3 ms·

Tobacco is vastly more harmful than marijuana. I don't necessarily agree with the justification but I don't think these positions are inconsistent.

by jolux 6y ago

endisneigh 6y ago
I don’t have a strong opinion either way, but you could just ban both things you know.
- catillac 6y ago
  We should consider risk versus reward though, not just harmful effects, buttressed by some measure of individual liberty.
lotsofpulp 6y ago
What is inconsistent is not banning alcohol, since it by far causes more harm than marijuana or menthol.
- jolux 6y ago
  Agreed. Unfortunately the social perception of alcohol is still at a place where banning it would be impossible, though. People don't even want to talk about making it more expensive. Alcohol still doesn't have nutritional labels in the US!
  - int_19h 6y ago
    We have already banned alcohol in US a long time ago. That didn't last long, for very good reasons.
    - jolux 6y ago
      >That didn't last long, for very good reasons. It was, and still would be extremely unpopular. The public health reason is as strong as it's ever been.
      - int_19h 6y ago
        The Prohibition wasn't extremely unpopular back when it was passed. Indeed, it was passed due to heavy pressure from the progressive public at the time, with grassroots campaigning advocating for such measures on all levels of government. It became extremely unpopular when it became law, and people found out what this actually means - a large black market for organized crime to cultivate, and heavy-handed enforcement with plenty of "collateral damage".
        jolux 6y ago
        >The Prohibition wasn't extremely unpopular back when it was passed. Indeed, it was passed due to heavy pressure from the progressive public at the time, with grassroots campaigning advocating for such measures on all levels of government. There's no evidence it ever had majority support, though: https://www.vox.com/2015/10/19/9566935/prohibition-myths-misconceptions-facts https://www.vox.com/2015/10/19/9566935/prohibition-myths-mis... The campaign was effective at getting an unpopular law passed. I think that's how we should read prohibition. Besides which, we don't have to go all the way to prohibition to make a dent here. A pigouvian tax would be good enough to start with, and maybe better education on the effects of alcohol.

Tobacco is vastly more harmful than marijuana. I don't necessarily agree with the justification but I don't think these positions are inconsistent.

by jolux 6y ago

Tobacco is vastly more harmful than marijuana. I don't necessarily agree with the justification but I don't think these positions are inconsistent.

endisneigh 6y ago

I don’t have a strong opinion either way, but you could just ban both things you know.

catillac 6y ago
We should consider risk versus reward though, not just harmful effects, buttressed by some measure of individual liberty.

lotsofpulp 6y ago

What is inconsistent is not banning alcohol, since it by far causes more harm than marijuana or menthol.

jolux 6y ago
Agreed. Unfortunately the social perception of alcohol is still at a place where banning it would be impossible, though. People don't even want to talk about making it more expensive. Alcohol still doesn't have nutritional labels in the US!
- int_19h 6y ago
  We have already banned alcohol in US a long time ago. That didn't last long, for very good reasons.
  - jolux 6y ago
    >That didn't last long, for very good reasons. It was, and still would be extremely unpopular. The public health reason is as strong as it's ever been.
    - int_19h 6y ago
      The Prohibition wasn't extremely unpopular back when it was passed. Indeed, it was passed due to heavy pressure from the progressive public at the time, with grassroots campaigning advocating for such measures on all levels of government. It became extremely unpopular when it became law, and people found out what this actually means - a large black market for organized crime to cultivate, and heavy-handed enforcement with plenty of "collateral damage".
      - jolux 6y ago
        >The Prohibition wasn't extremely unpopular back when it was passed. Indeed, it was passed due to heavy pressure from the progressive public at the time, with grassroots campaigning advocating for such measures on all levels of government. There's no evidence it ever had majority support, though: https://www.vox.com/2015/10/19/9566935/prohibition-myths-misconceptions-facts https://www.vox.com/2015/10/19/9566935/prohibition-myths-mis... The campaign was effective at getting an unpopular law passed. I think that's how we should read prohibition. Besides which, we don't have to go all the way to prohibition to make a dent here. A pigouvian tax would be good enough to start with, and maybe better education on the effects of alcohol.