Posted on 06/10/2004 6:43:49 PM PDT by sarcasm
Welfare and health groups have urged the NSW Government to take tougher tobacco control measures after new research showed the state's poorest families would save almost $60 a week if they could quit smoking.
The research, by Macquarie University economists, showed the next poorest 20 per cent of households would save $85 a week if the smokers quit.
The study also shows the NSW economy would not be harmed if fewer people smoked, contrary to the claims of the tobacco industry.
The study was commissioned by the Cancer Council of NSW and conducted by David Collins, adjunct professor in economics at Macquarie University, his colleague William Junor, and Helen Lapsley, a health economist at the University of Queensland.
Gary Moore, of the NSW Council of Social Service, said: "We believe tougher measures to counter tobacco would help families struggling on a low income who are finding it difficult to quit."
The study, to be released today, said the poorest one-fifth of households spent 18 per cent of their income on cigarettes, while the richest spent 3 per cent.
Smoking households - defined as a household where money was spent on tobacco - spent relatively less on clothes, shoes, education, housing and health than non-smoking households.
If people could give up smoking it was likely they would spend more on these items, and enjoy health benefits as well, the research shows.
"A reduction in smoking in NSW could constitute a significant step towards reducing the impact of poverty in the state," it says.
The study also found that big reductions in the prevalence of smoking over five or 10 years would have no significant impact on employment, output or profits in any business sector, apart from the tobacco industry.
Professor Collins said: "The tobacco industry has lost the health argument and now argues it generates employment and output. But if the tobacco industry disappeared overnight there would not be 57,700 fewer jobs. If people don't spend the money on smoking they would spend it on something else, which would generate jobs and output."
The researchers conducted a detailed examination of the impact of reduced tobacco expenditure on 106 industries and of the effects on them of the expenditure being redirected.
"Because the economic effects were close to neutral, they are not an issue which should be taken into account in the framing of public health policy," the study says.
Anita Tang, director of health strategies at the Cancer Council, said NSW should match other states in per capita expenditure on tobacco control. An investment of $13.5 million a year - instead of the current $4 million - would reduce the prevalence of smoking by 1 per cent a year.
You just wear 'em out going to the store to get smokes.
News from Down Under.
According to the law of unintended consequences, it shall result in people rolling old shoes into stoogies and then smoking these. Eeew!
If they were really concerned about the economic impact on the poor people, they'd eliminate the taxes on the cigarettes.
Where would we be without Macquarie University economists to tell us these things?
It's always a good sign when the Smart People(tm) practice responsible animal husbandry on the poor. Left to themselves, the poor will make bad decisions, so it up to the Anointed Ones to provide guidance and, if necessary, coercion to steer their pets in the right direction.
Gee...............why do I have more than 30 pairs of shoes in my closet..........and just bought 4 more for my daughter?????/
These people are getting out of hand.
I've had it with these raving lunatics.....most of them need to find new jobs and I will be more than happy to proved the suit jackets they will need everyday.......they tie around the back...........
$8.00 a pack? Gee, why don't they cut the $7.00 of taxes out and the poor can save $50 a week without doing anything?
"I'd walk in my bare feet for a Camel in Australia 'cause I'm broke after paying those cigarette taxes!"
I'm not poor, but I save a lot more money then that just by rolling my own and I am not paying into the glutton state coffers for the past three years.
The study, to be released today, said the poorest one-fifth of households spent 18 per cent of their income on cigarettes, while the richest spent 3 per cent.
Who's fault is that? Is the state didn't try to balance their budgets on the backs of smokers, they would still be collecting their tax dollars and smokers could still enjoy the legal commodity.
The study also found that big reductions in the prevalence of smoking over five or 10 years would have no significant impact on employment, output or profits in any business sector, apart from the tobacco industry.
This is a crock of pig dirt. These highly paid professional anti-smokers just can't accept that 55 million people in the United States totally enjoy smoking, which is a LEGAL commodity, I might add.
No impact on employment???????? Try looking at all the business's closing and/or cutting their staff because of the forced smoking bans. These people are complete jerks if they think we will all be sucked in by their bold faced lies. I don't know how they sleep at night.
I have never seen the likes of being able to buy a legal commodity then being treated like a criminal for doing so.
I'm starting to believe that these same anti-smokers are a front for the terrorist to choke America's economy even more. They have a lot more to their agenda then meets the eye.
OOPS....my husband just reminded me that it's 45+ pairs of shoes....and I am turning my daughter into an "imelda" nearly like me!!!!!!
Just another crock!
Smoking households - defined as a household where money was spent on tobacco - spent relatively less on health than non-smoking households.
No, they would still be making the decision for themselves then. We can't have that. The nanny state knows better.
AMEN! They thought they were being smart by raising taxes on cigarettes so high to balance the budget on the backs of the smokers.......well, let me tell you this: the smokers have gone elsewhere for cheaper cigarettes, plus many smokers are rolling their own to get out from under the disgusting cigarette taxes in the state.
They just don't get it! Most people who smoke totally enjoy it. And it's LEGAL!
I have heard, and I believe it to be true, that all but about 20 cents a pack of the cost of cigarettes is state and Federal tax...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.