Smoking ban verses traffic pollution.?
Your thoughts please.
Answer:
wow, interesting thought. i live in the US in a state that recently passed a smoking ban. I smoke. It's an addiction. So now i don't go out to eat, i don't go out for a drink. Your point makes me wonder what the true motivation behind the ban is. Obviously not the environment. How about banning gas lawn mowers if your yard is under a certain size! Ban gas guzzling vehicles (i'd love to never see an arrogant hummer again) Money is usually the motivation, however i wonder how the ban has affected our already struggling economy.
Live natural, stop driving, smoke pot ;-)
Permaculture? What does that have to do with smoking? They might grow tobacco that way, they don't smoke it that way. And how does permaculture apply to auto exhaust.
Old song, fell from the charts long ago.
They banned smoking because of the potential risk of lung cancer due to second hand smoke. Most other countries in the world have banned smoking in public places and eventually the UK have followed suit! We do need to also reduce out traffic pollution i agree but i think the smoking ban is worthwhile. It will reduce the pressure on the NHS as it is presumed many people will quit smoking because of the inconvinience of having to go outside to smoke. I understand it must be annoying for smokers though! x
banning tobacco and all other drugs (will happen one day) will help people live longer, since those things harm them. Traffic polution is a major problem for the eath, though gloable warming is a mnyth. Its like comparing apples to bannas ( or oranges if you like)
PERMACULTURE ANSWER:
You are confusing two totally different and very complex issues.
To put it very simply. Smoking related long term health problems cost the Government far more than any revenue collected could do regardless of how they taxed it. The UK Governments have known since the 1920s the negative impact on health. The carcinogenic properties were widely reported and a scientific consensus of agreement arrived at in 1946. See links below and other reports below.
1974 – Lalonde Report
1980 – Black Report
1981 – WHO Health for All by the Year 2000
1992 – Health of the Nation
1998 – Acheson Report
1998 – Smoking Kills
1999 – Saving Lives:Our Healthier Nation
2000 – The NHS Plan
2002 – Tackling Health Inequalities:Cross-Cutting Review
National Service Frameworks. Worth a look too.
It is the COST TO THE GOVERNMENT DUE TO length of time that a smoker is ill. Not just the NHS but benefits, housing, loss to the economy, social care costs etc etc etc. A smoker may have 30 years of ill health even if they do not have any incidence of acute ill health they have associated health problems, strokes, vascular dementia and so on.
Simply: Now what is pollution? What are the benefits to the government of industry, transport, oil etc? Do these bring in more money than it costs the government? YES. That is the point. It is about COST to the government. NOT A HEALTH ISSUE.
Government could have banned smoking in the 1920s when the evidence came to light. Why didn't they? Why now? People are living longer and making long term demands in financial terms to the economy.
Permaculture answer: LIMIT YOUR OWN CONSUMPTION.
EDIT: Permaculture is a whole systems approach to living seeking to find solutions to every day problems. Limit your own consumption. Fair Shares. If you can not see the connection between tobacco and social exploitation/health issues/government funding then perhaps pot is to blame.
Old songs, are popular, proven and environmentally sustainable. Too many new anythings are not.
In the U.S. the government, knew the hazards of smoking years and years ago, same goes for alcohol. Knowing that they can make millions on taxes they left next to nill restrictions. These days many health experts are finally breaking way with facts that second hand smoke can cause damage to non-smokers. I do think they are suggesting more harm than proved but it's not just those fact's. To be honest smoke from a cigarette really stinks and smokers are pretty rude blowing smoke without consideration of others. So now it's getting harder to light up. I think that there are more cancer causing chemicals in the air we breathe from big truck/bus exhaust to all the factory's and refineries that fill our air with more pollution than any smokers put out. It is said that banning smoking from many places will save and or extend many lives. This may be true but, we all have to die of something, this just might prolong other fatal diseases we can and eventually might get.... ;)
Ending traffic pollution would anger most citizens. With few alternatives, there is the question "how will I get to work?" also, "selling gas is my job." and "I sell gas powered appliances." You would heear big complaints from the oil companies, too. Many people live far from where they work and see driving as necessary. Also lots of kids rely on their parents or some other driver to drive them.
The answers post by the user, for information only, FunQA.com does not guarantee the right.
More Questions and Answers: