| Author |
Thread |
|
Mental_Adam
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
845 posts
Joined: Feb, 2006
|
 Posted - 2008/05/11 : 03:11:48
quote:
Originally posted by ruroken:
IMO there are bigger things for the government to worry about than marijuana.
And just because it's a natural defense against insects doesn't mean it's necessarily bad for human beings :P
They should just legalise it and bring in some sort of ID card what you have to pay for a year and you have to have this card so you are enabled to purchase at a shop what trades it.
the government should think of all the money that it would bring, it would probably sort out alot of money issues. plus a teenth would probably could like £4 or £5 instead of the rip off £12.50
__________________________________
Alert moderator 
|
Xayo
New Member
Germany
42 posts
Joined: Apr, 2008
|
Posted - 2008/05/11 : 08:24:07
an ID card that allows the costumer to buy weed twice a week or sth would be an idea.
It would be good if it was under governments control because of:
A) Taxes !
B) No more punshed Cocain Weed shit
C) Lowering the prices
Alert moderator
|
jenks
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
3,698 posts
Joined: Feb, 2003
19 hardcore releases
|
Posted - 2008/05/11 : 13:07:51
quote:
Originally posted by djbrownieboy:
quote:
Originally posted by ruroken:
IMO there are bigger things for the government to worry about than marijuana.
And just because it's a natural defense against insects doesn't mean it's necessarily bad for human beings :P
They should just legalise it and bring in some sort of ID card what you have to pay for a year and you have to have this card so you are enabled to purchase at a shop what trades it.
the government should think of all the money that it would bring, it would probably sort out alot of money issues. plus a teenth would probably could like £4 or £5 instead of the rip off £12.50
OR maybe all the tax money they gain would end up being spent on the NHS, for people's lungs that are now ****ed. Legalising it to be ingested might work though...
Alert moderator
|
Mental_Adam
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
845 posts
Joined: Feb, 2006
|
Posted - 2008/05/11 : 18:15:12
Just think of all the jobs it would create....
Where i am, we have shitloads of fields surrounding our villages. It's virtually impossible to get a decent job, as frankly the only jobs going our crappy holiday camps who pay below the Min wage.
But it would be ace, IF it got legalised as id know what i want to do... Work for the nearest crop farmer, who would be about 2 minutes away and i could hop over my fence as a huge field is what i see when i look out my window.
__________________________________
Alert moderator
|
SixFeet
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
2,285 posts
Joined: Jan, 2005
|
Posted - 2008/05/11 : 21:49:59
quote:
Originally posted by jenks:
OR maybe all the tax money they gain would end up being spent on the NHS, for people's lungs that are now ****ed. Legalising it to be ingested might work though...
Not many people get lung cancer from smoking Cannabis alone. It has more carcinogens than Tobacco per part but very few people actually smoke enough of it a day over extended periods to do so much damage. Very few people will be smoking more than a few joints worth a day whereas 20+ ciggies is quite usual and even 40+ a day isn't too uncommon at least for people I know.
__________________________________
No single raindrop ever blames themselves for the flood...
Alert moderator
|
jenks
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
3,698 posts
Joined: Feb, 2003
19 hardcore releases
|
Posted - 2008/05/12 : 20:19:23
quote:
Originally posted by SixFeet:
quote:
Originally posted by jenks:
OR maybe all the tax money they gain would end up being spent on the NHS, for people's lungs that are now ****ed. Legalising it to be ingested might work though...
Not many people get lung cancer from smoking Cannabis alone. It has more carcinogens than Tobacco per part but very few people actually smoke enough of it a day over extended periods to do so much damage. Very few people will be smoking more than a few joints worth a day whereas 20+ ciggies is quite usual and even 40+ a day isn't too uncommon at least for people I know.
How could you possibly know that? Especially given that after it's legalized the prices would drop dramatically...
Alert moderator
|
whispering
Moderator
Finland
8,453 posts
Joined: Nov, 2002
|
Posted - 2008/05/12 : 21:18:07
quote:
Originally posted by jenks:
OR maybe all the tax money they gain would end up being spent on the NHS, for people's lungs that are now ****ed. Legalising it to be ingested might work though...
Smokers "cost" on average ~38%(?) less to NHS then non smokers, thats a fact (some Dutch research i can dig the specifics of the research if you want.), then add up the extra tax money from the smokes. So the government gets money from smokers, it doesnt lose money to them.
Edit:
Also to add, i've smoked soon half of my life. I hate the "nagging non smokers" with a passion. But i dont recommend smoking to anyone. If you can quit now, do so. You wount thank yourself later on, because you wount live to feel the damage it does (the non lethal too).
Alert moderator
Edited by - whispering on 2008/05/12 21:33:07 |
Hard2Get
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
12,837 posts
Joined: Jun, 2001
|
Posted - 2008/05/16 : 08:22:02
quote:
Originally posted by whispering:
quote:
Originally posted by jenks:
OR maybe all the tax money they gain would end up being spent on the NHS, for people's lungs that are now ****ed. Legalising it to be ingested might work though...
I hate the "nagging non smokers" with a passion.
Because they are right?:P
Alert moderator
|
SixFeet
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
2,285 posts
Joined: Jan, 2005
|
Posted - 2008/05/16 : 15:54:23
quote:
Originally posted by Hard2Get:
quote:
Originally posted by whispering:
quote:
Originally posted by jenks:
OR maybe all the tax money they gain would end up being spent on the NHS, for people's lungs that are now ****ed. Legalising it to be ingested might work though...
I hate the "nagging non smokers" with a passion.
Because they are right?:P
People don't give fat people the same stigmata and now they're costing the NHS similar money annually that smokers do.
__________________________________
No single raindrop ever blames themselves for the flood...
Alert moderator
|
whispering
Moderator
Finland
8,453 posts
Joined: Nov, 2002
|
Posted - 2008/05/16 : 18:29:58
quote:
Originally posted by Hard2Get:
Because they are right?:P
No, because they are hypocrites. Who spread false information and assumptions as facts. Try to ram peoples rights in the name of "health". Try to bring up new laws that are based on those lies. What they are doing is a witch hunt.
quote:
Originally posted by SixFeet:
People don't give fat people the same stigmata and now they're costing the NHS similar money annually that smokers do.
Theres an example of the lies. Smokers DO NOT cost any extra money to the government, in fact to the government a smoker is cheaper then a non smoker.
Alert moderator
Edited by - whispering on 2008/05/16 18:33:37 |
SixFeet
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
2,285 posts
Joined: Jan, 2005
|
Posted - 2008/05/16 : 20:11:03
quote:
Originally posted by whispering:
Theres an example of the lies. Smokers DO NOT cost any extra money to the government, in fact to the government a smoker is cheaper then a non smoker.
I probably doubt even through the amount they make on tax from the cigarettes a person buys throughout their life time that it even equals the cost of the years of treatment required for cancer.
__________________________________
No single raindrop ever blames themselves for the flood...
Alert moderator
|
whispering
Moderator
Finland
8,453 posts
Joined: Nov, 2002
|
Posted - 2008/05/16 : 22:01:24
quote:
Originally posted by SixFeet:
I probably doubt even through the amount they make on tax from the cigarettes a person buys throughout their life time that it even equals the cost of the years of treatment required for cancer.
I spent few years working in a hospital, the thing i noticed, doesnt matter who you are or what you've done in you're life, you will die. Your body gets weaker and cant hold on forever, eventually one or the other illness will break through. There is no such thing as dying of "old age". For years i thought it was moronic to even think you could "get away with it" without smoking. Theres actually a Dutch research where they took a bunch (1000 if i remember right) of people and examined how much they used the health care system in their life, turns out non smokers used more (Thats not even counting the extra tax paid from cigs). Reason was, smokers die younger. I'll try to find out who made the research, its from a science magazine, but can find the issue now...
Alert moderator
|
SixFeet
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
2,285 posts
Joined: Jan, 2005
|
Posted - 2008/05/19 : 21:46:51
quote:
Originally posted by whispering:
I spent few years working in a hospital, the thing i noticed, doesnt matter who you are or what you've done in you're life, you will die. Your body gets weaker and cant hold on forever, eventually one or the other illness will break through. There is no such thing as dying of "old age". For years i thought it was moronic to even think you could "get away with it" without smoking. Theres actually a Dutch research where they took a bunch (1000 if i remember right) of people and examined how much they used the health care system in their life, turns out non smokers used more (Thats not even counting the extra tax paid from cigs). Reason was, smokers die younger. I'll try to find out who made the research, its from a science magazine, but can find the issue now...
I know they die younger. But they don't just die in the snap of a finger, they die over years usually fo lung or throat cancer and they usually are hanging on recieving medical treatment for years. My uncle has throat cancer for the last 3 years. He's had almost half a dozen surgeries, spent over 7-8 months of the time in a hospital bed and hundreds of hours in the presence of doctors, surgeons and cancer specialists aswell as hundreds of hours of chemotherapy. You think the 20 a day habit at £2-3 tax for 25 years (so roughly £18,000-27,000 total) equals the cost of all the treatment he has recieved?
I'd have to say you're very naive if you think the tax from cigarettes covers the cost of the inevitable treatments that are required further down the line. In this day and age where money rules everything including the majority of the governments policies, if the tax from smoking covered the treatment costs and even made them a profit their certainly wouldn't be any warnings about them. They would just ignore it.
__________________________________
No single raindrop ever blames themselves for the flood...
Alert moderator
|
whispering
Moderator
Finland
8,453 posts
Joined: Nov, 2002
|
Posted - 2008/05/19 : 22:04:33
quote:
Originally posted by SixFeet:
I'd have to say you're very naive if you think the tax from cigarettes covers the cost of the inevitable treatments that are required further down the line. In this day and age where money rules everything including the majority of the governments policies, if the tax from smoking covered the treatment costs and even made them a profit their certainly wouldn't be any warnings about them. They would just ignore it.
You're missing the point, theres immense amount of medical help used in some smokers. But to even think you're saved from that by not smoking is naive. People dont just drop dead when their old. They get diseases, i could drop 10's of diseases that take immense amount of hospital treatment, are not caused by smoking and are very big problems for the health care system. The biggest causes of death for working people (15-64yo) here are coronary heart disease (1 for men), breast cancer (1 for women) and then comes alcohol related diseases, suicide and accidents.
Alert moderator
|
Printer friendly
