Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 78

Thread: Ban smoking at Coffee Shop n pub = worst?

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    BB West
    Posts
    2,184

    Default Ban smoking at Coffee Shop n pub = worst?

    In my own view, it is like making thing worst than ever before if there are ban on those area.

    Why? No rest place for smokers to smoke and so, they smoke while they are walking and so, those non-smokers will be getting more 2nd hand smoke while they walking. Don't tell me that non-smokers will go to coffee shop and pub to siam those smokers?

    Therefore, ban smoking at those rest place (open air) is not that wise. It might cause more problem in the end. Hope they wouldn't ban else non-smokers will be suffering more.
    Only Sony device mostly, haha!

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    CCK
    Posts
    1,051

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BBTM
    In my own view, it is like making thing worst than ever before if there are ban on those area.

    Why? No rest place for smokers to smoke and so, they smoke while they are walking and so, those non-smokers will be getting more 2nd hand smoke while they walking. Don't tell me that non-smokers will go to coffee shop and pub to siam those smokers?

    Therefore, ban smoking at those rest place (open air) is not that wise. It might cause more problem in the end. Hope they wouldn't ban else non-smokers will be suffering more.
    I think smokers will continue to smoke in the open whether or not there is a ban on smoking in the pubs.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Leith Road
    Posts
    134

    Default

    David Marshall once said... "Smokers are the persecuted minorities in Singapore."

    Of course this was said with tongue in cheek.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    lulu island
    Posts
    6,131

    Default

    Yeah ban smoking!


  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    494

    Default

    Just reminded me that my last puff was six months ago

    The reason for me quiting was one pack a day...$8 x 365 = S3pro each year



    Fight the urge....buy more cameras and lenses

  6. #6

    Default

    i dun see why we need to smoke its a "want" more than a "need"

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Benign
    Just reminded me that my last puff was six months ago

    The reason for me quiting was one pack a day...$8 x 365 = S3pro each year



    Fight the urge....buy more cameras and lenses
    iirc.... now $10+ liao... not s3pro liao...is 1ds mk2...

  8. #8

    Default

    i think they should ban it altogether rather than procrastinating bout it...raising prices then citing health/social problems...then dropping price...up and down, up and down.

    Don't think they will ever ban totally since it does bring them a large amount of revenue.

    i do smoke socially...i rather quit totally than to take note all the time where to smoke....kena fine... give $ for nothing.
    One-North Explorers
    | Leave nothing but footprints, take nothing but photos |

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Beach Road
    Posts
    3,752

    Default

    the BBB syndrome in Singapore....


    BAN! BAN! BAN!

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Cons digger.
    Posts
    3,924

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tao
    the BBB syndrome in Singapore....


    BAN! BAN! BAN!
    hahaahah good one.
    “How fortunate for leaders that men do not think.” - Adolf Hitler

  11. #11

    Default

    It's very easy for all the non-smokers to just come out and shout 'Ban it totally', but please spare a thought for those of us who are smokers.

    While banning smoking in a public place is justifiable, as to spare a thought to the non-smokers who inhale the secondhand smoke, an outright ban is not feasibly possible. Smoking in part of social culture and, in more extreme terms, a 'way of life' for many of us. Do not equate smoking with consumption of chewing gum.

    It may not be the best of habits, but it's our choice to smoke or not. Quit? Which smoker hasen't thought about quitting before. Ironic isn't it? You also have the choice to chose what camera system to buy into.

    Banning smoking in public places (bus stop, coffeeshop) or in pubs/night clubs may reduce a slight number of smokers (social smokers maybe?), as will increasing the tax on nicotine, but this is only combating the existing smoking issue, not as a means of solving it. The only way to solve it is through education, and that takes time since it's a program which Singapore has only recently started in the past few years.

    The gahmen knows they can't totally ban smoking outright, so they are trying their usual 'banning' by reducing the number of 'smoking areas'. I wonder when the next cigarette price hike is going to be, don't you? More tax dollars from our pockets to the nation's coffers vs. smoking deterrent? Oh no wonder recently COE prices drop. You make the decision.

    On another note, check this out .

  12. #12
    Senior Member Hommie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    925

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mr_jason
    It's very easy for all the non-smokers to just come out and shout 'Ban it totally', but please spare a thought for those of us who are smokers.
    You'll be surprised, those shouting for total ban are mostly smoker themselves. Non-smokers like me have never push for such to happen because it never will. Why? Because smoker dare the garment to ban it totally instead of increase the tax constantly, spare their addiction and pain.

    Quote Originally Posted by mr_jason
    While banning smoking in a public place is justifiable, as to spare a thought to the non-smokers who inhale the secondhand smoke, an outright ban is not feasibly possible. Smoking in part of social culture and, in more extreme terms, a 'way of life' for many of us. Do not equate smoking with consumption of chewing gum.It may not be the best of habits, but it's our choice to smoke or not. Quit? Which smoker hasen't thought about quitting before. Ironic isn't it? You also have the choice to chose what camera system to buy into.
    Actually I'll equate it to a individual choice rather than putting it as a social culture. Which part of social culture is it that encourages smoking? Or is it peer/social pressure? But you got it there when you mentioned that its your choice, your choice.


    Quote Originally Posted by mr_jason
    Banning smoking in public places (bus stop, coffeeshop) or in pubs/night clubs may reduce a slight number of smokers (social smokers maybe?), as will increasing the tax on nicotine, but this is only combating the existing smoking issue, not as a means of solving it. The only way to solve it is through education, and that takes time since it's a program which Singapore has only recently started in the past few years.
    I can't remember the time when the smoking packages didn't label slogons like "smoking kills or smoking causes lung diease or thinks about your children/ spouses". Nowadays, graphic images are displayed instead on the box and commericals running on the TV showing that its baaaaaad! Its been as long as I can remember, what do you mean by 'only started in past few years'?

    Quote Originally Posted by mr_jason
    The gahmen knows they can't totally ban smoking outright, so they are trying their usual 'banning' by reducing the number of 'smoking areas'. I wonder when the next cigarette price hike is going to be, don't you? More tax dollars from our pockets to the nation's coffers vs. smoking deterrent? Oh no wonder recently COE prices drop. You make the decision.
    Its a sin tax, they have a guilt free time collecting it in the name of detering more smokers to smoke and decreasing the health issue of lung diease. No rights or wrongs.....
    Last edited by Hommie; 23rd March 2005 at 01:38 PM.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Leith Road
    Posts
    134

    Default

    I heard from my colleague that in Germany, the government has increase the tax on cigarettes slowly just as in Singapore. As a result, there is actually a significant decrease in smokers these days. Compared to years ago, the tax collected from tobacco sales dropped drastically recently. This shows that price hike does help reduce smokers.

    Of course, if a government is taxing just to maintain their revenue, then they will have to start thinking of other ways of replenishing the decrease. Maybe imposed other forms of taxes? Increase tax on alcohol?

    Fortunately, Singapore is not like that. It is the concern for the health of the nation that drives the taxes up. We see the government promoting healthy lifestyle etc.

    A bit out of the point... but if there is no COE, there might be too many cars on the road, and the emission from exhaust might cause lung cancer. Then health warning labels must be placed on the vehicles etc.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Leith Road
    Posts
    134

    Default

    I used to work in Jurong Island and once attended a Health and Safety talk. The guy presenting said that actually, the exhaust from the chimneys of some of the plants there are very toxic, more than second, third or fourth hand smoke of cigarettes. And they run 24-7, having shut downs only once every few years. Of course, having a tall chimney and having a favorable predominant wind direction reduces our contact, but it's still not enough. Some of the workers there are required to go for medical checkups every six months due to their exposure.

    Is there an acceptable casualty figure pegged to getting foreign investors?

    What choices do the people staying in the west have?

    Tobacco ban? I think we don't know what bigger problems actually exist.

    Granted, there are non-smokers who prefer fresh air and their rights should not be breached.

    So I suggest that an area for smokers be set aside. Not those separated by small pots of plants as seen in some other countries, but actually separated areas with installed vents that exhausts cigarette fumes effectively.

    Just my thought.
    Last edited by Clark75; 23rd March 2005 at 01:36 PM.

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Singapore / Japan / China
    Posts
    1,928

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Benign
    Just reminded me that my last puff was six months ago
    good for you that you managed to quit.

  16. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hommie
    You'll be surprised, those shouting for total ban are mostly smoker themselves. Non-smokers like me have never push for such to happen because it never will. Why? Because smoker dare the garment to ban it totally instead of increase the tax constantly, spare their addiction and pain.

    Actually I'll equate it to a individual choice rather than putting it as a social culture. Which part of social culture is it that encourages smoking? Or is it peer/social pressure? But you got it there when you mentioned that its your choice, your choice.

    I can't remember the time when the smoking packages didn't label slogons like "smoking kills or smoking causes lung diease or thinks about your children/ spouses". Nowadays, graphic images are displayed instead on the box and commericals running on the TV showing that its baaaaaad! Its been as long as I can remember, what do you mean by 'only started in past few years'?

    Its a sin tax, they have a guilt free time collecting it in the name of detering more smokers to smoker and decreasing the health issue of lung diease. No rights or wrongs.....
    Smokers only dare to ask the gahmen to ban it totally out of frustration at constantly having to pay more and more for cigarettes. But in actual fact we know that they will never ban it. So far, I think only Bhutan has banned public smoking, something to that effect. There will most definately be a social uproar if the gahmen banned the sale and consumption of tobacco products.

    Which part of social culture encourages smoking? Product placements and actors in movies and tv shows I'd say. People pick up smoking or get 'interested' in it through these avenues. True it is an individual choice, but what influences that choice can be put down to social culture, what's seen as 'cool' and mature. Like that might as well censor the parts where people are smoking (not serious)?

    The warning and labels on the boxes have been around forever, yes. But how many people actually will bother with it if it's only text? Ask any smoker, would they care? Every country has these. Would you ask the shop vendor to change the cigarette box because it said 'Smoking Causes Cancer' instead of 'Smoking Harms the Family'? Now that the new and graphic boxes are out, yes people are taking a look and having second thoughts. Many smokers would try and get the vendors to give them the 'Family' pack instead of all the other more graphic pictures. These shock tactics will work.

    The tax issue isn't one of right or wrong, it's just what they have to do to further deter existing and young smokers. Same reason they eliminated to 10 stick packs, pricing reason. Combating the situation on both fronts which is increasing education and prices will lower demand, but as you can see there are 'cheaper' cigarettes out there like Limos, Texas, More which target the pricing problem, while incrasing the supply of cigarettes more.

    Maybe a fixed tax to all cigarettes charged on a per stick basis instead of amount/weight of tobacco per stick will solve this problem right? Or fix a price floor on the price per pack, so no more 'cheaper' and 'more expensive' brands. Even though the increase in tax led to price of the Marlboros, Kents and Dunhills increasing, thus leading to a drop in demand for those brands, supply of the newer cheaper brands which use less tobacco per stick (Limos, Texas, More) has fufilled the 'shortage'. So the only outcome of constant increases in tax has led to new and cheaper cigarette brands emerging, utilising the loophole. Instead of constant increases in the price, why dosen't the gahmen plug this loophole?
    Last edited by mr_jason; 24th March 2005 at 03:30 AM.

  17. #17
    Senior Member Hommie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    925

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mr_jason
    Smokers only dare to ask the gahmen to ban it totally out of frustration at constantly having to pay more and more for cigarettes. But in actual fact we know that they will never ban it. So far, I think only Bahrain has banned the sale of cigarettes and locals smoking, something to that effect. There will most definately be a social uproar if the gahmen banned the sale and consumption of tobacco products.
    Something to think about....

    Quote Originally Posted by mr_jason
    Which part of social culture encourages smoking? Product placements and actors in movies and tv shows I'd say. People pick up smoking or get 'interested' in it through these avenues. True it is an individual choice, but what influences that choice can be put down to social culture, what's seen as 'cool' and mature. Like that might as well censor the parts where people are smoking (not serious)?
    I dunno, I have seen even more cooler A-list hollywood and sport celebrities promoting for anti-smoking campaign to little effect. People see what they want and lastly the decision making still comes down an individual choices. We respect that.

    Quote Originally Posted by mr_jason
    The warning and labels on the boxes have been around forever, yes. But how many people actually will bother with it if it's only text? Ask any smoker, would they care? Every country has these. Would you ask the shop vendor to change the cigarette box because it said 'Smoking Causes Cancer' instead of 'Smoking Harms the Family'? Now that the new and graphic boxes are out, yes people are taking a look and having second thoughts. Many smokers would try and get the vendors to give them the 'Family' pack instead of all the other more graphic pictures. These shock tactics will work.
    This is the education I am talking about, it has always been there. I doubt the effect is as strong as some will it to be. As usual, people see what they wanna see....

    Quote Originally Posted by mr_jason
    The tax issue isn't one of right or wrong, it's just what they have to do to further deter existing and young smokers. Same reason they eliminated to 10 stick packs, pricing reason. Combating the situation on both fronts which is increasing education and prices will lower demand, but as you can see there are 'cheaper' cigarettes out there like Limos, Texas, More which target the pricing problem, while incrasing the supply of cigarettes more.

    Maybe a fixed tax to all cigarettes charged on a per stick basis instead of amount/weight of tobacco per stick will solve this problem right? Or fix a price floor on the price per pack, so no more 'cheaper' and 'more expensive' brands. Even though the increase in tax led to price of the Marlboros, Kents and Dunhills increasing, thus leading to a drop in demand for those brands, supply of the newer cheaper brands which use less tobacco per stick (Limos, Texas, More) has fufilled the 'shortage'. So the only outcome of constant increases in tax has led to new and cheaper cigarette brands emerging, utilising the loophole. Instead of constant increases in the price, why dosen't the gahmen plug this loophole?
    You have good suggestion and I hope you succeed in quitting the habit!

  18. #18

    Default

    there's no need for the govt to ban. the rise in the tax and those latest horrifyin pics on the cigarette boxes have significantly deterred a number of smokers to cut down on their smoking.

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Leith Road
    Posts
    134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dolpjki
    there's no need for the govt to ban. the rise in the tax and those latest horrifyin pics on the cigarette boxes have significantly deterred a number of smokers to cut down on their smoking.
    That's why I always choose the packs with the 'family' and 'man on hospital' bed' ones. Some of my friends have switched to using cigarette holders too.

    But it's true lah, the high taxes have forced some to switch to cheaper brands and some to quit altogether.

    For me, I'm alternating between cigarettes and nicotine gums (which are actually quite expensive).

  20. #20
    Senior Member poohbear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Sengkang
    Posts
    1,163

    Default

    cut down ?? chey .. I always limit myself to 1 pack of cigerettes when they used to sell those small packing at 10 sticks/pack. Now I'm still limiting myself to 1 pack per day , just that it's a 20 sticks now ..... and pls dun tell me it's about self control ...... if we have self control , kaverment no need to come up with all these price hikes liao lah ..

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •