3 ms·

So why is no country banning smoking? If the current smokers are a problem, maybe you could give out "smoking licenses"... (Yes, I hate it.)

by Joona 13y ago

pmr_ 13y ago
Where I live (Europe) tax income through cigarette sales is substantive. Some countries even have refrained from further increasing taxes or lowered the planned increases on cigarettes because the last raises have caused a drop in tax income. I imagine prohibiting cigarettes would lead to a huge outcry on all sides of the political spectrum fueled by lobbyist decrying the end of the free world. There also would be a large economic impact on all the retailers, logistics companies, promoters, distributors, and addiction management industries (nicotine patches, e-cigarettes, and what not). By "large impact" I mean that they would be gone for good. I guess this would still mean a net win for society and health care costs at large, but those measures are always hard to justify and not a very popular decision to make. That's why politicians tend to refrain from making them.
cromulent 13y ago
Tasmania proposed something similar, basically that anyone born after 2000 would not be able to purchase cigarettes. Singapore proposed the same thing. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-23/tas-smoking-ban-facing-lower-house-hurdle/4217022 http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-23/tas-smoking-ban-facing... However, I think neither proposal has been accepted.
vacri 13y ago
Because smoking is still a powerful political issue, both in terms of smokers and lobbyists. Cigarettes here in Australia are nearly $1 each, and all cigarettes must be sold in an olive drab box with a graphic picture of a diseased body part and health warning - plus the packages must now be hidden from view by the vendor. The rather wealthy tobacco companies fight it all the way, right up to petitioning the UN trade bodies on their own dime. Sometimes it's quite amusing - the argument against the olive drab packaging was "it's a waste of time, the colour of the packaging won't change tobacco sales", to which the only sane response is "then why are you taking out multiple full-page ads in every paper?". You also can't just make it illegal overnight, since it's a notoriously difficult drug to give up. Hence it's being gradually phased out.
6d0debc071 13y ago
Bad precedents. War on drugs. Prohibition.

So why is no country banning smoking? If the current smokers are a problem, maybe you could give out "smoking licenses"... (Yes, I hate it.)

by Joona 13y ago

So why is no country banning smoking? If the current smokers are a problem, maybe you could give out "smoking licenses"... (Yes, I hate it.)

pmr_ 13y ago

Where I live (Europe) tax income through cigarette sales is substantive. Some countries even have refrained from further increasing taxes or lowered the planned increases on cigarettes because the last raises have caused a drop in tax income. I imagine prohibiting cigarettes would lead to a huge outcry on all sides of the political spectrum fueled by lobbyist decrying the end of the free world. There also would be a large economic impact on all the retailers, logistics companies, promoters, distributors, and addiction management industries (nicotine patches, e-cigarettes, and what not). By "large impact" I mean that they would be gone for good. I guess this would still mean a net win for society and health care costs at large, but those measures are always hard to justify and not a very popular decision to make. That's why politicians tend to refrain from making them.

cromulent 13y ago

Tasmania proposed something similar, basically that anyone born after 2000 would not be able to purchase cigarettes. Singapore proposed the same thing. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-23/tas-smoking-ban-facing-lower-house-hurdle/4217022 http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-23/tas-smoking-ban-facing... However, I think neither proposal has been accepted.

vacri 13y ago

Because smoking is still a powerful political issue, both in terms of smokers and lobbyists. Cigarettes here in Australia are nearly $1 each, and all cigarettes must be sold in an olive drab box with a graphic picture of a diseased body part and health warning - plus the packages must now be hidden from view by the vendor. The rather wealthy tobacco companies fight it all the way, right up to petitioning the UN trade bodies on their own dime. Sometimes it's quite amusing - the argument against the olive drab packaging was "it's a waste of time, the colour of the packaging won't change tobacco sales", to which the only sane response is "then why are you taking out multiple full-page ads in every paper?". You also can't just make it illegal overnight, since it's a notoriously difficult drug to give up. Hence it's being gradually phased out.

6d0debc071 13y ago

Bad precedents. War on drugs. Prohibition.