Frankly this seems paternalistic. It's hard for me to read this and not translate it as: "We found something non-white people enjoy and we're going to ruin it. For their own good."
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/16/new-zealand-ai...
11–20 of 273 posts
Frankly this seems paternalistic. It's hard for me to read this and not translate it as: "We found something non-white people enjoy and we're going to ruin it. For their own good."
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/16/new-zealand-ai...
I wonder if there’s ever been a study comparing the effects of banning compared to ultra high taxation of products. I understand that there are groups that are negatively affected but is banning even effective in improving health outcomes in this case? In my imaginary world the tax would be extremely high and diverted to things in the same area that have the opposite effect: e.g make cheeseburgers more expensive and…
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/12/151217165607.h...
tl;dr: they have different, but complementary effects.
I’m extremely in favor of harm-reduction legislation in general, and I think this ban is a good idea overall. Flavors are effective at hooking young people in particular — lots of vaping research has shown that — and so get it outta here. Great. But man, “ban menthols because Black people like them” sure feels a little weird. Like, I get that’s not exactly what’s going on. But.. it’s a little bit what’s going on? I g…
I’m extremely in favor of harm-reduction legislation in general, and I think this ban is a good idea overall. Flavors are effective at hooking young people in particular — lots of vaping research has shown that — and so get it outta here. Great. But man, “ban menthols because Black people like them” sure feels a little weird. Like, I get that’s not exactly what’s going on. But.. it’s a little bit what’s going on? I g…
I wonder if there’s ever been a study comparing the effects of banning compared to ultra high taxation of products. I understand that there are groups that are negatively affected but is banning even effective in improving health outcomes in this case? In my imaginary world the tax would be extremely high and diverted to things in the same area that have the opposite effect: e.g make cheeseburgers more expensive and…
So, if the goal is to remove the item entirely, it has to be banned from production/import rather than highly taxed.
I don't really think bans are great either - we're all adults and can make our own choices. Provide better education about the effects/impacts of the choice, then let the informed adults make their own decision.
On the one hand, I understand that complete prohibition for drugs and alcohol just don't work. But I have a difficult time squaring that against my feelings towards tobacco, where I feel it would be so much easier for me to quit if I wasn't tempted by its availability at every corner store.
https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/health/keeping-bc-healthy...
This just feels like a continuation of the failed war on drugs... I don't smoke, but I have no problem with allowing people to do so in private spaces. Why do we insist on micromanaging peoples lives?
This, along with bans on smoking inside public buildings including restaurants and bars, ban on advertising (they can't even be displayed in stores), and marketing has lead to significant falls in smoking.
The downside is there is a growing blackmarket and robberies of convenient stores because they are worth so much and easily converted to cash.
(I don't smoke and prices may have changed since I last read about it)
Edit: Typo fixed.