261–270 of 430 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it really that bad? Is there something I can read to learn more?
> Is it really that bad? I say this as someone who quite enjoys his drink–you haven't seen a hardcore drinking culture until you've dodged multiple projectile vomiters in SoHo at like 5PM on a random Tuesday.
Can anyone attest if young people are actually taking up cigarettes again? I was talking with a friend that teaches teenagers and she was explaining how many students that once were getting in trouble for vaping/pouches have now turned on to cigarettes. Completely boggles my mind - I thought the newer generation had a much stronger aversion to physical cigarettes.
My main problem with this is the "do as I say not as I do" intergenerational conflict. It just seems completely absurd to me that a government thinks it's acceptable to treat a generation unable to vote differently from the generations who can. It's really an absurd unfreedom and a kind of tyranny. Why not just pass a law that says people born after 2008 have to pay higher taxes, and work longer hours for less pay? P…
That in general is what inflation is
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you ever smoked? I feel like I only hear this sentiment from people that have never tried nicotine. Nicotine absolutely produces effects that people enjoy. Smokers don't just do it because they want to smell bad and look cool.
Is there proof that the positive effects are still there after you're hooked? Or are the "positive effects" at that point just a cessation of the negative effects of withdrawal?
Now, the euphoric effects that you get at first, those very rapidly go away with tolerance. With habitual use, you probably only experience a tiny shadow of that with the first hit of the day, or a respectable replay if for whatever reason you go a couple days without (which is heightened by the cessation of withdrawal). The nausea and disorientation also go away, which is nice since otherwise it would be a problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With all due respect, this is completely wrong. There is a difference that someone smoking nearby automatically harms people around you. With alcohol, the effect is more unpredictable, but it is equally real. Alcohol is a factor in an automobile crashes, and a factor in a significant proportion of violent crime, especially domestic violence ( https://www.cato-unbound.org/2008/09/17/mark-kleiman/taxatio... edit: this…
Second-hand smoke does affect people around you. It is how people get addicted to nicotine. It is how new smokers are created. And there are some people who are more sensitive to temporary exposure to smoke (and pollution in general) than others. That is why smoking tends to be is banned around hospitals and day care centers — because those are places where you will find those people. My father was one of them, afte…
My main problem with this is the "do as I say not as I do" intergenerational conflict. It just seems completely absurd to me that a government thinks it's acceptable to treat a generation unable to vote differently from the generations who can. It's really an absurd unfreedom and a kind of tyranny. Why not just pass a law that says people born after 2008 have to pay higher taxes, and work longer hours for less pay? P…
> Why not just pass a law that says people born after 2008 have to pay higher taxes, and work longer hours for less pay? That in general is what inflation is
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a restriction on liberty but not an unjustified one. I agree that it gives cigarettes a "mystique" that they do not deserve to have one generation able to smoke if they like while another generation has to go outside the law to do so. When I was a smoker, I used to decry places that were less liberal about where I was allowed to smoke, and places with high taxes. As a former smoker, I know that the high taxes ha…
If I want to smoke in my own home I should be able to. Next up the government will ban reading hacker news for people born after 2012 because it incentivizes you sitting in your chair too much.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> other things (alcohol) that cause problems and are not being restricted Alcohol is heavily restricted, though. You can't sell it to minors, younger minors can't drink it in public, you can't sell/buy/make it above a certain proof, you can only resell it from authorized distributors, it is taxes, and so on. Sure, banning cigarettes for a specific generation is a much more stringent restriction, but plenty of other r…
what if they told you your kids would never be allowed to have a drink?
Alcohol costs the UK 4-5x more than smoking. Coincidentally, it's the upper classes drug of choice. Must be a coincidence though
Alcohol is the deadliest and has the biggest social costs of any drug. Nicotine is second, heroin is a distant third. Drugs that are largely harmless, like MDMA, are illegal with heavy penalties. Drug policy is largely nonsense and rampantly hypocritical.
An MDMA overdose, however, needs active, external cooling to ride out. We don't really have a natural safety valve for overconsumption.
That's not to say it should remain banned (I'm quite pro-legalization myself), but it's not entirely arbitrary to have MDMA banned versus other, less acutely dangerous drugs. Better examples of unjustifiably banned drugs are psychedelics such as LSD.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why not just pass a law that says people born after 2008 have to pay higher taxes, and work longer hours for less pay? People should be equal under the law. We already do this, the UK State Pension age is currently rising from 66 to 67 for those born on or after April 6, 1960. This change affects, for example, those born between April 1960 and March 1961, who will have a pension age of 66 plus a set number of month…
See, that at least affects a big enough swath of voters that they could, if mattered to them, vote everyone involved out. This smoking ban is specifically designed to not affect a single voter.
For example, some parties have a cannabis pledge and not enough people have wanted it as yet.
My son is 16, and will be impacted by this ban. He is constantly exposed to the temptation to smoke and vape. As a responsible parent, I want to do everything I possibly can to protect him and not become addicted.
We know that nearly all smoking starts before 26.
- ~90% of daily smokers first tried cigarettes by age 18
- ~95% had their first cigarette by age 20-21 (American Lung Association)
- 98% first smoked by age 26 (National Cancer Institute)
We owe our young people this protection, and I am a liberal.
But to take your point to full conclusion, Brexit was decided by the people that it impacts the least. And, "Since the Brexit referendum, 4+m voters have died (mainly Leavers), while almost 5m have reached voting age (overwhelmingly Remain), There is now a 1.6m majority for Remain - without anyone needing to change their minds". - https://www.thenewworld.co.uk/anti-brexit-britain-has-reache... - June 2023