Smoke prices raising will raise crime!
Posted by: diaooraa
5th May 2012 12:50pm
If the government raises the price of smoke suffnificately in the sort period of time it will put smokers that dont want to quit into shock and will not push them into quitting, it will just cause more people with already little money to become poorer in this bad time of the ecconamy, with little jobs around they will be more likely to take up ellegal work to earn more money to pay for there habbit or begin to steal smokes from people or shops causing the crime rate to increase. The government doesnt truely want New Zealand to be smoke free as they make too much money out of it, if they really did they would make the tobbacco companys slowly decrease the amount of niccatene so that it would be less adictive to people started and easier for people to quit, if they did this so minuetly people wouldnt even notice the differance, causing no fuss over it all. Or why dont they put some of the money they make off smokes towards finding something that gives people the same affect, same taste, pretty much identicul but doesn't have or the bad health affects??
You must be a member to reply to this chat topic. Click here to sign in.
Help Caféstudy members by responding to their questions, or ask your own in Café Chat, and you will get the chance of earning extra rewards. Caféstudy will match these and donate equally to our two chosen Australian charities.
Australian Marine Conservation Society are an independent charity, staffed by a committed group of scientists, educators and passionate advocates who have defended Australia’s oceans for over 50 years.
ReachOut is the most accessed online mental health service for young people and their parents in Australia. Their trusted self-help information, peer-support program and referral tools save lives by helping young people be well and stay well. The information they offer parents makes it easier for them to help their teenagers, too.
Comments 25
Crunchy
I have, and they know, and the best that they can do is that they do not smoke around my dh, my dd and their sons.
It comes down to choice. Which do we prefer, hanging on to a killer habit or going through a relatively short rough time and being the cleaner for it?
Anonymous
It's a given that I am a smoker of 47 years. I am 65, run the mile in less than 7 minutes, and can easily blow out candles immediately afterwards. However, despite all its protestations, the Australian Federal Govt has shot itself in the foot with everything that it has issued in its attempts to "stop smoking". Firstly, it put out some figures supposedly stating how much "smoke related illnesses" cost us. Figures from the ABS show that Govt revenue from packaged cigarettes sold in Australia in 2009 averaged more than $26m/day, that's approx $9.5b/year! Secondly, in past years, various govt's have legislated that dangerous or poisonous products must show what is contained in the package or container. THAT IS THE LAW!!! However, in its wisdom, the Govt has covered these up, with Pictures and messages that nobody takes any notice of. Thirdly, the supposed plain packaging of Tobacco products is to dissuade young people from the "pretty colours" and the peer pressure that encourages young people to smoke. . I have many friends, both smokers and non-smokers. Those that still smoke and the ones that have given up say they were not influenced by friends or others to commence smoking. Nobody held them down
and forced them to smoke - it was a choice they individually made. Finally, those who complain about smoking when walking in the open air, don't forget about the fumes from traffic, trains (including electric), planes flying overhead., and the many ships sailing our shores, collectively putting more dangerous gases into the air that we breathe.
diaooraa
Hi again, because i would just think that before you go out and try to change a strangers minds opinion on a topic you would start more "at home"
diaooraa
Yes i agree humans are never good when it comes to addictions but it has been proven that nicotine plays a very addictive part in smoking so if the levels were decreased, cigarettes would be less addictive giving smokers more of a chance not to take up smoking as a habit, get addicted in the first place, continue to smoke or fail to quit. Knowing how hard it can be to quit if the physical addictive part wasnt as big/bad i beleive it would make quiting easyer
Crunchy
Why do you think I haven't? More to the point, why do you think that you are less important than are they in the scheme of things? Of course you're as important!
diaooraa
So can i just ask why are you on here going on about it when you could be going on to them about smoking
Crunchy
I agree that decreasing the nicotine may help, but I don't believe that nicotine is the only reason people smoke.
And I don't believe that decreasing the nicotine levels, therefore, would mean that more people would be able to quit. We are an addictive species, be it food, salt, sugar, booze, exercise, sleeping, TV or any other drug.
Also, I do believe that when you give in to your cravings for cigarettes (not just nicotine), you do feel sorry for yourself. Along with the guilt.
Crunchy
Smoke, in and of itself, is poisonous. That's why smoke is the killer in bushfires and home fires. To not have smoke is to not have cigarettes. Would you rather I vomit in your lap or face the next time you light up and then YOU can moan about it?
For some reason, I really appreciate not losing my last meal...
My husband's sons haven't given up probably for the same reason/s as you... Look in the mirror.
And you are so full of yourself that the idea of somebody wanting you to save your own life and the lives of your children means nothing?
diaooraa
The point is which i said at the start of the topic if they reduced the nicotine (which is known to be HIGHLY ADDICTIVE) people would have more of the chance to quit long term/sucessesfuly, never getting addicted in the first place and more likey to try to quit. I have tried to quit before and like most used-to-be smokers will tell you it isnt easy and most of the things they give you that are apparently ment to help, dont! Also i do wonder how you get the whole "feeling sorry for yourself" part out of the comment above?
diaooraa
Then why dont they create a "greener" smoke as a replacement then so that others like you can stop moaning about it. And why dont your husbands sons stop smoking now then
Crunchy
I wonder how much better you would do and, in the future, be able to maintain doing if you had never smoked or would stop now, Spider.
My husband's sons were encouraged to smoke by an uncle to whom they both looked up. They still smoke and regret it hugely, especially now that they each have a son of their own. So I tend to think that the people to whom you've been talking, Spider, have either not been honest with you or not been honest with themselves.
I tend not to vomit with the fumes from traffic. I do with smoking.
And why increase the amount of noxious fumes in the air with smoking? We are getting 'greener' with the fumes that are being put out there, so why bring that up? Are cigarettes getting greener over the decades? I don't think so!
Crunchy
Of course you agree, diaooraa! Why would you not? And why not use an excuse to feel sorry for yourself because you don't want to give up a killer habit? It's not just the nicotine that's addictive. Try mints.
diaooraa
Thank you very very much i agree with 99.999% of your points in this topic!! its true there are many things out there that are just as bad for you or even worse that isnt illegal or is around us everywhere all day. if the government is going to start pickng and choosing what people are/arnt allowed to consume then why arent they baning microwaves, alcohol, cars or fatty foods? its the same thing, there fats behind it that they may cause death and parts of them are bad for you in ways! What happened to peoples right to opinion and all of that.
Crunchy
Let me state first that I am a virulent anti-smoker. If I had my way, ALL directors of tobacco companies and ALL tobacco growers would be up on charges of first degree murder because they KNOW what they are doing.
I am allergic. I catch the wrong whiff when I am down the street, and I start coughing uncontrollably, then eventually vomit. This is not a good look. As I say to people, "Nobody wants to see what I had for my last meal again."
The 'chop-chop' market has always been there. It always will be. Humans have a tendency to stupid addictions, including me, BTW.
I am hoping increased prices will, however, push people into quitting.
I saw a woman today at a major local shopping centre, smoking around her toddler. I really felt like going up to her and asking her, "So tell me, loving mother, what would you do if someone your child loved put arsenic and cyanide into their food? Or insisted that they stay in a locked garage with the engine of the car running, filling their young lungs with carbon monoxide? Because that's what you are doing when you smoke around your child. Arsenic, cyanide, carbon monoxide, up to TEN THOUSAND other chemicals, including DDT if the tobacco has been partially sourced from a Third World country that has not yet banned its use."
How can people justify killing those that they love the most, or, almost as bad, continue to commit suicide and leave those loved ones without them, sometimes at a very early age?
I don't know of anything that can give the same effect, same taste but without the bad health effects.
I wonder if the NZ Gov. would realise how much it would save on health bills over the decades if they banned smoking, even if it was just in public and around children. Now, that would be interesting!
diaooraa
No i do not deny that smoking can increase chances of death but i find that its not to such a severe degree as they keep say. Also people dont usually die that younge from smoking, more actual younge people die from many other thing. I think that a childs up bringing would be worse on them creating more negatve effects on them/there life from being miss treated or beaten from there parent compared to them dying as like i said 40-60 isnt that young and its still rare for a 40 year old to dye solely from smoking. But yes its plane and simple... Smoking is bad for people but the key thing i beleive is that the government is going around it the wrong way when theres many better ways. And on top of that over 60% of people in nz probably already have bad teeth anyways smokers or non-smokers since the price to go to the dentist is soo high in new zealand.
Crunchy
diaooraa, to throw this back at you, because you have taken a small piece of my reply earlier: so you think that it is better for the parent to die early and horribly, depriving the child of a parent than to get angry for a relatively short while as his/her body goes through withdrawals?
Statistics are interesting things, as I'm sure you've already discovered. Are you now saying that smoking does NOT cause premature death or even death at all and therefore something so incredibly solveable should not be because of that addiction or some supposedly skewed statistics?
Also, cancer cells have been known to stay dormant for quite some time. Years or decades. What would have set them off originally? Certainly not a nice smile.
diaooraa
So your saying that when a parent gets angry at there child when there playing up and there all ready pissed off from wanting a smoke and in some bad cases would increase the chance of the child getting beaten thats better then smokers carrying on not paying more for smokers? i am i smoker and im not saying smokings good for you but smokers and non-smokers agree they havent gone the right way around it. and plus what they dint tell you is that the apparent "statistics" behind deaths caused by smoking even cases where people havent smoked for 20/30 or even 40 years are still counted as dyed by smoking causes when most of the body would of already reproduced and most evedence of them being a smoker is gone bythat point
Crunchy
That impatience would be temporary at best, as would the anger towards kids. If that is all that is a side-effect, surely it's better than so many people dying horribly?
diaooraa
Everyone knows that it has effects on people when there trying to give up smoking so what would that do to the community and familys? there would be more crashs for impantiance and road rage, people get angry so kids will get treaded not as nicely. And i think everyone also knows the government will never fully ban it until they have got the last cent of money they can out of it because they make too high of a profit
musicmum
I don't think crime will increase as people always find ways to afford their addictions whether it is smoking or drinking or doing something healthy. Education is the key, to help young people not go down this road. Visits to hospital were people are dying of lung cancer may deter at least some of them. The effect from smoking is actually an illusion,as when a smoker doesn't smoke he suffers a reaction from withdrawals which is uncomfortable and unpleasant so its easier to continue. When I gave up smoking I didn't use anything except my mind to make the decision and not give in to what my body was feeling. Most smokers are unhealthy so increasing healhier food into your diet also makes you feel better and not want to smoke. Being free from this addiction is truly liberating. My only regret is starting smoking in the first place but then we didn't have the knowledge of how bad it was in the 1970s.
diaooraa
I think that famous people need to stop saying they used to smoke and just say dont smoke, cut out the whole when i was young, dumb and partying i smoked i have a friend that started smoking because of a speach a famous person told about how they used to smoke when they were young and always partyed so they thought since they were young it was there time too so they could tell a storey of how they used to smoke and be cool.. thats what they really need to get through that smoking IS NOT COOL. thing is they dont taste nice they dont make you skinny, cool or pretty even smokers addmit they dont do anything great except help with stress, its just an addiction maybe they need to make something to help with stress for smokers to use instead. smokers dont like smoking but cant help it, its like you need it so cost wont do anything and if they do try find other ways to be able to afford tobbacco but cant then what are they going to turn to? crime! or possibly start smoking illigal stuff since that will almost be cheaper! and we all know like teenagers if they really want to keep doing something they will so punishing smokers wont help! there best bet is to try make less people take up smoking while finding a cheap, healthyer substatute that does they same effect as a ciggeratte for the already smoker or wait until theres no smokers left anymore in there own time
chickclaire
Some people very much want to quit. They place this first on their list of desires, and they will pay any price for the packet of smokes that keeps them going every day.
Some people might turn to crime to make their lifestyle more affordable, but not everybody thinks about money this way. Money is only one requirement to continuation of smoking.
You made an interesting point on the subject of Government control over the level of dangerous smoke we are consuming. Are you getting pictures on every brand of smokes there? It's every packet here in Australia!
diaooraa
Yes where getting pictures on the packets here aswell which once again i doubt helps the problem if people dont like it theyl just cover the packet up or put there tobbacco in something else, it would be more likely to affect people if instead of pictures they wrote a parragraph on what can happen as pictures dont explain but once again thats not really going to help if people just dont want to quit yet or if they find it too hard they need to make quitting easier as we all say it will just cause more crime, both smokers, non-smokers and used to be smokers know that!!!
fifi
I -do not believe the Govt care whether or not people smoke., WE smokers are a minority group who apparently have no say about any smoking decisions.The amount of money the government is making is criminal considering not one cent of that goes towards supplementing the various stop smoking gadgets and medications. Everyone wins except the smoker. Talk about discrimination, If the government wanted people to truly quit besides bleeding them dry, the would make cigarettes illegal!
diaooraa
I agree strongly the government does not care and isn't prepared for the consequenses and lets face it even if the government does truely want new zealand to be smoke free for health reasons it wont happen as one it makes them too much money which like you say doesnt go towards quit smoking groups and two the tobbacco companys probably have more money then the governent!