Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

When All Cigarette Packages Look the Same, Fewer People Buy Them

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 71 posts

Re: When All Cigarette Packages Look the Same, Fewer People Buy Them

#31

Post by chris_wot »

kozhevnikov wrote: post #12
lemming wrote: post #9

Here's another interesting tidbit about plain packaging: the Australian government has been sued by big tobacco over this, under the terms of a trade agreement similar to the TPPA that is currently being negotiated in secret. These agreements allow large multinationals to sue governments who are party to them if they feel that legislation enacted by that government unfairly prejudices their business. The tobacco comp…

Would you prefer it any other way? Instead of going to the High Court your government can just say "what we say goes, and if you happened to be in business X that we no longer like, you're out of luck", I'd rather see them fight in courts. A dying business fighting tooth and nail for their survival is understandable and expected whatever poison they happen to be selling.

Yes. I would like the laws I live under to be debated and enacted under a transparent democratic process, not a process that makes major changes to the society I live in via a series of secret negotiations and deals made by faceless and unaccountable men and women who weren't democratically elected.

Does that answer your question?

Re: When All Cigarette Packages Look the Same, Fewer People Buy Them

#32

Post by [deleted] »

lemming wrote: post #14
kozhevnikov wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you prefer it any other way? Instead of going to the High Court your government can just say "what we say goes, and if you happened to be in business X that we no longer like, you're out of luck", I'd rather see them fight in courts. A dying business fighting tooth and nail for their survival is understandable and expected whatever poison they happen to be selling.

Of course I'd prefer it another way. Whether you like it or not, businesses are subject to all sorts of regulations from governments. Maybe you're a believer in the free market; I'm not. I'd like businesses that make their living exploiting people to be regulated.

[deleted]

Re: When All Cigarette Packages Look the Same, Fewer People Buy Them

#33

Post by DanBC »

NicoJuicy wrote: post #28
lucian1900 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not a smoker, but I wonder: is there a downside to just continue using an e-cigarette? It's the smoke that kills you (and those around you) after all, not the nicotine.

It's supposed to do less harm, which actually means nothing as manufacturers are making it addictive.

Wait, nicotine is already addictive. And there is a strong psychological addiction.

How can they make it more addictive?

Re: When All Cigarette Packages Look the Same, Fewer People Buy Them

#34

Post by nrinaudo »

lucian1900 wrote: post #20
nrinaudo wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good job on quitting, but a word of warning: you've not hit the hard patch yet. From what all of my friends who quit smoking experienced, 1 month is the real test. I've seen many people quit smoking cold turkey and do great for 1 month, and then get back to it with a vengeance. I'm not sure what the psychological / physical reason for that is, but thought I'd warn you to be extra vigilant in 3 weeks - don't feel that…

I'm not a smoker, but I wonder: is there a downside to just continue using an e-cigarette? It's the smoke that kills you (and those around you) after all, not the nicotine.

I don't believe there are known health reasons not to use an e-cigarette. It's a relatively new phenomenon though and hasn't been around long enough for us to study all possible long term effects.

There are, however, plenty of social reasons, depending on the local culture.

Not everybody necessarily realises that e-cigarettes are harmless to them and get upset when you use one around them, for example. Or people have had unpleasant experiences with aggressive e-cigarette consumers using them in public places like a restaurant or a train and getting uppity when asked to stop.

Another social stigma is that e-cigarette users tend to wax lyrical about them and, and I say that as an ex-user, not be very pleasant conversationalists, at least in the first few weeks after the discovery. I have seen people in social occasions actively avoid e-cigarette users (me!) for fear of being dragged into yet another lecture about vaping.

Re: When All Cigarette Packages Look the Same, Fewer People Buy Them

#35

Post by barrkel »

ekianjo wrote: post #25
loup-vaillant wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, having the government having the power to dismantle the kind of businesses they don't like is actually a neat idea. I know our representative governments aren't democratic (despite elections and stuff). But big capitalist corporations are even worse. So, before we get rid of governments and their ludicrously concentrated power, why don't we look at the elephant in the room first: corporations and their even…

> So, before we get rid of governments and their ludicrously concentrated power, why don't we look at the elephant in the room first: corporations and their even more ludicrously concentrated power? Hey, Marx is back ! Instead of looking at the wrong elephant, i.e. the one actually selling products that people want, I'd say you better attack the one that's 1) taxing you to death for subpar services 2) force-feeding t…

actually selling products that people want

Selling products a minority of people want, products that the vast majority do not want their children consuming or seeing as glamourous in any way.

The fact that some people want a product does not create a moral right to that product, and does not mean it is wrong for a government to enforce laws restricting and prohibiting those products.

Re: When All Cigarette Packages Look the Same, Fewer People Buy Them

#36

Post by DanBC »

lucian1900 wrote: post #20
nrinaudo wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good job on quitting, but a word of warning: you've not hit the hard patch yet. From what all of my friends who quit smoking experienced, 1 month is the real test. I've seen many people quit smoking cold turkey and do great for 1 month, and then get back to it with a vengeance. I'm not sure what the psychological / physical reason for that is, but thought I'd warn you to be extra vigilant in 3 weeks - don't feel that…

I'm not a smoker, but I wonder: is there a downside to just continue using an e-cigarette? It's the smoke that kills you (and those around you) after all, not the nicotine.

Nicotine isn't a good idea for people at risk of blood clots; or people having surgery.

Re: When All Cigarette Packages Look the Same, Fewer People Buy Them

#37

Post by junto »

jjgreen wrote: post #26

Usually so libertarian here, so where did that go?

You are still free to buy them, but you're no longer able to make these things attractive to young impressionable teenagers, who once hooked cannot stop.

I personally feel that it is a fair balance.

Re: When All Cigarette Packages Look the Same, Fewer People Buy Them

#38

Post by chris_wot »

barrkel wrote: post #35
ekianjo wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So, before we get rid of governments and their ludicrously concentrated power, why don't we look at the elephant in the room first: corporations and their even more ludicrously concentrated power? Hey, Marx is back ! Instead of looking at the wrong elephant, i.e. the one actually selling products that people want, I'd say you better attack the one that's 1) taxing you to death for subpar services 2) force-feeding t…

actually selling products that people want Selling products a minority of people want, products that the vast majority do not want their children consuming or seeing as glamourous in any way. The fact that some people want a product does not create a moral right to that product, and does not mean it is wrong for a government to enforce laws restricting and prohibiting those products.

Selling products a minority of people want

Actually, even in that minority, they only want the product because of the addictive substance nicotine. Most of the minority want to quit using the product, but find it very hard to do so. The rest just have a death wish :-)

Re: When All Cigarette Packages Look the Same, Fewer People Buy Them

#39

Post by chris_wot »

kozhevnikov wrote: post #16
lemming wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course I'd prefer it another way. Whether you like it or not, businesses are subject to all sorts of regulations from governments. Maybe you're a believer in the free market; I'm not. I'd like businesses that make their living exploiting people to be regulated.

Of course, but those regulations come from somewhere, they come from court cases, from subject matter experts' testimonials, from balanced review of views and facts on both sides. We don't want a random politician with questionable morals and unknown contributors banning products or whole sectors of the market bypassing courts and due process.

Court cases are ultimately decided based on the law which, as you know, is created and enacted on via a parliament or congress of elected politicians. Yes, even case law. Unless you think that a court can rule outside the law?

Re: When All Cigarette Packages Look the Same, Fewer People Buy Them

#40

Post by ekianjo »

barrkel wrote: post #35
ekianjo wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So, before we get rid of governments and their ludicrously concentrated power, why don't we look at the elephant in the room first: corporations and their even more ludicrously concentrated power? Hey, Marx is back ! Instead of looking at the wrong elephant, i.e. the one actually selling products that people want, I'd say you better attack the one that's 1) taxing you to death for subpar services 2) force-feeding t…

actually selling products that people want Selling products a minority of people want, products that the vast majority do not want their children consuming or seeing as glamourous in any way. The fact that some people want a product does not create a moral right to that product, and does not mean it is wrong for a government to enforce laws restricting and prohibiting those products.

> The fact that some people want a product does not create a moral right to that product,

Where is the moral right coming from ? That's purely philosophical and I certainly do not want the government (which is no more no less than the dictature of the majority) to tell me what's right or wrong when it comes to what I consume.

And if you don't want your children to buy cigarettes, don't give them money, or better, educate them. It works quite well, but I guess in your reasoning you expect the education to come from the government instead of the parents?

Post reply on HN