Simon Wrote:

> > Nonsense. What the NHS gets from excise duty
> on
> > tobacco is not nearly as much as it costs it
> to
> > treat the diseases that result from smoking
> the
> > foul stuff.
> >
>
> Well you are actually wrong there -

What's this? Deceptive economics? I refer to what the NHS gets from taxation on tobacco and you post sites that tell us what HMGov gets from it and you hope I won't notice the sleight of hand? I'm beginning to wonder how I contrive to give the impression that I am that stupid!

Let's look at the actuality (data sources in parentheses):

Total HM GOv expenditure (2005 budget): £519 billion
Total health expenditure (2005 budget): £ 90bn -- 17.3% of total

HMG income fromr excise duty and VAT on tobacco (FOREST): £7bn (ASH) £8bn
Cost to NHS of smoking (FOREST & ASH): £1.5bn

17.3% of £8bn (i.e. the NHS share) is over £100 million less than the cost to the NHS of smoking-related disease.

However, were smoking-related diseases to disappear, it would be political suicide to remove from the NHS its proportion of tobacco taxation. The expenditure on treatment of the self-inflicted health effects of smoking would be diverted to treating the diseases, etc. that are currently untreated because of NHS budget restrictions.




--

Stephen