Forum menu
Back in the day, I was smoking 30 to 40 cigs a day.
Even that would be difficult today due to not being able to smake at work and down the pub. My mum only ever managed anything like that when she was at home full time. I doubt any workplace would tolerate you going out for a cig 3 or 4 times per hour.
Nicotine is VERY addictive.
Not denying that, but banning cigarettes (especially just for one cohort of society) isn't going to solve that problem.
Not denying that, but banning cigarettes (especially just for one cohort of society) isn’t going to solve that problem.
You seem so sure of that with absolutely no data to back it up. It's like an article of faith.
I have no idea whether it will work or not because I have no data from a similar experiment.
However, we know that the later you start smoking the less likely you are to become addicted and I can see a clear theoretical case that this could significantly increase the age that people start smoking.
And given the graduated implementation any unforeseen effects are going to be fairly limited.
There is so much to gain and so little risk I'm really really struggling to see why anyone would be opposed beyond some sort of religious type belief in 'liberty and individual freedom'.
You seem so sure of that with absolutely no data to back it up.
Presume that's a joke, or are you unaware that lots of people take illegal drugs?
Also you might want to look at the experience of the US when they attempted to ban the sale of alcohol.
It's not alcohol. It's not a total ban.
Restrictions on tabacco has reduced the use of tobacco, and the number of new addicts each year. That's why the industry, and its paid shrills like Truss, are against any further restrictions on tobacco.
The evidence is that restrictions can work for this drug on the social scale. Other drugs are not the same.
Presume that’s a joke, or are you unaware that lots of people take illegal drugs?
Also you might want to look at the experience of the US when they attempted to ban the sale of alcohol.
A bit different from tobacco though.
Smoking tobacco doesn't get you high. All it does is ease the withdrawal symptoms that you are feeling.
Also, it's not an outright ban, taking it away from people who already use it, unlike prohibition. Also, again alcohol is a lot more pleasurable than nicotine.
I'm not saying a ban would work but tobacco is a bit different from alcohol or illegal drugs. It's very high health risk for very little "reward".
Presume that’s a joke, or are you unaware that lots of people take illegal drugs?
Presume that's a troll now that we've just spent the best part of a page explaining to you why tobacco is not the same as every other drug (and that every other drug is not the same as every other drug).
Also you might want to look at the experience of the US when they attempted to ban the sale of alcohol.
Presume this is also trolling as it's been explained to you several times that it's not a ban.
It’s not a total ban.
It's a total ban for anyone born after 2009. When they reach 18 (assuming they don't start sooner) in a few years time, a new black market in tobacco will be created and that will grow each year as more people are pulled into it. It's bad enough having a black market for all the other drugs out there and we want to create a new one with all the side effects and damage that will cause? More enlightened and sensible countries are getting rid of their illegal black markets in drugs (amazingly the US being one of them!) yet we're going the other way. It's bonkers.
It’s a total ban for anyone born after 2009. When they reach 18 (assuming they don’t start sooner) in a few years time, a new black market in tobacco will be created and that will grow each year as more people are pulled into it.
You forgot to say, 'I think', and instead stated your opinion as fact.
It could be you are correct, of course. And if there are signs a black market has been created purely to cater to 19 year olds who want to smoke then we can evaluate if the problems with this black market are offset by the reduced number of 19 year old smokers.
But no one can say anything for sure until we get some data. Not even you.
More enlightened and sensible countries are getting rid of their illegal black markets in drugs (amazingly the US being one of them!) yet we’re going the other way. It’s bonkers.
The US has legalised some marijuana use in some states, it's not a legalisation of all drugs, and they still spend more money on enforcement than any other country.
And if there are signs a black market has been created purely to cater to 19 year olds who want to smoke then we can evaluate if the problems with this black market are offset by the reduced number of 19 year old smokers.
You seriously think this will ever be rolled back if it's not working? Just like the other black markets have been rolled back to prevent the harm they create? 🙄
Anyway, this is all academic, because as long as Sunak survives the next couple of months he's going to get his wish as unsurprisingly the Labour party have declared full support for it. And he wonders why his fellow tories hate him? We can bookmark this issue for the future but anyone who can see the current state of affairs with drug policy knows how this is going to end up.
You seriously think this will ever be rolled back if it’s not working?
OK, so now we won't try anything new because if it doesn't work the government will be to scared to put things back how they were before?
Anything else we shouldn't try in case it causes problems and the government is too scared to roll it back? Legalising weed? Safe injection spaces?
Tobacco is the only drug that has to get children addicted to its product. As an industry it simply will not survive if it has to rely on adults taking up the habit. Any other drug people can and do start using at any age. I tried mushrooms for the first time a couple of years ago and it was great. I'd happily do it again.
I tried smoking regular cigarettes in my 20s and it was shit and I never smoked again.
Tobacco has a unique business model and this scheme has a real chance of disrupting it.
Edit: oh, and here is some evidence that governments will have no problem rolling it back:
Tobacco is the only drug that has to get children addicted to its product.
Children are already banned from buying tobacco. If this statement is correct then it shows the existing policy of prohibition for under-18s has already failed. Or do you not regard 18-21 year olds as adults? I actually wouldn't be too bothered if they raised the smoking age to 21 and left it at that. It's the total lifelong ban for one age group I'm mostly against because it will create a new and growing black market. And if New Zealand are reversing it why are we copying them?
I actually wouldn’t be too bothered if they raised the smoking age to 21 and left it at that.
I wouldn't mind that either.
In addition I'd like to see the availability of tobacco reduced. Maybe something similar to the Scandinavian alcohol model where you can only buy strong alcohol from the government 'Vinmonopolet' shops.
And if New Zealand are reversing it why are we copying them?
The government literally came out and said the were reversing it because they didn't want to lose the tax revenue. Not because it wasn't working (yay for right wing governments!).
There won't be a black market for 19 year olds wanting to smoke as we now have vaping and smoking is not what is was. The 'beauty' of smoking is that you can just get them from a shop very easily. Once that is not so easy the 19 years olds won't bother.
Young people just don't smoke or drink to anywhere near the same levels as when I was in my prime 30 years ago.
amazingly the US being one of them!
Oregon, one of the US states that decriminalised the possession of small amounts of some drugs back in 2021, are reclassifying them again just 3 years later, while keeping some of the initiatives that allow folks to access rehabilitation centres and medical help for addiction. They're doing it as voters in places like Portland were getting massively fed up with the open dealing, massive spike in O/D in things like Fentanyl and Meth amongst their kids
They’re doing it as voters in places like Portland were getting massively fed up with the open dealing. massive spike in O/D in things like Fentanyl and Meth amongst their kids
Well the problem here is decriminalising use while criminalising supply. It's the worst of both worlds, increase demand but keep supply in the control of criminals. Hardly a surprise that people don't want gangland drug dealers on their street corners. Irregardless though, the US is heading in a more liberal direction on the drugs issue, which is quite something when a few years ago they were putting people away for life under the 3 strikes rule for dealing a bit of weed.
Dazh is right, (did I just say that?)
Remember when David Blunket reclassified cannabis from a class C to a class B drug, (shortly after a period of relaxation of law enforcement for possession in Lambeth / Brixton) a few years ago?
Synthetic cannabis (Spice and the like) filled the gap, leading to greater problems than had existed before, the synthetics being far more dangerous than the natural product. There's still an epidemic of its use in prisons.
The smoking ban created a market for vapes, which the kids seem to love and whilst once they used to have a naughty smoke behind the bike sheds, now they're puffing between lessons and not just the fruity flavours either, they are smoking cannabis oil and derived products, the use of which is becoming an increasing problem in schools.
Smoking is very bad for you, that much is obvious but deploying the legislative hammer can have other negative effects as well that are rarely taken into consideration.
Apparently the biggest factors relating to causing premature death is isolation and lonlness, more than any other specific health condition. I wonder what cumulative effect the closure of all those pubs, cafes and bingo halls after the ban came in had on overall health and mental wellbeing and shortened lives?
Ironically, just before jumping on here I was reading in the MEN. about Jillys / Rockworld shutting down in 2010, the owner attributing its demise to the smoking ban.
So this Rishi bloke, wot a plonker.
I’m no rightwinger (as you know)
Yer not much of a lefty either. You positions you espouse on here are pretty right wing to me. Libertarian right not fascist but right wing all the same
Yer not much of a lefty either.
You know it is possible to be 'on the left' without subscribing to the 'we know best, just do as we say' patriarchal bollocks that often comes from the socialist illuminati? Some of us are capable of thinking outside the outdated boundaries of 19th century revolutionaries.
You positions you espouse on here are pretty right wing to me.
You ought to be judging people's political views according to the country's political centre, not your own. Otherwise, you'd always consider yourself dead centre by definition.
Rishi is dropping his latest and conservative candidate into a boundary change constituency, good Twitter thread below, and below that her LinkedIn bio,
https://twitter.com/fleetstreetfox/status/1751993396321767935?s=20
boys - you're getting boring...again.
dazh - if you were a real geordie your response to anyone who doesn't agree with you would be...see ya ootside an' I'm ganna kick ya **** heed in; none of this properly argued discourse you appear to favour.
Your polite socialist view wouldn't get you far in any of the pubs on Wallsend high street.
Your polite socialist view wouldn’t get you far in any of the pubs on Wallsend high street.
Absolutely true. Thankfully if I'm ever in a place like that I can switch in to pisshead geordie at the drop of a hat (see the football thread).
If you happen to find yourself stuck there...don't forget to include racist and sexist comments with multiple random insults when you talk to/with/at the locals.
You'll be accepted as one of their own.
I'm more than delighted that Wallsend is a very far distant sight in my rear view mirror.
It's not the place; it's the long entrenched (prejudiced) views of a chunk of the population that I'm happy to be away from - as I have been for a very long time.
It's possible that my views of Wallsend are, themselves, prejudiced.
Many years ago I had the *experience* of working with a bloke from Byker; spoke at machine gun speed in a thoroughly impenetrable form of geordie - slowed down x10 it still wouldn't make much, if any, sense
Tribal would not do him justice.
I think you and he share a (not uncommon) surname; you could be related!
somafunk
Full Member
Rishi is dropping his latest and conservative candidate into a boundary change constituency, good Twitter thread below, and below that her LinkedIn bio,https://twitter.com/fleetstreetfox/status/1751993396321767935?s=20
Linkedin bio
Interesting and completely predictable once you read her unofficial bio that guy has tweeted, eh?
If only he really listened to the "will of the people" who no doubt would prefer an election sooner rather than later.
Molgrips
Imno lefty either
Dazh is tbe classic thinks he is on tbe left but is not hence tbe absurd suggestion of being barely middle class earning 3x tbe natioal average and being clueless about the real situation for the majority
Sorry dazh but " champagne socialist" is the closest you get
Sorry dazh but ” champagne socialist” is the closest you get
Well firstly even though I’m on the left I don’t describe myself as a socialist and never have. And secondly where in the rule book does it say that working class people or those on the left have to be poorly paid? I paid attention at school, made some astute decisions and had a bit of luck which put me where I am so not apologising for it.
Many years ago I had the *experience* of working with a bloke from Byker; spoke at machine gun speed in a thoroughly impenetrable form of geordie – slowed down x10 it still wouldn’t make much, if any, sense
Funnily enough I've just spent the last month getting to know a lad like that who was staying at my local pub as he was working locally. The Calder Valley is a very gay/trans friendly place so I had a very amusing conversation with him when I tried to explain to him the difference between sex and gender and that some of the lads behind the bar weren't born that way. It's an interesting exercise trying to penetrate decades of social conditioning and wiful ignorance and prejudice but I think I got there. (he was a nice lad actually behind the hard geordie persona, and I managed to get some of my old accent back)
Dont descibe yourself as socialist but on the left. Dinnae be ridiculous laddie.
The point about your wages and the quote was about showing how out of touch you are not that lefties need to be poor
I earned 6 figures at the end of my career.
Retired from it early, I no longer enjoyed it and didn't realise how stressful it was until I walked away. Now run 3 small businesses with the Mrs.
I take Orwell's stance, there is no Middle Class.
The Middle Class is a fallacy, created to keep the oiks in tow and ensure we have a good supply of Tory voters, people who think they are in a prosperous position but in reality only a few months wageslips from disaster.
That Debbie candidate up there, 6 years at Goldman Sachs too...
I've only one demand of Starmer when he becomes PM, I want an inquiry into Govt Corruption, that reports constantly every little illegal and/or immoral act it finds, and prosecutes immediately when it is identified that someone has broken the law.
In fact if he's to create a standalone court to get the prosecutions 'fast-tracked', sort it - and if they need juries, shout, as I'll be retired by then and more than happy to do it for a few months.
Unless we shut this down as soon as possible, ALL politicians will be tarnished - in fact I constantly hear "they're all the same", abet it is mostly from right-leaning folk as it dawns on them they've been screwed. But it needs nipping, and nipping ASAP.
I earned 6 figures at the end of my career.
Retired from it early, I no longer enjoyed it and didn’t realise how stressful it was until I walked away. Now run 3 small businesses with the Mrs.
I take Orwell’s stance, there is no Middle Class.
The Middle Class is a fallacy, created to keep the oiks in tow and ensure we have a good supply of Tory voters, people who think they are in a prosperous position but in reality only a few months wageslips from disaster.
I describe myself as a Champagne Socialist, mainly to wind up Tory voting friends & acquaintance's who are poor and/or earn bu99er all. If the country was structured and run to the policies they support they'd be one illness/accident/job-loss away from destitution.
Even the Torygraph are now calling for him to call a general election, stop this pointless purgatory and just get it over with
Even they have recognised that installing one of their favoured loon candidates would be a waste, and would rather get Kemi started with a clean slate as leader of the opposition.
Kemi is a rabid right wing loon.
Dont descibe yourself as socialist but on the left. Dinnae be ridiculous laddie.
The problem I have with socialism/socialists is that they have an authoritarian streak that puts a lot of fascists to shame. And authoritarianism is what I despise most of all, because it is the root of pretty much every evil in this world. You can however be a supporter of freedom and anti-authoritarianism and stil think the fruits of labour should be shared rather than concentrated in the top few percent. Individual rights and freedom and economic security and justice are complementary, but many traditional socialists don't seem to understand that.
The point about your wages and the quote was about showing how out of touch you are
Not that out of touch. A govt minister packed in his his £120k job and went back to the private sector because he couldn't afford his mortgage. 🙄
Kemi is a rabid right wing loon.
It tells you everything you need to know about the present Tory party that they are even seriously considering foisting someone as clearly insane as her on the country.
Mind you, they voted by a huge majority for Liz Truss
They not learnt much have they?
And I've heard... he's got a mobile phone! 😮
According to the BBC it's because it's jumping from £800 to £2k, I too was wondering what the rest of his outgoings are in order that a £2k pcm mortgage payment is unaffordable on £100k+ salary, especially given how generous MPs expenses are.
Private School Fees.
Big house, big energy bills.
Holidays.
As an ex-Minister he can probably earned a £100k a year for non-exec directorship for a few days a month.
Half a dozen of them and he's laughing.