What cost is "loss of lifetime earnings" because you die early while still of working age? And cost to whom? (You're dead).

How can you add that like-for-like to actual financial cost to NHS? (Which was the otiginal issue of the discussion, remember?)

Shifting the topic and trying to add random things as "cost" is fudging the numbers, so dishoneest, indeed. It is obvious and I am hoping you see it, too.

Bottom line is that smokers do pay for the cost of their healthcare so this is a fair system and people can then make their own decisions regarding their own lives (which is what a free, liberal society is about).

▲

greggoB 3 hours ago | parent [-]

> so this is a fair system

Well, no, the cost of their own smoking-induced illness isn't the only cost, as mentioned before what about the healthcare costs of people who pick up 2nd or 3rd hand smoke?

I think the point we are making thay you don't want to acknowledge is that the cost to society, healthcare or otherwise, simply cannot be made up for with sin taxes on cigarettes. If we tried that, a pack would need to cost like 10x or more of what it does now, and even then it's debatable.

	▲	mytailorisrich 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Unless we have finer data, I would assume that 2nd and 3rd hand smoke is included in "smoking-related" so in the cost figure. It has also to be much less than actual smoking so will not massively change the NHS cost. We have already established that healthcare costs are more than covered by existing tax. Arguing and trying to make up additional "costs" is, again, just fudging the numbers and clutching at straws at this point... Live and let live.