Ruling bloc forgoes tobacco tax hike to fund social security costs

Friday 12th December, 04:28 AM JST

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

Latest 15 of 30 Total Comments Show All

realist at 01:17 AM JST - 12th December

Once again, the LDP Fascist/Soka Gakkai Alliance shows its true colors. They cave in to the demands of their supporters, and refuse to put a bigger tax on Cancer Weeds. Of course, the J government owns Japan Tobacco - so they also dont wish to tax themselves. The sooner this crowd of charlatans is voted out of office, the better for the Japanese people.
franz75 at 07:32 AM JST - 12th December

cleo: as a smoker myself, I still don't understand your point. Smoking may be baaaad but anti-social habit?
thepro at 08:55 AM JST - 12th December

I find it really disgusting that in this country the government's main concern with cigarattes is how much money they can get from the tax on them, rather than the health problems related to them
cleo at 09:37 AM JST - 12th December

franz75 -

You don't understand how smoking is anti-social??

When smokers light up in public they contaminate the air around them with toxic fumes. A decent-sized room can be turned into a smoke-box in minutes. When they do it in restaurants, it kills the taste of the food. I have very slight asthma, which doesn't bother me at all unless I catch cold or am forced to spend any amount of time in a smoky atmosphere, after which I end up at the hospital and need several days off work while I struggle to breathe. You don't think spoiling folks' dinners and putting them gasping on their backs is anti-social? Not to mention the ash flicked all over the place and butts thrown on the floor outside non-smoking areas.
BlackFlag at 10:29 AM JST - 12th December

I agree with Cleo 100%
franz75 at 10:39 AM JST - 12th December

cleo: we are already confined is smoking reserved spaces.

I have no problem with Tokyo banning cigarettes on train platforms, no problem about imposing a ban in all restaurants, etc.

About butts, this is a question of eduction like littering, picking your nose in public, etc.

I'm sorry for your asthma but you should worry more about air pollution in the cities caused by cars, fire retardants in your futton and other furnitures.

Finally, what you eat!

Smoking is not anti-social.
BlackFlag at 10:43 AM JST - 12th December

Smoking is not anti-social

yes it is. if you do it in a public place you are annoying and damaging people around you. that is anti social.
fds at 11:11 AM JST - 12th December

actually sharing a smoke with friends is very social. in fact there are sub-cultures built around it like the sharing of a hookah in the middle east. what you all are complaining about is second hand smoke which is a different issue. what you are trying to do is impose the will of non-smoker on smokers, which i do not agree with. what i've alway said, let the owner of the place decide and put a big sign up designating the place either smoking or non-smoking, then you have the choice of whether you want patronize/work at the place or not. if the government wants to ban smoking on the streets that's their perogative. if JR wants to ban smoking in their train stations that is also their perogative. but if a bar/restaurant owner wants to allow smoking that is their perogative. if you don't like it don't go.

that being said, i don't understand why they don't raise taxes on tobacco either and i'm a smoker. but instead of using it to fund social security, it should be used to fund kenkohoken.
cleo at 11:15 AM JST - 12th December

franz -

Why do you think there is such strong support for the banning of cigarette smoking on train platforms, in restaurants and other public places? Because it's anti-social.

you should worry more about air pollution in the cities caused by cars

One of the reasons I live in the countryside (apart from it being altogether more pleasant) is that the air is cleaner here. Since moving to the countryside I have not had a single asthma attack except for when some moron insisted on smoking in an enclosed space I was not free to leave. (Eventually I did, treading on quite a few toes in the process, but it was too late...)

If you're a regular on JT you should know that no one is more fussy about what she eats than cleo.
franz75 at 11:29 AM JST - 12th December

cleo: "Why do you think there is such strong support for the banning of cigarette smoking on train platforms, in restaurants and other public places?" yeah, drinking was anti-social in the 20's too. Just a question of "norm"... Smokers were dictating non-smokers, so now it's the non-smokers revenge.

I know the risk, I know it's bad. That's my problem.

If they ban cigarettes in all public spaces, fine for me. Let me at least light my cigarette in the cold outside.
cleo at 01:36 PM JST - 12th December

drinking was anti-social in the 20's too

No it wasn't. It was illegal in one(?) country, the rest of the world went on enjoying the occasional tipple without the drama of speakeasies and Eliot Ness.

I know the risk, I know it's bad. That's my problem.

It's your problem so long as you smoke alone in an enclosed space. The moment you light up in public - and that includes the cold outside, if it's a place where normal people are walking or are likely to walk - then it become everyone's problem, and an anti-social act. Second-hand smoke contains more toxins than the smoke you inhale directly.

We had a weekend away recently with a number of other couples. During the meal and drinkies we had after, about a third of the men left the room at regular intervals to get their fix. I reckon that's anti-social, when the filthy habit disrupts normal social intercourse.
franz75 at 03:32 PM JST - 12th December

"men left the room at regular intervals to get their fix". not smoking is the problem. Non-smokers are the cause of disrupting normal social intercourse.

We cannot smoke anymore. We cannot drink and drive anymore. We cannot beat our children anymore. What kind of society is that...

Have a nice week-end :-)
BlackFlag at 05:29 PM JST - 12th December

if the government wants to ban smoking on the streets that's their perogative

that is what I mean by public places. I know where I don't want to go because of smokers so I don't go there, pubs and restaurants fine, I'll visit the no smoking ones. However many streets in Japan are now no smoking punishable by fine, yet it deters few smokers. whenever I see someone walking down a crowded street waving a lit cigarette around I want to punch them.
Shumatsu_Samurai at 01:26 AM JST - 13th December

the rest of the world went on enjoying the occasional tipple without the drama of speakeasies and Eliot Ness.

cleo, you know you're being economical with the truth. In reality the world does a lot more than enjoy the "occasional" tipple - it is addicted to alcohol. Americans refused to obey the prohibition rules not because alcohol is good, or because it isn't bad but because they were "addicted" to it. You don't have to be an alcoholic to be unable/unwilling to not drink.

Now I drink once or twice a week in moderation, but I recognise that a lot of people "can't" do without - and they're not alcoholics. Booze is a global addiction in that really the world would be a better place without it, but relatively few would be willing to make that happen. We know that the world will never drink responsibly because arguably it never has done.

I have never smoked, but I think that much criticism of smokers is hypocritical. People call for bans on smoking in public places and restaurants, but do they correspondingly call for bans on drinking in the same places? Not usually. I don't like breathing in second-hand smoke, but nor do I like having to hear the drunken, very loud talking of someone who has had too much to drink. Whatever you may say, waiters will not try to keep them quiet because they fear getting glassed by drunks and they want the profit from the drinkers. The only places you would be immume from that are in super-posh restaurants and exclusive clubs.

Smokers already pay a massive amount of tax on their ciggies, whereas drinkers get off with a lot less. And at the least, smoking doesn't cause traffic accidents, nor does it lead to an increase of assaults, rapes, etc.

If I could banish cigarettes or booze from the world it would be the latter, despite the fact that's the only one out of the two I enjoy.
cleo at 11:47 AM JST - 13th December

Shumatsu -

I agree with you that drunks are anti-social. Not as anti-social as smokers, in that what they drink doesn't end up in my lungs, but more anti-social in that they can and do cause traffic accidents.

But it is possible to enjoy a tipple in public without being obnoxious. Not so the smoker. I have no problem with the banning of public drunkenness, and DUI is already a crime.

The only places you would be immume from that (loud talking by drunks in restaurants etc) are in super-posh restaurants and exclusive clubs.

Now I think you're exaggerating. I do not frequent 'super-posh restaurants and exclusive clubs', and I enjoy the occasional tipple, but the problem you speak of is not one I come across often. Then again I live in the sticks and don't frequent dives. If smoking were limited to super-posh restaurants and clubs, I wouldn't complain. And they wouldn't get my custom (they don't now, so no change).

Tax on alcohol is beer 46.5%, sake 17.9%, shochu 35.8%, whisky 22.8%. Certainly less than the 63.1% of tobacco. By all means impose heavy fines on public drunkenness, which is nearly as anti-social as public smoking.

Moderator: Stay on topic please. Drinking is not relevant to this discussion, which is about a tobacco tax.