the honey and fructose syrup they add to it, yet they take this weight as the whole tobacco weight. This form of smoking is a more respected and cultural form, and for anyone visiting Turkey or the Arab states, would know that it is a revered form of congregation and social activity. One shisha lasts for over an hour and the calculated intake would be about half a cigarette between a group of 3- 4 people. Why don't they recognise this instead of categorising it as all identical forms of tobacco usage. This plant has been in use for millenniums, and will continue to be used as such. There has to be radical underground growers and producers to overcome these decisions based on facts from cigarette tobacco, laced with all the chemicals that cause the majority of the health problems associated with smoking. It will be interesting to see what will happen in the future.

[Hendry]

Some people have adverse health effects for use/misues of ethnobotanicals should they ban the whole lot,including this forum or just levy a $15 tax per woodrose seed or thornapple lol See how ridiculous it could get?

The issue is weather or not you want the govenment making decisions for you to keep you safe?

What you can and cannot safetly read, what movies you can watch, what kind of video games are safe for you play and paying $20 for a pack of cigarettes during a recession lol

Where does it end?

Edited July 6, 2009 by Hendry

[Neoshaman]

Some people have adverse health effects for use/misues of ethnobotanicals should they ban the whole lot,including this forum or just levy a $15 tax per woodrose seed or thornapple lol See how ridiculous it could get?

i say to compare woodrose to tobacco smoking there is a major hole in your arguement as for datura my opinion is stupid people should pay their own medical cost in saying that datura use or misuse generally come s about from the pathetic level of miseducation provided by our governments andd restriction put on far safer products

The issue is weather or not you want the govenment making decisions for you to keep you safe? Well they have for every other ethnobotanical you should be thankful its not illegal like a lot of ethnobotanical products which imo are far safer and less adictive personally i would rather pay a tax then have to worry about a criminal record that could well fuck up the rest of my life

What you can and cannot safetly read, what movies you can watch, what kind of video games are safe for you play and paying $20 for a pack of cigarettes during a recession lol

true this labor government thinks they have a god given right to control too many aspects of our lives as have most in the past however i do not feel paying $20 for cigarettes can be lumped into the same category as their ridiculous views on vgideo games the internet or any other stupid media laws as the other topicxs you raised are straight deprevations of liberty which affexct the vast majoprity of the population where as a cigarette tax increase is in line with the majority of socities views and is for health reasons

IMO altghough it be regarded as tax evasion you'd be better off and have less issues simply growing your own then trying to argue against such a tax increase on processed tobacco

Where does it end?

Edited July 6, 2009 by neoshaman

[C_T]

I think its good, if they use the money to combat the medical strain from smokers.

[MindExpansion]

I would not say it causes irreparable damage to loved ones, nor dose it do the same thing to society

So kids watching their parents suffer post-stroke disability isn't doing irrepairable damage to loved ones?

Or a wife losing her husband and provider to cancer after watching hit wither to nothing for 2 years?

And how many potential tax payers die before their time because of smoking...or develop a chronic illness that warrents the payment of disability and renders working impossible.

Aren't these a damage to society in the financial sense as well as the productivity sense?

Peace

[Drake]

So kids watching their parents suffer post-stroke disability isn't doing irrepairable damage to loved ones?

Or a wife losing her husband and provider to cancer after watching hit wither to nothing for 2 years?

And how many potential tax payers die before their time because of smoking...or develop a chronic illness that warrents the payment of disability and renders working impossible.

Aren't these a damage to society in the financial sense as well as the productivity sense?

Peace

Well I did add that it dose do these things, but not to a MAJOR point. I still feel Alcohol dose this in much more of a dramatic way, then smoking. I was waiting for someone to correct me on this matter . So yeah, it dose do the damage in the end, I do agree.

Edited July 6, 2009 by Drake

[~shameless~]

At the end of the day, if it even makes me consider giving up, its got to be a good thing (in some ways).

I am now considering giving up the cigs but before i had this idea, i thought to myself...

" i would think that the price of nicotine gum ( another of lifes great pleasures - i like it!) or other quit smoking aids would go up as well."

I will be waiting to see if this happens, i bet it will.

[Neoshaman]

At the end of the day, if it even makes me consider giving up, its got to be a good thing (in some ways).

I am now considering giving up the cigs but before i had this idea, i thought to myself...

" i would think that the price of nicotine gum ( another of lifes great pleasures - i like it!) or other quit smoking aids would go up as well."

I will be waiting to see if this happens, i bet it will.

I think that would be quite sad and underhanded if the government did this as some of the items you've mentioned have proven quite effective in at least helping people cut down their consumption although nothing surprises me with this bunch of low life pricks runniong our nation

[Hendry]

See this article written before the proposed $20 tax scam.

It discusses how smoking is already heavily taxed in Australia but ALCOHOL isn't but should be lol. Fucking Goodie Goodie politicians trying to trick us into thinking the government should be running your life for you and taxing the shit out of ya (to keep you safe)

Link

"Australia taxes smoking heavily, with the average $5.08 in tax per pack of 20 higher than taxes imposed in Germany, Sweden, Italy or the US, but lower than in France (equivalent to $6) or Britain ($8). "

"One estimate puts the net cost of smoking in Australia at $318million -- not including the costs of passive smoking.

The government raises about $5.6bn from tobacco excise. Although it would be possible to raise more, this would increase the level of smuggling and evasion. "

[Chiral]

I notice they keep raising the prices and taxes but don't ban it...that say's a lot for how much they really care about our health...this country is run on ciggarettes and pokies taxes...I'd hate to think where they would get the money from if they banned them...but they won't will they...nope they just adjust the taxes to scrape a few more coins from out of every working class citizen who is addicted to either or both...you can bet alcohol will cop some heavy taxing if ciggies and pokies ever get outlawed.

H.