Random rants that don't warrant their own threads Page 241

  • Page

    of 299 First / Last

  • RyanDS 28 Dec 2012 11:25:45 9,053 posts
    Seen 51 minutes ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    darkmorgado wrote:
    That 106 billion figure is a huge inflation on what I've seen cited this year, got a source for that?

    I did say as well, in fairness, tobacco & alcohol duty, not either/or (and that's without taking into account other taxes like VAT, IT, fuel, NI, etc). Maybe I misremember what I read on the subject and it was estimated the total tax take of the smoking/drinking population, rather than just the duty from their vices?
    http://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/thenhs/about/Pages/overview.aspx
  • spamdangled 28 Dec 2012 11:37:09 27,269 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    RyanDS wrote:
    darkmorgado wrote:
    That 106 billion figure is a huge inflation on what I've seen cited this year, got a source for that?

    I did say as well, in fairness, tobacco & alcohol duty, not either/or (and that's without taking into account other taxes like VAT, IT, fuel, NI, etc). Maybe I misremember what I read on the subject and it was estimated the total tax take of the smoking/drinking population, rather than just the duty from their vices?
    http://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/thenhs/about/Pages/overview.aspx
    Totally unrelated to my rant/this discussion but from your link:

    It is also one of the most efficient
    Is lolworthy.

    3DS: 4055-2781-2855 Xbox: spamdangled PSN: dark_morgan Wii U: Spamdangle Steam: spamdangled

  • RyanDS 28 Dec 2012 11:38:41 9,053 posts
    Seen 51 minutes ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    darkmorgado wrote:
    RyanDS wrote:
    darkmorgado wrote:
    That 106 billion figure is a huge inflation on what I've seen cited this year, got a source for that?

    I did say as well, in fairness, tobacco & alcohol duty, not either/or (and that's without taking into account other taxes like VAT, IT, fuel, NI, etc). Maybe I misremember what I read on the subject and it was estimated the total tax take of the smoking/drinking population, rather than just the duty from their vices?
    http://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/thenhs/about/Pages/overview.aspx
    Totally unrelated to my rant/this discussion but from your link:

    It is also one of the most efficient
    Is lolworthy.
    Why? Look at somewhere like the US and it is a very valid comment.
  • skuzzbag 28 Dec 2012 11:40:04 5,636 posts
    Seen 13 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    darkmorgado wrote:
    skuzzbag wrote:
    That's right - the only taxes the government collect are from fags and booze.
    Don't be wilfully dense.
    Hello Pot have you met Kettle perchance?
  • spamdangled 28 Dec 2012 11:49:31 27,269 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    RyanDS wrote:
    darkmorgado wrote:
    RyanDS wrote:
    darkmorgado wrote:
    That 106 billion figure is a huge inflation on what I've seen cited this year, got a source for that?

    I did say as well, in fairness, tobacco & alcohol duty, not either/or (and that's without taking into account other taxes like VAT, IT, fuel, NI, etc). Maybe I misremember what I read on the subject and it was estimated the total tax take of the smoking/drinking population, rather than just the duty from their vices?
    http://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/thenhs/about/Pages/overview.aspx
    Totally unrelated to my rant/this discussion but from your link:

    It is also one of the most efficient
    Is lolworthy.
    Why? Look at somewhere like the US and it is a very valid comment.
    The notion that the NHS is in anyway efficient (particularly from a cost/managerial perspective) is a laughable travesty if you have any back-office work experience of it. Soooooooooooooooooo much red tape, so many Brazil-esque meetings solely to organise meetings, and endless tinkering around the edges from government have put it on par with the civil service when it comes to bloat value.

    3DS: 4055-2781-2855 Xbox: spamdangled PSN: dark_morgan Wii U: Spamdangle Steam: spamdangled

  • Deleted user 28 December 2012 11:49:48
    darkmorgado wrote:
    but actually enjoys it rather than it just being an addiction.
    Clearly the addiction talking.
  • RyanDS 28 Dec 2012 11:54:01 9,053 posts
    Seen 51 minutes ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    iHAZaCHEEZ3burger wrote:
    darkmorgado wrote:
    but actually enjoys it rather than it just being an addiction.
    Clearly the addiction talking.
    He said it's not JUST an addiction. Hence it is an addiction, albeit one that he enjoys.
  • Deleted user 28 December 2012 11:56:10
    RyanDS wrote:
    iHAZaCHEEZ3burger wrote:
    darkmorgado wrote:
    but actually enjoys it rather than it just being an addiction.
    Clearly the addiction talking.
    He said it's not JUST an addiction. Hence it is an addiction, albeit one that he enjoys.
    It is just an addiction and the addiction is making him say that. He doesn't really enjoy it.
  • Chopsen 28 Dec 2012 12:53:39 15,707 posts
    Seen 27 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    darkmorgado wrote:
    The notion that the NHS is in anyway efficient (particularly from a cost/managerial perspective) is a laughable travesty if you have any back-office work experience of it. Soooooooooooooooooo much red tape, so many Brazil-esque meetings solely to organise meetings, and endless tinkering around the edges from government have put it on par with the civil service when it comes to bloat value.
    That's not what efficiency means in this context. Any large organisation has these issues.
  • Chopsen 28 Dec 2012 13:01:17 15,707 posts
    Seen 27 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    darkmorgado wrote:
    If it helps, up to the age of 19 I was the most fanatical anti-smoking person you have ever met. Deliberately fake cughing fits whenever anyone lit up, exagerrated hand flapping to clear the air, the lot. I do genuinely see where non-smokers come from, it's the fanatical devotion to treating smokers like inconsiderate scum who must be cast out and then stamped out like cancer that really gets my wick, along with general social hypcocrisy of it.
    Doesn't really help, just means you were as much of a tit then as you are now, just that the issues change. You were histrionic then and by the tone of that last sentence you're histrionic now. "scum who must be cast out.." FFS.
  • Salaman 28 Dec 2012 13:24:14 18,855 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Wait a minute now. How come you get to throw stuff like this out:

    Government will NEVER, EVER EVER fucking outright ban it because it's a cash cow for them and, combined with alcohol duty, funds the entire NHS by itself (a fact which also instantly negates the fucking morons who suggest smokers/drinkers are drains on the health service).

    Then when someone calls you on it you want them to provide proof.
    have YOU got a link to some background information that backs up your ludicrous claim?
  • StarchildHypocrethes 28 Dec 2012 13:38:52 25,406 posts
    Seen 1 minute ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    The EG Forum runs to very stringent Mongo Rules. Do not question them. This leads to high-pitched wailing that occurs at the same frequency as Mods' inboxes.
  • Deleted user 28 December 2012 13:38:56
    Drinking:

    Increases in home spending on alcohol is roughly in line with inflation. In 2001 the UK spent around 36bn a year on alcohol, including in pubs, clubs, supermarkets etc. Tax revenue is approximately 8bn a year as recent as 2007/2008. There is absolutely no evidence that the smoking ban in pubs has resulted in massive amounts of drinking at home instead.

    Cost to the NHS from drinking is estimated at almost 2.4bn a year.

    As a percentage of revenue from taxes, alcohol makes up less than 5%. In 1860 it made up almost 40%

    http://www.ias.org.uk/resources/factsheets/economic_costs_benefits.pdf

    Smoking:

    12.1bn a year to the government (2011/12)

    DM posting moronic shit in vaguely political threads is nothing new. He'll never provide a link for his made up drivel, even though he could use all the free time he has sat on his arse to bother reading and then posting something intelligent.

    It's like having a discussion with a 6 year old with special needs.
  • spamdangled 28 Dec 2012 13:39:26 27,269 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Not to hand, no. To be fair I only asked for a source on the 100+ bn figure as it was so inflated from the one that I understood to be the case.

    Ultimately though, the whole "smokers are a burden on the NHS" thing IS massively reductive and lazy because it ignores/doesn't account for the different budgets of the NHS, the fact that everyone has bad habits that are bad for their health, that smoking-related illnesses aren't exclusive to smokers, that many smokers will never have a single one of those problems anyway, that smokers arguably pay more tax as a percentage of their income compared to non-smokers (which I am happy to accept in case anyone tries to twist that one), and on and on and on, etc etc etc.

    3DS: 4055-2781-2855 Xbox: spamdangled PSN: dark_morgan Wii U: Spamdangle Steam: spamdangled

  • Deleted user 28 December 2012 13:44:12
    Go shut the fuck up now please.
  • Salaman 28 Dec 2012 13:59:24 18,855 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    darkmorgado wrote:
    smoking-related illnesses aren't exclusive to smokers
    Well maybe the smoking ban will reduce that,huh?
  • Chopsen 28 Dec 2012 14:08:57 15,707 posts
    Seen 27 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    darkmorgado wrote:
    Ultimately though, the whole "smokers are a burden on the NHS"
    So if people smoked more the NHS would be better?

    darkmorgado wrote:t different budgets of the NHS
    Irrelevant

    darkmorgado wrote:
    , the fact that everyone has bad habits that are bad for their health,
    So? Smoking is fine because other things are also bad?

    darkmorgado wrote:
    that smoking-related illnesses aren't exclusive to smokers, that many smokers will never have a single one of those problems anyway,
    You don't understand epidemiology or health economics, do you?


    darkmorgado wrote:that smokers arguably pay more tax as a percentage of their income compared to non-smokers
    So?
  • spamdangled 28 Dec 2012 14:23:36 27,269 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Not saying smoking isn't pretty bad for your health in general or is "fine" etc. Just that it isn't the first class ticket on a bullet train to smelly deathtown that fanatic anti-smokers make it out to be (at least if you are otherwise health-conscious and have a sense of personal hygiene).

    Obesity is arguably more deserving of concern when it comes to its burden on healthcare in terms of things like diabetes, heart disease, strokes, clotting, ulcers, tooth decay, liver and kidney problems and so on.

    Demonising something is easy, but is also incredibly lazy and fails miserably to achieve goals and address root causes. All it achieves is to make the "problem" people less likely to listen or engage with you and more likely to stubbornly stick around out of spite.

    3DS: 4055-2781-2855 Xbox: spamdangled PSN: dark_morgan Wii U: Spamdangle Steam: spamdangled

  • Chopsen 28 Dec 2012 14:27:19 15,707 posts
    Seen 27 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    darkmorgado wrote:
    Not saying smoking isn't pretty bad for your health in general or is "fine" etc. Just that it isn't the first class ticket on a bullet train to smelly deathtown that fanatic anti-smokers make it out to be (at least if you are otherwise health-conscious and have a sense of personal hygiene).

    Obesity is arguably more deserving of concern when it comes to its burden on healthcare in terms of things like diabetes, heart disease, strokes, clotting, ulcers, tooth decay, liver and kidney problems and so on.

    Demonising something is easy, but is also incredibly lazy and fails miserably to achieve goals and address root causes. All it achieves is to make the "problem" people less likely to listen or engage with you and more likely to stubbornly stick around out of spite.
    Ah, I see. So it's a good old fashioned strawman with a side order of playing the victim card.
  • Deleted user 28 December 2012 14:28:43
    Stop being an idiot.

    Personal opinion, don't give a fuck about the health concerns. You want to poison yourself that is up to you. But you do fucking stink. All smokers smell bad. It is sweet that you think otherwise, and I'm happy for you that you don't notice it and live with people that pretend not to (or are just plain used to it). But you do smell, and worst of all you make everyone and everything else around you smell. For that reason alone - forgetting the health concerns or the fact that you make what ever area you occupy look dingy - you fucking deserve to be demonised for it.
  • Fozzie_bear 28 Dec 2012 14:31:13 15,470 posts
    Seen 38 minutes ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    darkmorgado wrote:
    RyanDS wrote:
    darkmorgado wrote:
    RyanDS wrote:
    darkmorgado wrote:
    That 106 billion figure is a huge inflation on what I've seen cited this year, got a source for that?

    I did say as well, in fairness, tobacco & alcohol duty, not either/or (and that's without taking into account other taxes like VAT, IT, fuel, NI, etc). Maybe I misremember what I read on the subject and it was estimated the total tax take of the smoking/drinking population, rather than just the duty from their vices?
    http://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/thenhs/about/Pages/overview.aspx
    Totally unrelated to my rant/this discussion but from your link:

    It is also one of the most efficient
    Is lolworthy.
    Why? Look at somewhere like the US and it is a very valid comment.
    The notion that the NHS is in anyway efficient (particularly from a cost/managerial perspective) is a laughable travesty if you have any back-office work experience of it. Soooooooooooooooooo much red tape, so many Brazil-esque meetings solely to organise meetings, and endless tinkering around the edges from government have put it on par with the civil service when it comes to bloat value.
    This is pretty much the definition of an open goal, isn't it?

    Support the Mowgli Dirty Protest!

  • Psychotext 28 Dec 2012 14:31:47 53,788 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    mowgli wrote:
    But you do fucking stink. All smokers smell bad. It is sweet that you think otherwise, and I'm happy for you that you don't notice it and live with people that pretend not to (or are just plain used to it). But you do smell, and worst of all you make everyone and everything else around you smell.

    In my experience that's not actually true. Some smokers smell bad, that's absolutely true, but I know a handful of smokers who dont' smell at all. I suspect it's because they only smoke outside and their clothing is of a type of material that doesn't absorb the smell.

    That said, you'll always smell it if they've just had one because it'll be on their breath.

    Edited by Psychotext at 14:33:41 28-12-2012
  • sport 28 Dec 2012 14:33:03 12,526 posts
    Seen 5 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Psychotext wrote:
    I suspect it's because they only smoke outside and their clothing is of a type of material that doesn't absorb the smell.
    Kevlar?
  • Fozzie_bear 28 Dec 2012 14:33:56 15,470 posts
    Seen 38 minutes ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    mowgli wrote:
    Stop being an idiot.

    Personal opinion, don't give a fuck about the health concerns. You want to poison yourself that is up to you. But you do fucking stink. All smokers smell bad. It is sweet that you think otherwise, and I'm happy for you that you don't notice it and live with people that pretend not to (or are just plain used to it). But you do smell, and worst of all you make everyone and everything else around you smell. For that reason alone - forgetting the health concerns or the fact that you make what ever area you occupy look dingy - you fucking deserve to be demonised for it.
    It's a fair point which, as an on/off smoker, I'm well aware of.

    For similar reasons, I despise fat people. The snorting and grunting as they waddle about, their sweaty faces, the constant smell of cheap pastry and fried food which wafts around them.

    Support the Mowgli Dirty Protest!

  • Psychotext 28 Dec 2012 14:34:04 53,788 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Could be. That or patent leather.
  • RyanDS 28 Dec 2012 14:38:11 9,053 posts
    Seen 51 minutes ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    Anyway, lets change the topic from the NHS and taxes. Bored now.

    My rant of the day:

    Smokers really fucking stink don't they? I mean Jesus, what's with that?
  • spamdangled 28 Dec 2012 14:38:29 27,269 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Psychotext wrote:
    mowgli wrote:
    But you do fucking stink. All smokers smell bad. It is sweet that you think otherwise, and I'm happy for you that you don't notice it and live with people that pretend not to (or are just plain used to it). But you do smell, and worst of all you make everyone and everything else around you smell.

    In my experience that's not actually true. Some smokers smell bad, that's absolutely true, but I know a handful of smokers who dont' smell at all. I suspect it's because they only smoke outside and their clothing is of a type of material that doesn't absorb the smell.

    That said, you'll always smell it if they've just had one because it'll be on their breath.
    The last point is true, but largely mitigated with gum.

    If you do smoke outside out of consideration to living with non-smokers, even the clothing smell isn't really an issue.

    3DS: 4055-2781-2855 Xbox: spamdangled PSN: dark_morgan Wii U: Spamdangle Steam: spamdangled

  • LionheartDJH 28 Dec 2012 14:40:16 19,359 posts
    Seen 3 days ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Chopsen wrote:

    Ah, I see. So it's a good old fashioned strawman with a side order of playing the victim card.
    It's his standard MO. Good at first but now it's become very transparent.

    She dives for cheese pasties

  • Deleted user 28 December 2012 15:35:55
    darkmorgado wrote:
    Demonising something is easy, but is also incredibly lazy and fails miserably to achieve goals and address root causes. All it achieves is to make the "problem" people less likely to listen or engage with you and more likely to stubbornly stick around out of spite.
    So true, sadly. So very very true...
  • Kanjin 28 Dec 2012 15:38:05 1,051 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    darkmorgado wrote:
    Psychotext wrote:
    mowgli wrote:
    But you do fucking stink. All smokers smell bad. It is sweet that you think otherwise, and I'm happy for you that you don't notice it and live with people that pretend not to (or are just plain used to it). But you do smell, and worst of all you make everyone and everything else around you smell.

    In my experience that's not actually true. Some smokers smell bad, that's absolutely true, but I know a handful of smokers who dont' smell at all. I suspect it's because they only smoke outside and their clothing is of a type of material that doesn't absorb the smell.

    That said, you'll always smell it if they've just had one because it'll be on their breath.
    The last point is true, but largely mitigated with gum.

    If you do smoke outside out of consideration to living with non-smokers, even the clothing smell isn't really an issue.
    No it isn't. If they have gum they stink of a mixture of gum and smoke.
  • Page

    of 299 First / Last

Log in or register to reply