271–280 of 430 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think health costs are the bigger issue
In the UK taxes on tobacco earn more than the (socialised) healthcare financial cost of smoking. So this argument is a fallacy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the UK taxes on tobacco earn more than the (socialised) healthcare financial cost of smoking. So this argument is a fallacy.
I don’t think the argument as a whole is a fallacy, it’s true that the exact cost to the NHS is more than covered by tax, but most estimates of wider cost to the economy (e.g. lost productivity, disability benefits, etc) is higher. https://fullfact.org/health/farage-smoking-revenue-nhs/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I can't agree with this. When they become voters, if enough people of that age bracket wanted to reversed it then they could elect a party that has it in their manifesto. 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 everyth…
You can't seriously be naive enough to think that's how party politics works?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I can't agree with this. When they become voters, if enough people of that age bracket wanted to reversed it then they could elect a party that has it in their manifesto. 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 everyth…
What is proposed is something very different in kind.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’ve never seen having an expired tag be a points violation, that seems very wrong. IME it’s only ever moving violations that impact safety. For that, higher rates are absolutely appropriate.
Safety inspection. It's a moving violation in this state (of course it wasn't initially, frogs are best boiled slow). That's the magic of it. Frame it as a "safety" issue and everyone who can't think critically about how that sausage might be made will knee jerk approve.
And as a driver, I certainly want everyone around me to be required to properly maintain their cars.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not a separate category, that's the general principle in a free society: There is a limit to "doing what you want" when it impacts others/imposes on them. That's why smoking is already heavily regulated in order to limit and minimise the impact that your choice has on others.
On reddit, not so long ago, they were inventing interesting theories about how seat belt laws were justified because without seat belts people would be ejected from cars and kill by standards when their flying carcasses cannonballed through them. The claim that "it impacts others" is, at very minimum, exaggerated, but just as often completely fabricated out of pseudoscience and absurd movie plots. Smoking is heavily…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Awesome! Where can I sign?
It’s awesome to decide what your children, once they are adults, can’t do? Seems borderline psychopathic. Kinda sums up democracy in current times though.
You do realize that this is what basically every single law in existence does, right?
That my kids, and likely yours, once they're adults, can't drive under the influence, rob a bank, impersonate a cop, lie under oath, exercise medecine without a licence, walk downtown naked, jaywalk, evade taxes, criticize the King?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Safety inspection. It's a moving violation in this state (of course it wasn't initially, frogs are best boiled slow). That's the magic of it. Frame it as a "safety" issue and everyone who can't think critically about how that sausage might be made will knee jerk approve.
If I was an auto insurer, I would want to know that my policy holders were properly maintaining their vehicles. I would also have a strong interest in ensuring that non-policy holders did the same. And as a driver, I certainly want everyone around me to be required to properly maintain their cars.
There are two separate issues here: 1. will this work (will the UK stop smoking) 2. is this something the UK government should be doing Setting aside 1 and looking at 2, it seems silly to me to point out that other things (alcohol) that cause problems and are not being restricted. You take the wins where you find them, and the government isn't a magical force that can impose its will on the people arbitrarily. This i…
Cigarettes on the other hand are not so popular. If you ask most smokers if they regret starting about 90% say yes. They mostly want to quit but are addicted. Quite different from booze.