So, conflate the discussion is your answer, weight v tobacco.
Putting my Pipes Away
- Thread starter Lyle b
- Start date
So, conflate the discussion is your answer, weight v tobacco.
Actually nothing needs to be conflated for this to be relevant. Every argument that applies to smoking applies to obesity, and I suspect the economic analyses would be largely the same in form and outcome. Raising this comparison serves a purpose: it highlights the non-economic side of the question, which is to what extent is it appropriate for government to move to modify personal behavior (whether through compulsion or suasion) in the name of societal good, or the good of the individual involved? I personally think the money arguments are a red herring.
Last edited:
For me, "conflating" is widening/diluting the discussion subject. An oft used tactic which only detracts from the subject at hand. And, on a site such as this usually sends the discussion off the rails. Better to focus I think rather than dilute or deflect. If one doesn't have a solid argument, widen the scope of the debate. Not an unreasonable tactic for some. One that often works, witness our last posts. 
Yes, but in today's world you're not supposed to notice double standards or inconsistent, unprincipled reasoning. And most of all, you're not supposed to engage in critical thinking, which your last two posts shamelessly display...a blantant disregard for the expected blind acceptance of whatever the current edict is.
For this your social credit score will be substantially reduced with corresponding loss of privileges afforded only to compliant subjects.
Well don't come to Brazil; the Brazilian gubberment don't allow the importing of tobacco or anything to do with smoking (so pipes can't be imported either)...Pack up your pipes and leave Australia !!!
Oh, I think trying to reduce the medical costs may be a part of it also. I have also had a couple of younger friends who had died from cancer and neither of them were smokers or lived with smokers. There are a number of factors that play into who gets cancer and who dies from cancer. Cigarette smoking has rightly been identified as have a strong connection to lung and throat cancers, but they are not the only cause of cancer.
My father was in his mid-70s when he died from emphysema and COPD. His doctor said the fact that my dad worked on towboats and woudl go clean the inside of oil and chemical barges without protective equipment back in the 1950s had more to do with the scaring in his lungs than smoking.
But none of that means that politicians are immune from supporting regulations based on how many votes they can garner.
Look into whole leaf unprocessed tobacco. In Canada you can import that and the duty is ridiculouslu cheap. Like a few dollars a pound
I forgot to mention that you can however bring in 5 tins of tobacco in your luggage when travelling.Well don't come to Brazil; the Brazilian gubberment don't allow the importing of tobacco or anything to do with smoking (so pipes can't be imported either)...
The Oz tax on tobacco is the same whether it is unprocessed or processed.
Why would anyone want to pay the hefty tax on unprocessed tobacco, then have to process it yourself. And most likely end up with a barely smokeable inferior blend you because you have nil experience.
It does not make sense.
Yesh thats crazy. I would say its because the government is hell bent on making smoking unaffordable and being the first place to literally tax smoking to death
I maintain that banning Cigarettes is the correct choice, the convenience of Cigarettes is what pushed consumption beyond what anyone imagined possible.
I might be a politically reprehensible person for saying to ban anything, but the cause and effect of this situation is clear as day.
IF government cared about the population they would be subsidizing Vape.
I don’t disagree, but look at what a huge success was Prohibition. Marginalizing tobacco is a much easier sell.
I don't think there's enough research on vaping yet to give a definite answer if it's healthier or not. I'm of the opinion it's going to cause worse damage over time than smoking. They would have to study the effects on everyone who mods vapes and what that does as theyre taking in probably 10 times the intended use at a time. I don't think smoking pg and VG will be the safe alternative people think it is.
You bet! Marginalization is much more effective than prohibition. Unfortunately we are normalizing drugs and alcohol and marginalizing tobacco. It seems bass ackwards. To quote the younger crowd; “smh”.
Free needles are all over the place for heroin users. Don’t you know that tobacco use is much more dangerous than injecting heroin into your arm??
You're not supposed to notice these types of wildly disproportionate and contradictory ideas. You're just supposed to accept whatever the arbitrary policy of the day is as normal and reasonable.
I sense great sarcasm in the first part of that statement and great truth in the second sentence.
I have acquaintances decades younger than me who are enamored with life in the U.S. during the Prohibition Year. They have somehow romanticized the era of bootleg booze, speakeasies, bathtub gin and organized crime that existed back then.
The black market will always exits. When prohibition was put into law in the US liquor flowed free. Obviously it was not was not without risk. I wonder if the black market would be profitable in your country. I smoked pot with minimal risk when illegal in the good old days. I am not suggesting that you break the law. In college I and my friends did.
I have seen demonstrations of the hazard to your lungs, but anyone switching to vape from cigarettes has only positive things to say about quality of life with vape.
If all cigarette smokers switch to vape, society will be vastly improved, and both government and tobacco companies are fighting to prevent this (the tax structure is based on tobacco not Nicotine itself).
The type of humans who are driven to an obsessive-compulsive degree to be in charge analyze and reverse engineer every situation they see out of reflex, breaking it down so they can play one side off the other.
Tobacco is merely one of the issues they identified and swooped in on a while back. All claims are pretext. Shit to be argued over so emotions on all sides will be engaged. Feathers thrown in a fan. Logic doesn't apply, and truth is irrelevant.
Why? Because when things are going smoothly and everyone is behaving reasonably, society has no need for so-called "leaders".
FACT: if the small percentage of humans who will develop into narcissistic Machiavellian sociopaths could be identified and eliminated before they were born, Planet Earth would be a VASTLY different and infinitely better place.
Tobacco is merely one of the issues they identified and swooped in on a while back. All claims are pretext. Shit to be argued over so emotions on all sides will be engaged. Feathers thrown in a fan. Logic doesn't apply, and truth is irrelevant.
Why? Because when things are going smoothly and everyone is behaving reasonably, society has no need for so-called "leaders".
FACT: if the small percentage of humans who will develop into narcissistic Machiavellian sociopaths could be identified and eliminated before they were born, Planet Earth would be a VASTLY different and infinitely better place.