Sugar Tax kicks in 6th April



Many factors. Mostly lack of resources and poor allocation of resources.

Never seem to be short of a tab or Maccies though so I suspect more latter than former
lack of resources? what do you mean? tobacco is bad, the government tells us constantly, be it on the back of buses and bus stops, advertising boards etc. everybody has access to the information. why is it that people on higher incomes do it less?

I would to be fair. if people want to eat doner meat and chips for their tea, I'm not going to stop them.
scran of kings
 
Bedroom tax :lol:
Sugar tax :lol:

Thank god for that, no more fat people living in the wrong shaped house's, phew, thats that sorted.
 
Some of the fittest people I know have cost the nhs a f***ing fortune due to injuries and having to get new knees and hips in their 50's.

Bet the fatties outweigh the cost spent on people who are costing the NHS from knees and hips from sport though.

Plus they probably need a knee replacement just from sitting doing fuck all anyway.
 
Bet the fatties outweigh the cost spent on people who are costing the NHS from knees and hips from sport though.

Plus they probably need a knee replacement just from sitting doing fuck all anyway.
No doubt they are a burden on the nhs but the sporty still cost the nhs a fortune due to their lifestyles. This is why you either give everyone it free at point of use or charge everyone lifestyle penalties. To be honest fatties, pisspots and smokers are already hammered with tax so you could argue they already pay that penalty.
 
I would to be fair. if people want to eat doner meat and chips for their tea, I'm not going to stop them.
I had donner meat and chips on Saturday night, it was scratastic.

I can't help but think that if the government said that from today they would start denying services to people who got a long term condition through a lifetime of a shit diet you would call bullshit like. :lol:
 
No doubt they are a burden on the nhs but the sporty still cost the nhs a fortune due to their lifestyles. This is why you either give everyone it free at point of use or charge everyone lifestyle penalties. To be honest fatties, pisspots and smokers are already hammered with tax so you could argue they already pay that penalty.

Hammer them more. Price them out for all
I care.

Love to hear the wailing and crying on here like

Wah wah wah the government won’t let me smoke myself to an early grave
 
Hammer them more. Price them out for all
I care.

Love to hear the wailing and crying on here like

Wah wah wah the government won’t let me smoke myself to an early grave

That's f***ing stupid. You need to keep that tax just enough to cover their care but make sure it's cheap enough so they fuck themselves up enough to shuffle off early.

How many obese people or a 40 a day smokers claim pensions for 35 years?

Not f***ing many I'll wager.


Imagine the strain on the nhs and pensions if everyone was living to 100 and needed countless knee and hip ops. Fuck that. The fit will be more of a burdon than some fucker who goes out with a bang at 64 after a short tab related illness.
 
That's f***ing stupid. You need to keep that tax just enough to cover their care but make sure it's cheap enough so they fuck themselves up enough to shuffle off early.

How many obese people or a 40 a day smokers claim pensions for 35 years?

Not f***ing many I'll wager.


Imagine the strain on the nhs and pensions if everyone was living to 100 and needed countless knee and hip ops. Fuck that. The fit will be more of a burdon than some fucker who goes out with a bang at 64 after a short tab related illness.

Well if you’re happy for folk to smoke themselves to an early grave because you think that’s economically necessary fair enough

Can’t imagine you’d feel the same about letting people burn to death to reduce the pension payments like
 
Well if you’re happy for folk to smoke themselves to an early grave because you think that’s economically necessary fair enough

Can’t imagine you’d feel the same about letting people burn to death to reduce the pension payments like
the fuck is that supposed to mean?
 
Well if you’re happy for folk to smoke themselves to an early grave because you think that’s economically necessary fair enough

Can’t imagine you’d feel the same about letting people burn to death to reduce the pension payments like

Look man they know the risks, they pay more than their fair share of tax and they enjoy it. If they want to smoke and drink themselves to death let them. What's going to happen when people are living to 100. They'll be working to f***ing 85 that's what. Less jobs for younguns etc etc.
It'll be a f***ing disaster.
 
the fuck is that supposed to mean?

Isn't Sparty a fireman?

My point is that the state is in the business of preventing harm to the population - where this is preventable.

Sparty says that it's better that some people do drink and smoke and whatever-else themselves to death as it reduces the amount paid out in pensions.

I'm sure he's right to a point. My counter would be that often the people dropping dead in their 50s and 60s have been economically inactive for many years and through ill-health and other issues, likely have patchy employment history. Had we kept them in good health, by discouraging alcoholism or smoking or obesity or whatever, then they'd likely be economically productive, which would aid the economy.

If we're happy to let people smoke themselves to death at 55 through lung cancer or COPD or whatever else, because it is economically beneficial in regards to pensions then why aren't we happy to let people die in car crashes early, or in burning homes or in unsafe working conditions or anything else? It's much the same.

Look man they know the risks, they pay more than their fair share of tax and they enjoy it. If they want to smoke and drink themselves to death let them. What's going to happen when people are living to 100. They'll be working to f***ing 85 that's what. Less jobs for younguns etc etc.
It'll be a f***ing disaster.

Plenty of people die in their 70s and 80s despite never having issues with smoking, drinking or whatever else. These people dying at 60 haven't been economically productive from 18-59 and then suddenly drop dead, you know. In many cases (bearing in mind this is what I do for a day job) research shows that they're often from the most deprived communities and have had significant issues with employment, mental health, disability etc throughout their lives.

Had we kept them fit and healthy they'd have enjoyed a more productive working life, produced more for the state and benefitted us all.

If a detached bungalow containing a 45-year-old smoker caught fire, you wouldn't let the occupant burn to death to save the pension pot, so why you say it's fine for them to die of cancer, COPD or heart failure because of smoking, I am unsure.
 
I had donner meat and chips on Saturday night, it was scratastic.

I can't help but think that if the government said that from today they would start denying services to people who got a long term condition through a lifetime of a shit diet you would call bullshit like. :lol:
It would never happen. Maybe it would be easier if we had to get private health care.
 

Back
Top