5 ms·

I mean, I would love it if people behaved in a moral way - if they are in a business that brings a net negative value to the world, then yes! Shut it down! But

I mean, I would love it if people behaved in a moral way - if they are in a business that brings a net negative value to the world, then yes! Shut it down! But I'm not here expecting that to happen... Instead I think we should just know that what they are saying and why they are saying it is 100% a cyncial play to make more money at the cost of the environment and people's health, and regulate them as such.

scarface74 7y ago
Playing Devils Advocate: Why are we so quick to demonize the tobacco industry but we don’t demonize companies that sell alcohol, artificial sweeteners, junk food, red meat, etc. They are all unhealthy. I’m sure everyone has some bad habits that will lead to a premature death.
- cryptonector 7y ago
  Or even marijuana. Legalizing marijuana is popular now, and so is banning nicotine. The cognitive dissonance in that is something to marvel at.
  - tehjoker 7y ago
    Not really. You can want something to be legal, not have the state brutalize people, and still not want for profit companies synthesizing desire via marketing and product design and creating ubiquitous availability.
    - scarface74 7y ago
      You can want both. But it can’t happen. I personally would rather not have a world where marijuana use is widespread, but I would rather have that if it means taking away one more tool from the justice system to punish people (unequally) for a victimless crime.
    - dr_dshiv 7y ago
      What world do you live in? Potato chip companies cause way way more social harm than Juul. It is waaay easier to quit Juul than cigarettes. It doesn't cause cancer. What is actually the issue, besides the puritanism?
      - kennywinker 7y ago
        1. potato chips aren't addictive. 2. juul is bringing millions of new people to tobacco products, not just providing a way for smokers to ease off cigarettes.
        leetcrew 7y ago
        > potato chips aren't addictive this claim is not uncontroversial. they don't cause physical dependence in the way we think of with drugs (ie, no physical withdrawal syndrome), but eating junk food can be an exceptionally difficult habit to break. humans can become addicted to almost anything that gives a moderate to strong immediate reward.
        kennywinker 7y ago
        Clearly there are differences between potato chips (hard to stop eating) and alcohol/tobacco/coffee (physical withdrawal symptoms). So how about this: I think the more addictive something is, the more carefully we should regulate the capitalist systems that surround it. Not actually that complicated a position.
        leetcrew 7y ago
        not trying to split hairs, but it's worth pointing out that addiction is a lot more complicated than most people think. the severity of physical withdrawal is not perfectly correlated with how hard it is to kick a habit; there are a lot of other factors. I don't disagree with your broader point though. as long as you are focused on preventing new users rather than making the lives of existing users needlessly difficult, you'll get no argument from me.
        7y ago
  - ppseafield 7y ago
    Marijuana is a plant that is very easy to grow, has few negative long-term side effects, has several medicinal properties, and its ban and subsequent enforcement existed to disenfranchise anti-war folks and minorities. Additionally its ban helped gangs in South and Mezoamerica make a lot of money by selling it in the US. Cigarettes have few positive side effects and heavily contributes to the #1 preventable disease in the US: cardiovascular disease. AFAIK there are no outright bans on nicotine or tobacco products. However, the places you may consume them in public are shrinking (and often the same restrictions are placed on marijuana). Also the kind of products that are attractive to kids are being targeted (again, AFAIK companies are not allowed to market marijuana - or alcohol - to children). It seems to me that tobacco used to be much more prevalent but is being re-categorized from "acceptable everywhere" into the same group as alcohol. And marijuana is being re-categorized from Schedule 1 to the same category as alcohol.
- kennywinker 7y ago
  Unhealthy != addictive. Tobacco and alcohol are addictive, but none of your other examples are. I'd love to have a separate convo about regulating alcohol in a different way than we currently do - more in some ways, less in others.
  - viklove 7y ago
    Sugar is addictive...
    - kennywinker 7y ago
      Is it? I really don't think that everything that gives you a dopamine hit should be considered addictive. Even if we do accept that "sugar is addictive", the physical symptoms of withdrawal from alcohol / tobacco are much more extreme than the physical symptoms of sugar withdrawal... they are at best two classes of "addiction", NOT the same thing.
- DanBC 7y ago
  This is a really weird list. We do demonize alcohol makers and sellers -- Scotland has introduced Minimum Unit Pricing; there's a push to get that introduced in England (unlikely with a current PM who doesn't believe in regulation for anything) and alcohol is taxed and has controls on who can buy it and who can sell it. Artificial sweeteners are not harmful. Red meat is no where near as harmful as either tobacco or alcohol. > I’m sure everyone has some bad habits that will lead to a premature death. Tobacco kills huge numbers of people in a variety of ways. The number one public health issue at the moment is getting people to smoke less and then to stop smoking.

scarface74 7y ago

Playing Devils Advocate: Why are we so quick to demonize the tobacco industry but we don’t demonize companies that sell alcohol, artificial sweeteners, junk food, red meat, etc. They are all unhealthy. I’m sure everyone has some bad habits that will lead to a premature death.

cryptonector 7y ago
Or even marijuana. Legalizing marijuana is popular now, and so is banning nicotine. The cognitive dissonance in that is something to marvel at.
- tehjoker 7y ago
  Not really. You can want something to be legal, not have the state brutalize people, and still not want for profit companies synthesizing desire via marketing and product design and creating ubiquitous availability.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    You can want both. But it can’t happen. I personally would rather not have a world where marijuana use is widespread, but I would rather have that if it means taking away one more tool from the justice system to punish people (unequally) for a victimless crime.
  - dr_dshiv 7y ago
    What world do you live in? Potato chip companies cause way way more social harm than Juul. It is waaay easier to quit Juul than cigarettes. It doesn't cause cancer. What is actually the issue, besides the puritanism?
    - kennywinker 7y ago
      1. potato chips aren't addictive. 2. juul is bringing millions of new people to tobacco products, not just providing a way for smokers to ease off cigarettes.
      - leetcrew 7y ago
        > potato chips aren't addictive this claim is not uncontroversial. they don't cause physical dependence in the way we think of with drugs (ie, no physical withdrawal syndrome), but eating junk food can be an exceptionally difficult habit to break. humans can become addicted to almost anything that gives a moderate to strong immediate reward.
        kennywinker 7y ago
        Clearly there are differences between potato chips (hard to stop eating) and alcohol/tobacco/coffee (physical withdrawal symptoms). So how about this: I think the more addictive something is, the more carefully we should regulate the capitalist systems that surround it. Not actually that complicated a position.
        leetcrew 7y ago
        not trying to split hairs, but it's worth pointing out that addiction is a lot more complicated than most people think. the severity of physical withdrawal is not perfectly correlated with how hard it is to kick a habit; there are a lot of other factors. I don't disagree with your broader point though. as long as you are focused on preventing new users rather than making the lives of existing users needlessly difficult, you'll get no argument from me.
      - 7y ago
- ppseafield 7y ago
  Marijuana is a plant that is very easy to grow, has few negative long-term side effects, has several medicinal properties, and its ban and subsequent enforcement existed to disenfranchise anti-war folks and minorities. Additionally its ban helped gangs in South and Mezoamerica make a lot of money by selling it in the US. Cigarettes have few positive side effects and heavily contributes to the #1 preventable disease in the US: cardiovascular disease. AFAIK there are no outright bans on nicotine or tobacco products. However, the places you may consume them in public are shrinking (and often the same restrictions are placed on marijuana). Also the kind of products that are attractive to kids are being targeted (again, AFAIK companies are not allowed to market marijuana - or alcohol - to children). It seems to me that tobacco used to be much more prevalent but is being re-categorized from "acceptable everywhere" into the same group as alcohol. And marijuana is being re-categorized from Schedule 1 to the same category as alcohol.
kennywinker 7y ago
Unhealthy != addictive. Tobacco and alcohol are addictive, but none of your other examples are. I'd love to have a separate convo about regulating alcohol in a different way than we currently do - more in some ways, less in others.
- viklove 7y ago
  Sugar is addictive...
  - kennywinker 7y ago
    Is it? I really don't think that everything that gives you a dopamine hit should be considered addictive. Even if we do accept that "sugar is addictive", the physical symptoms of withdrawal from alcohol / tobacco are much more extreme than the physical symptoms of sugar withdrawal... they are at best two classes of "addiction", NOT the same thing.
DanBC 7y ago
This is a really weird list. We do demonize alcohol makers and sellers -- Scotland has introduced Minimum Unit Pricing; there's a push to get that introduced in England (unlikely with a current PM who doesn't believe in regulation for anything) and alcohol is taxed and has controls on who can buy it and who can sell it. Artificial sweeteners are not harmful. Red meat is no where near as harmful as either tobacco or alcohol. > I’m sure everyone has some bad habits that will lead to a premature death. Tobacco kills huge numbers of people in a variety of ways. The number one public health issue at the moment is getting people to smoke less and then to stop smoking.