C H A N N E L S  A M S T E R D A M
German Spanish French dutch Italien Portugese  
A - Z

Amsterdam Knowledge Base

A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z 

<< PreviousNext >>
Price of cigarettes in A'dam

Hello. Just curious if anyone knows the average cost of cigarettes in Amsterdam. Thanks.
I went a few months ago and the price wasn't much different than in the US. But plan ahead and buy as many as you will need at the duty free at Schipol airport. Much cheaper there.
most brands are 3.2 euro for a packet of 20
i second that advice about getting them at the duty free shop..I got two cartons of Marlboros for less than 40 dollars...here in North Carolina the are pretty cheap normally , around 22 to 24 dollars a carton and less than 3 a pack single....But duty free is the way to go for sure..
CHEAP???? You people are crazy to remain addicted to such a vile and dangerous substance at any price but really...

*Taps a vein*
Smoking cigarettes will kill you! That's why I eat them.
Jeez, relax Bo, Daz + Gab. Everyone has thier vises. You ever hear the phrase "To each their own" You know some people would frown on you for your use of pot. And one more thing. Don't give me any sh*t about posting as guest because i'm not a member. I just like visiting and reading the posts
"What were once habits are now vices" LOL. I really didn't mean to "flame" smokers (is there a pun there?) I was addicted to cigartettes twice in my life, for years. I have and always will contend that apart from the occasional pipe or fine Cuban cigar, the only "enjoyment" one gains from tobacco is the relief from the cravings caused by addiction. "Winstons taste GOOD like a cigarette should" Please! The taste sucks, the way your mouth hair, room and breath smells is horrid and so is the price.
I laughed my ass off yesterday when one of Bush's henchpeople (a female lawyer or doctor I can't remember who) stated (in response to the Rosenthal decision) "There is scientific proof that marijuanna is addictive". Where is that proof? What scientific study was that? There is no way that I could have gone as long without a cigarette as I do voluntarily, without pot. I am a very occasional user. Besides, the irony in her statement is that she seems to be inferring that ganja should be illegal because it is addictive, HELLOOOOO tobacco, alchohol;, valium etc!!! "nuf said
Chalk me up as a tobacco hater.

It irks me that co-workers who smoke are allowed lavish break time to go outside and smoke 'n schmooze. I liked the one Dilbert cartoon where Wally was going to take up smoking for the extra break time!

Its a nasty vice. It also bothers me that I have to go to the Dam to freely indulge my vice but co-workers who smoke don't even have to wait till they get home. The workplace has adapted to their vice.

And then there's the price. $20+++ a carton is a lot of money
"up in smoke"!
Please shoot me if I ever start growing "mouth hair."
Chalk me up as a tobacco hater.

It irks me that co-workers who smoke are allowed lavish break time to go outside and smoke 'n schmooze.

That's when I learned to smoke. Everybody on my submarine could take smoke breaks on the pier so I figured I would get more time to goof off if I started smoking. Nobody warned me about trying to go "topside" for a smoke when we were at patrol depth though.
It irks me that co-workers who smoke are allowed lavish break time to go outside and smoke 'n schmooze.

The workplace has adapted to their vice.

And you don't even hear what we say about the non-smokers when we're out there. A lot of office politics are conducted in the smoking area.

And then there's the price. $20+++ a carton is a lot of money
"up in smoke"!

Some would say that 30EUR for a gram of plant matter is a little excessive. People are tolerant of your vice, why do you have to be scathing and intolerant of theirs?
I hope that you weren't referring to me, I did not mean to be either "scathing" or "intolerant" I don't even mind the occasional whiff of smoke as long as I don't get inundated. Hell, I even allow my tobacco addicted (smokers to you, lol) friends to smoke in my house. I just air it our for a few days afterword.
Hm? No, I was talking to bear. His were the remarks I quoted.
im in california and cigs are just below $4. however i just came back from New York and cigs over there are OVER $7.
I'm all for people ingesting whatever they would like, as long as I don't also have to ingest it. That is my problem with cigarette smokers, generally-speaking - they generally do not seem to take into consideration that folks around them made a conscious decision to NOT smoke.

Yes, I know pot smoke is the same thing, which is why I love the idea of coffeeshops - you KNOW you're walking into a pot smoking store. I'm all for the idea of cigarette/cigar shops - at least then I KNOW to stay out of those places.

People in my hometown are in a tizzy because of a city-wide indoor smoking ban that's been passed recently. I love it, but of course there are people that believe their freedoms are being supressed. At least heroin users aren't running around injecting strangers everywhere they go!
There was a move to ban smoking in pubs here some time ago. It didn't work. It could never work, and neither will it work in Irealnd.

My reply to "I have a right to breathe clean air' is "Yes. And you also have a right to drink elsewhere." The proprietor of the premises has that right too. If you don't like smoke, don't go there. If enough people stay away, they'll change the policy.

That's what happens in a free market, rather than a socialist, regulated market.

I cannot see how banning business proprietors from allowing people to smoke on the premises they own can be defended. Surely any goovernment introducing legislation of this kind cannot conscionably call itself free.
I have made the choice not to smoke but I feel that city or state wide bans on smoking is just another way that the govt is telling people how to live there lives. I feel it should be up to the owners of the establishment if they want smoking allowed or a non smoking place. We all wear big boy/girl pants and can make our own choices as to which establishments to go to. If the smoke is too much for you,then leave. If you can't smoke in a place, then leave and find one that will allow it. To me it is all about people making the choice for me.
Another thing:

could all those whom are so vigorously anti-smoking on the grounds that it allegedly damages the health of non-smokers tell us all about their campagining against over-use of cars, proliferation of large, inefficient vehicles and over-reliance on fossil fuels?

These represent a far greater risk to health and a much harder to escape.
You're right Dazz, and that's why I don't eat dinner in the middle of the freeway.

I don't mind that ANYONE smokes cigarettes - I'm all for people killing themselves quickly or slowly however the choose, including sticking a fork in their eyes. My problem with smoking is your choice directly going against my choice. When you smoke in an enclosed space, I cannot avoid the smoke. And anyone that's ever been in a non-smoking section will tell you that the designation "non-smoking section" is a load of crap - smoke doesn't adhere to these sections.

Again, I'm all for allowing certain places to still allow smoking - late-night type bars, etc, where smoking is prevalent; cigar bars where you're going more for the smokes than the drinks; coffeeshops where you're going specifically for smoking. But frankly, if you can't think more of those around you to not smoke around people that don't want it, then your selfishness and self-importance is the problem. But you're not alone there - I've found that people's belief in their own self-importance is one of the most common problems out there.
But you haven't answered the question: how can you justify telling business proprietors what they can and cannot allow their customers to do?

And you might not eat your dinner in the middle of the road, but you are constantly exposed to benzine, carbon monoxide, soot and tar emissions from other people's exhausts. Allergies are soaring. Respiratory illness is on the increase.

Fewer and fewer people are smoking.

So are you telling motorists the same? That their insistence on driving large, inefficient cars is due to their own self-importance? The risk posed by these emissions far outweighs that of tobacco smoke, yet the current cowardly, puritan route is to blame smokers rather than drivers, burger restaurants, airports and power stations.

If your desire to eat in a smoke-free environemnt is so overriding, go to a non-smoking restaurant.

A case in point: McDonald's is now non-smoking in parts of the world where it's possible to enforce this rule, yet one burger restaurant generates the same amount of emission as twelve double-decker buses. I don't see anyone haranguing people eating in MDonalds for their contribution to air pollution.

Let he whom is without sin, and all that...
Are you telling me that you're a smoker but you don't ever drive a car or use electricity?

Smoking is unlike many other things - driving and electricity are generally accepted, and while I agree that they could be done more efficiently and with less emissions, they are much more widely accepted and utilized actions than, yes, even smoking. Given that the production of these emissions is less about individual's choices - sure, you can get around without a car in many big cities, but my small town has extremely mediocre mass transit, unlike the tube in London, which isn't exactly "clean air"! - I consider it to be more accepted that these emissions are part of our lives. Indoors, at a restaurant, I'd like to think that you can get away from similar emissions.

I don't buy the proprietor's rights on this one. IMO, this is more about choosing not to purposely subject yourself to a deadly toxin, yet having those around you forcefully subject you (no, not with your hands bound). If you had chosen to not want to be subjected to automobile emissions, and someone drove a Ford Explorer into your living room, we might be talking about similar situations. Do you believe that proprietors should allow some customers to leave their cars running out front while also attaching a hose to their tail pipe that pumps their exhaust into the proprietor's business?

Again, IMO, it comes down to self importance, and this is why I don't walk around Amsterdam smoking pot everywhere - there are places to do that FOR A REASON. Your rights are not being infringed on if you are not allowed to smoke wherever you feel like it. Now, if you came up with a cigarette that gave off no second hand smoke, and a smoker was able to absorb all that was inhaled, then I might buy allowing them to smoke in crowded public indoor spaces. Until then, why not have some simple courtesy rather than screaming about how you have to "suffer" from not being able to smoke every moment of your waking life and everywhere you step.

For the record - I'm not truly militant about this, I just find it particularly disappointing that many smokers cannot see that some courtesy could be employed. I don't mind if people have guns - generally they're not going to hurt you unless a) they intend to, or b) they really fuck up. Smokers generally affect those around them through no true intention, and they have to realize that's the case.
Special offers
WestCord City Centre Hotel

Prices from EUR 109

At walking distance from Central Station and the main attractions, you will find the perfect starting point for exploring.... >>

More offers...

The Knowledge base is created by answers from the amsterdam forum on The Channels website.
Opinions expressed here are from the posters on the forum and do not nessecarily represent the opinion of The Channels

© Channels 1995-2015, guides to the cities of the world   Pricacy statement   About The Channels