3 ms·
Not from United States. However, wouldn't it increase the sales of the black market?
by haskaalo 7y ago
Not from United States. However, wouldn't it increase the sales of the black market?
- umvi 7y agoPerhaps, but as long as there is a net drop in usage it's still a win. Who wants to bother buying black market cigarettes in 2020? It's like the worst drug ever - mild-to-no buzz, highly addictive/expensive, gives you cancer
- throwaway100773 7y agoTobacco isn’t the drug. Nicotine is. There are other ways to consume the drug, and it has a lot of positive effects. Regardless - it’s a win for you I guess - but does anyone else’s opinion matter?
- thatswrong0 7y ago> Perhaps, but as long as there is a net drop in usage it's still a win. That's not how that works. At all. If you get 1 less person to vape, but you get 3 people who were vaping seriously sick / they die from black market goods, that's probably not a net win.
- Gatsky 7y agoThe harmful health effects of tobacco products, which are a cost born by society while tobacco companies enrich themselves, mean that we can tolerate significant downsides of changes in tobacco accessibility, and it’s still very much worth it.
- Someone1234 7y agoI'd imagine people wanting to bypass this would still consume retail tobacco products via a 21+ proxy agent. I just think the cost of paying off a proxy would be cheaper than the cost of buying via some black market vendor (and low risk, since you're likely getting the real product via someone you likely know and trust). Or just via common fake IDs that certain vendors will happily take, since it provides the vendor just enough legal protection for reasonable doubt. Keep in mind that the new market for black market products is quite small (only people between 18-20), and the cost/risk of setting it up quite high. It could happen, but I think there are better alternatives to bypass this block-aid. It isn't really comparable to prohibition or the war on drugs, as those were/are global bans Vs. the entire population.