Skip to comments.
Shoes come second in smokers' homes
Sydney Morning Herald ^
| June 11. 2004
| Adele Horin
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.
TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: health; nannystate; pufflist; smoking
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-97 next last
To: hotshot
My Inlaws both each smoke 4 packs a day. Every waking hour there is a cig in their hand. That's $3.00 x 4 x 2 x 30 which equals $ 720.00 a month out of their $2000.00 a month retirement. They charge a negative $400 a month on credit cards. The dope dealer down the road could not get a better customer.Egads! I can't even imagine smoking 4 packs a day. I've smoked on the average of a pack and a half to two packs a day. Any more then that, I don't have enough to do!
They sure could save a lot of money if they rolled their own or bought off of the Internet or a Reservation if they live close enough to one. Reservations sell over the Net as well.
"Dope dealer?" They are on dope too?
61
posted on
06/11/2004 5:45:43 AM PDT
by
SheLion
(Don Imus is voting for FnKerry!)
To: sarcasm
Have they done any studies on how many obese people were NOT obese when they smoked?
62
posted on
06/11/2004 6:19:42 AM PDT
by
McGavin999
(If Kerry can't deal with the "Republican Attack Machine" how is he going to deal with Al Qaeda)
To: sarcasm
That's $260.00 per month!
What could you buy for $260.00 per month??
Here are some cars you could buy for about that much money per month... looks like the poor are poor because they choose to be poor. Bad choices.
Monthly Payment: All new vehicles $200 - $299.The new vehicles that fit into your monthly payment (based on MSRP) are listed below. Click on the vehicle name that you are interested in to learn more.
Get more vehicles for less money. Check Used Cars for pricing and listings.
Your monthly payment is . Show me in this price range.
Chevrolet Cavalier |
MSRP $10,325 - $17,710 |
Chevrolet Colorado |
MSRP $15,695 - $28,330 |
Chevrolet Malibu |
MSRP $18,995 - $23,855 |
Chevrolet Silverado 1500 |
MSRP $18,545 - $39,905 |
Chevrolet Tracker |
MSRP $19,865 - $22,715 |
Chrysler PT Cruiser |
MSRP $17,490 - $25,460 |
Chrysler PT Cruiser Convertible |
MSRP $19,405 - $27,565 |
Chrysler Sebring |
MSRP $18,465 - $30,845 |
Dodge Caravan |
MSRP $18,330 - $21,820 |
Dodge Dakota |
MSRP $17,200 - $24,835 |
Dodge Neon |
MSRP $13,490 - $17,640 |
Dodge Ram 1500 |
MSRP $19,855 - $45,000 |
Dodge Stratus |
MSRP $18,710 - $22,695 |
Ford Escape |
MSRP $19,265 - $26,365 |
Ford F-150 Heritage |
MSRP $19,610 - $33,035 |
Ford Focus |
MSRP $13,005 - $17,905 |
Ford Mustang |
MSRP $18,035 - $29,135 |
Ford Ranger |
MSRP $14,575 - $26,015 |
Ford Taurus |
MSRP $20,485 - $23,345 |
GMC Canyon |
MSRP $16,025 - $28,000 |
GMC Sierra 1500 |
MSRP $18,545 - $41,905 |
Honda Accord |
MSRP $15,900 - $28,500 |
Honda Civic |
MSRP $13,010 - $19,650 |
Honda CR-V |
MSRP $19,000 - $21,750 |
Honda Element |
MSRP $16,100 - $20,300 |
Honda Insight |
MSRP $19,180 - $21,380 |
Hyundai Santa Fe |
MSRP $17,999 - $25,499 |
Hyundai Sonata |
MSRP $15,999 - $19,799 |
Hyundai Tiburon |
MSRP $16,999 - $20,497 |
Isuzu Rodeo |
MSRP $19,799 - $25,699 |
Jeep Liberty |
MSRP $18,380 - $24,340 |
Jeep Wrangler |
MSRP $16,635 - $25,450 |
Kia Optima |
MSRP $15,500 - $19,595 |
Kia Sedona |
MSRP $19,975 - $22,085 |
Kia Sorento |
MSRP $18,995 - $25,200 |
Mazda B2300 |
MSRP $14,925 - $18,725 |
Mazda B3000 |
MSRP $18,005 - $19,885 |
Mazda Mazda3 |
MSRP $13,680 - $16,895 |
Mazda Mazda6 |
MSRP $18,895 - $22,895 |
Mazda Tribute |
MSRP $19,320 - $24,080 |
MINI Cooper |
MSRP $16,449 - $16,449 |
MINI Cooper S |
MSRP $19,899 - $19,899 |
Mitsubishi Eclipse |
MSRP $18,399 - $24,649 |
Mitsubishi Galant |
MSRP $17,997 - $25,697 |
Mitsubishi Lancer |
MSRP $13,597 - $17,997 |
Mitsubishi Lancer Sportback |
MSRP $16,709 - $19,319 |
Mitsubishi Outlander |
MSRP $18,449 - $22,349 |
Nissan Altima |
MSRP $17,200 - $26,900 |
Nissan Frontier |
MSRP $13,390 - $27,570 |
Nissan Sentra |
MSRP $12,400 - $17,500 |
Nissan Xterra |
MSRP $18,000 - $28,000 |
Oldsmobile Alero |
MSRP $18,485 - $23,335 |
Pontiac Grand Am |
MSRP $22,280 - $23,530 |
Pontiac Vibe |
MSRP $16,915 - $20,240 |
Saturn ION |
MSRP $10,430 - $20,385 |
Saturn L300 |
MSRP $21,370 - $21,370 |
Saturn VUE |
MSRP $17,025 - $26,195 |
Subaru Impreza |
MSRP $18,020 - $24,620 |
Subaru Outback Sport |
MSRP $19,220 - $19,220 |
Suzuki Aerio |
MSRP $13,499 - $16,999 |
Suzuki Aerio SX |
MSRP $15,499 - $17,299 |
Suzuki Forenza |
MSRP $13,199 - $16,699 |
Suzuki Grand Vitara |
MSRP $18,199 - $22,699 |
Suzuki Verona |
MSRP $17,199 - $20,199 |
Suzuki Vitara V6 |
MSRP $16,999 - $18,199 |
Toyota Camry |
MSRP $18,045 - $25,405 |
Toyota Camry Solara |
MSRP $19,220 - $29,450 |
Toyota Celica |
MSRP $17,570 - $22,235 |
Toyota Corolla |
MSRP $13,680 - $17,455 |
Toyota Matrix |
MSRP $14,760 - $18,750 |
Toyota RAV4 |
MSRP $18,450 - $19,850 |
Toyota Tacoma |
MSRP $12,460 - $22,700 |
Volkswagen Golf |
MSRP $15,580 - $19,320 |
Volkswagen GTI |
MSRP $19,250 - $22,070 |
Volkswagen Jetta |
MSRP $17,430 - $23,800 |
Volkswagen New Beetle |
MSRP $16,330 - $24,820 |
63
posted on
06/11/2004 6:20:33 AM PDT
by
Bon mots
To: B4Ranch
Does your maiden name start with an E ? LOL I think you girls are related somehow. LOL!!!! No, my maiden name starts with an R!!!
64
posted on
06/11/2004 6:51:56 AM PDT
by
Gabz
(RIP President Ronald W. Reagan 1911-2004)
To: sarcasm
[ The research, by Macquarie University economists, showed the next poorest 20 per cent of households would save $85 a week if the smokers quit. ]
What report does NOT show is How much of the $85 is TAXES..
The tobacco industry are merely businessmen, GOVERNMENT is the VAMPIRE.
65
posted on
06/11/2004 6:53:03 AM PDT
by
hosepipe
(This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole....)
To: SheLion
Another thing no one mentioned in this article: how about the elderly doing with out prescription drugs just so they can put food on their tables? How about that? Well if they didn't smoke, they would need the prescriptions.........(/sarcasm)
66
posted on
06/11/2004 6:56:22 AM PDT
by
Gabz
(RIP President Ronald W. Reagan 1911-2004)
To: sarcasm
showed the state's poorest families would save almost $60 a week if they could quit smokingTranslatio= the gov't is using my hard earned dollars to subsidize welfare smokers.
Reccomendation= Lets lower the checks of smokers on welfare by $60 per week. Apparently they don't need it for essentials.
To: Oztrich Boy
Now let me get this straight. If people don't spend money on tobacco, they can spend it on something else. Or better yet, invest it. Very good for the economy.
To: FrankR
Either way, it's money pissed away...but it's their money, and IT'S THEIR BUSINESS.Its not there money. We subsidize it.
To: mrsmith
$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?We give them the money to purchase the cigs anyways. Its not costing them. If they have excess cash from welfare to spend on cig's then we should lower their aid.
To: Gabz
OOPS....my husband just reminded me that it's 45+ pairs of shoes....Perhaps you should consider taking up smoking.
To: SheLion
No impact on employment???????? Try looking at all the business's closing and/or cutting their staff because of the forced smoking bans. Maybe, but overall employment is rising. Therefore this proves out what the economist is saying. If its true that people are losing smoking related jobs, they are finding employment elsewhere. This means folks are spending or investing their tobacco dollars.
To: SALChamps03
To: sarcasm
They should just cut their smoking in half and learn to hop everywhere on one foot. Problem solved
To: PBRSTREETGANG
75
posted on
06/11/2004 7:18:12 AM PDT
by
Gabz
(RIP President Ronald W. Reagan 1911-2004)
To: B4Ranch
My wife has shoes in the closet that have NEVER even been worn. I know, she's just another American gal who thinks she needs more shoes than she could ever wear out. When the big one hits and you are walking around barefoot and she has plenty of shoes to wear... then you will be sorry you didn't follow her example. < /survivalist off >
To: VRWC_minion
"Its not there money. We subsidize it."
Well, we subsidize studying the mating habits of the rainforest tree frog, space exploration, reforestation, environmentalism, endless global warming screwballs, airline travel, tomato growers, athletes, and countless other "golden fleece" money giveaways, but I don't hear any mass whining on how that money is spent wasted.
You have to decide if you're pissed about the money, or the tobacco angle.
77
posted on
06/11/2004 7:33:26 AM PDT
by
FrankR
(A fanatic is one who won't change his mind, and can't change the subject...)
To: Harmless Teddy Bear
I could buy the cheapest shoes in America and never wear them out, now the wheels on my chair are a different story. They get replaced every year whether they need it or not. < /survivalist off >
So, yes, I guess I am as bad as the girls are about buying things when I don't really need them and I don't even look for sales!
78
posted on
06/11/2004 7:43:14 AM PDT
by
B4Ranch
( GET READY!!...........http://www.ready.gov/get_a_kit.html)
To: FrankR
You have to decide if you're pissed about the money, or the tobacco angle.The heck with compassion. I call myself a selfish conservative. If my dollars are going to the poor to be spent on nonessentials, I'd rather keep the money myself. If a smoker can get by with less money, then we should cut their welfare checks by the same amount they spend on tobacco.
As for the high tax, I think the better compromise solution is to raise the tax. That way we are making them rebate their welfare to the state when its used on tobacco.
To: VRWC_minion
As for the high tax, I think the better compromise solution is to raise the tax. That way we are making them rebate their welfare to the state when its used on tobacco. And what about those of us spending our own money.............why should we be forced to "rebate" to the state?
80
posted on
06/11/2004 7:54:54 AM PDT
by
Gabz
(RIP President Ronald W. Reagan 1911-2004)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-97 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson