'Ban smoking at outdoor restaurants in Sweden'

[Tabrotar]

I never understand why so many of my fellow non-smokers get a hard on for trying to harass the smokers more and more. As gypsybob mentioned before they contribute quite a bit on taxes for the state. And why first ban it inside restaurants and then say: Well you know what? We decided before that you have to go outside now you have to go home (or somewhere else) .

[Dug]

I never understand why so many of my fellow non-smokers get a hard on for trying to harass the smokers more and more. As gypsybob mentioned before they contribute quite a bit on taxes for the state. And why first ban it inside restaurants and then say: Well you know what? We decided before that you have to go outside now you have to go home (or somewhere else) .

It doesn't make the habit any less disgusting. We should be educating people further to never pick up the habit in the first place so we don't have to rely on the extra taxes us smokers pay.

[nonameelf]

I never understand why so many of my fellow non-smokers get a hard on for trying to harass the smokers more and more. As gypsybob mentioned before they contribute quite a bit on taxes for the state. And why first ban it inside restaurants and then say: Well you know what? We decided before that you have to go outside now you have to go home (or somewhere else) .

Because it's a health issue. 2nd hand smoke can still cause cancer and a variety of other things.

[Pwellzor]

Probably not where gypsybob is from, the taxes on tobacco are very high in the UK (so presumably they are in the Channel Islands as well) and more than pay for what they cost the NHS and economy as a whole.

I've never seen a study that compares actual data to say that smoking healthcare costs < cigarette tax revenue. For any country.

[Kalis]

I've never seen a study that compares actual data to say that smoking healthcare costs < cigarette tax revenue. For any country.

They have done them for the UK, but the UK has very high taxes on tobacco, so they may not be representative for other nations.

[Pwellzor]

They have done them for the UK, but the UK has very high taxes on tobacco, so they may not be representative for other nations.

I would like to see this study. The numbers I've found in the last 10 minutes of looking almost abate the costs exactly.

[Deleted]

http://www.thelocal.se/20160607/ban-...ants-in-sweden



What do you think about smoking bans in public places?

smoking is disgusting and it impacts my health when people near me smoke. So it should be banned everywhere IMO, except private residences, and even then not when children are present.

[Kapadons]

In Texas you can smoke on an outdoor patio of an establishment unless the restaurant says no. And the only way to smoke inside is if the area is enclosed and uses a separate ventilation system and signs are posted its a smoke area. I've always hated that smoking has been legally banned in restaurants. If a restaurant wants to allow its clientele to smoke, people are free to not visit the establishment if they don't want to be around it.

Seems like people just trying to find something to bitch about. If someone is smoking a few feet away from you outside, the health risk to you is non existent.

[W1sp]

If it is in outdoor areas, then I think it should be up to the establishment.

I as a Swedish smoker think agree with you. But I also think that smoking should be allowed indoors if the Establishment wishes for it to be. So the Firm gets to make its own rules about smoking.

One thing i wonder is what will happen to all the turkish cafés around town with the waterpipes. Will they be banned to?

[Tabrotar]

It doesn't make the habit any less disgusting. We should be educating people further to never pick up the habit in the first place so we don't have to rely on the extra taxes us smokers pay.

Sorry but it´s not up to you to decide what one can do with his life thank you. If i want to start smoking right know should the thought/healt police walz into my home and arrest me for making a decision going against your belives?

[Dug]

Sorry but it´s not up to you to decide what one can do with his life thank you. If i want to start smoking right know should the thought/healt police walz into my home and arrest me for making a decision going against your belives?

No that's why I'm not calling for an outright smoking ban. If they banned it today I'd still find ways to smoke tomorrow (I'm a smoker unless you missed that). I feel people should be able to harm their bodies in whatever way they wish. However you don't have a right to harm other peoples bodies with your second hand smoke.

[lonely zergling]

They have done them for the UK, but the UK has very high taxes on tobacco, so they may not be representative for other nations.

If you only look at the costs for treating the diseases it may look good, but there is the reduced life expectancy /reduced productivity / lost tax money because of that = bad overall for society.

A package of cigarettes would need to cost 40€ to cover all the negative effects smoking has on society (with german taxes).

There are direct costs and indirect costs of smoking.

[tumppu]

Pretty much this.

why does gov't need to get involved in how a business operates?

If they want to allow smoking, and you don't like it, go somewhere else. If they lose enough money they will change.

This isn't USA, Swedish govt actually pays for the healthcare, when one of the smokers keels over from whatever, so they have an interest in butting into this. Also, since it's outdoors, the smoke can and will drift off the premises, so saying "business should dictate" does not cut it. However, I'm all for cigar and tobacco lounges/bars which are indoors and if you want to buy and puff your own, you can do it in at home or outdoors.

[Kapadons]

Sorry but it´s not up to you to decide what one can do with his life thank you. If i want to start smoking right know should the thought/healt police walz into my home and arrest me for making a decision going against your belives?

there are many people on this forum that would argue that yes they should. Dugraka is likely one of them.

[Kalis]

I would like to see this study. The numbers I've found in the last 10 minutes of looking almost abate the costs exactly.

ASH do them, they are a lobbyist group though.

The tax revenue from tobacco and tobacco companies > NHS costs and loss of productivity.

Unless they add in additional losses for smoke breaks, which seem a bit dubious as most companies do not allow them in Britain - you would normally have people smoking on tea breaks and lunch. Even then you have to add in taxes paid by employees of the tobacco industry and lowered costs of people not living as long on average.

[klogaroth]

If you want to ban smoking just ban smoking and deal with the consequences.

The health excuse.......I'm not buying it. You just wanted to appear to be doing something.

Sitting in a cubicle in an office all your life is just as bad for you (some have argued worse for you), but there's no drive to ban offices.

[Murderdoll]

Does Sweden, like many other countries receive massive tax dollars from cigarette sales?

They want to ban smoking, but dont want to lose that revenue. So lets just make it harder and harder.

[Pwellzor]

Sorry but it´s not up to you to decide what one can do with his life thank you. If i want to start smoking right know should the thought/healt police walz into my home and arrest me for making a decision going against your belives?

Nope, but when smoking related illnesses put a 170 billion dollar (in the US) and 10 billion pound (In the UK) Burden on the healthcare system, you will sure as fuck be asked to pay a portion. (By the way, in the US, tobacco excise taxes only amount to 17 billion dollars. Not even close to covering the negative externalities in healthcare alone.)

No one is going to force you to quit, but not many are going to be super enthused when you blow acrid smoke near them while theyre eating.

[Kalis]

If you only look at the costs for treating the diseases it may look good, but there is the reduced life expectancy /reduced productivity / lost tax money because of that = bad overall for society.

A package of cigarettes would need to cost 40€ to be cover all the negative effects smoking has on society (with german taxes).

There are direct costs and indirect costs of smoking.

I am using UK figures and not even the anti-smoking groups come up with a figure anywhere near your €40 per pack.

The figures do include loss of productivity, as well as additional costs for fires, etc.

[Dug]

there are many people on this forum that would argue that yes they should. Dugraka is likely one of them.

Yes, I, the smoker who smokes a pack and a half a day wants the government to come and force me to stop smoking . I said I don't mind public smoking bans because it serves a purpose, which is protecting other peoples health and well being.