New Zealand to reverse course on tobacco smoking ban

[mclumber1]

New Zealand scraps world-first smoking ‘generation ban’ to fund tax cuts | New Zealand | The Guardian

WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM

---

Health experts say axing plan to block sales of tobacco products to next generation will cost thousands of lives

 

I'm not a smoker, and I don't like being around people who are smoking, but this is the right move.  Their body, their choice.

[Xbob42]

54 minutes ago, mclumber1 said:

I'm not a smoker, and I don't like being around people who are smoking, but this is the right move.  Their body, their choice.

Eh, to an extent. Maybe if you're home alone. If I'm smelling your smoke then it's most definitely not your body. And any kids of smokers will tell you they most definitely don't get a fuckin' say-so in breathing in that good shit.

[Keyser_Soze]

This makes you wonder why some drugs are illegal and others are not. Is it that they harm yourself or others? Cigarettes do both.

[gamer.tv]

1 hour ago, mclumber1 said:

New Zealand scraps world-first smoking ‘generation ban’ to fund tax cuts | New Zealand | The Guardian

WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM

---

Health experts say axing plan to block sales of tobacco products to next generation will cost thousands of lives

 

I'm not a smoker, and I don't like being around people who are smoking, but this is the right move.  Their body, their choice.

This has been an argument in the UK with the Troy government mimicking this policy. Yes, your body, your choice…but the effects of smoking then use up resource in the NHS…which makes it slightly more conflicted. Though I suppose it’s the same as illness due to alcohol.

[outsida]

Sacrificing the next generation for tax cuts for the rich, of course. 

[Nokra]

I guess I wouldn't care if they want to smoke privately (and nobody, especially children, has to be around it) if e.g. their premiums for insurance are also sky high. Otherwise, it seems to me like it's not just "their body, their choice", as everyone else has to compensate for their stupid choices. Am I completely wrong/ignorant in thinking this? 

[Bacon]

I'm Pro-Life when it comes to Cigarettes.

[thewhyteboar]

Smokers don't just affect themselves. They ruin the lives of their kids and affect whoever is around them. Every smoker smells like absolute shit and leaves that in their wake. Ever been in an elevator after a heavy smoker?? Jesus. 

 

 

[Keyser_Soze]

Chewing tobacco is more "my body my choice" than cigarettes are.

[Kal-El814]

Endangering public health to fund tax cuts, libertarians o'er the world nutting hard.

[Ominous]

Where is the line drawn? What about fatty fat people that eat shit and feed their kids shit? Oh so you want insurance to cover your type 2 diabetes meds, but you won't fix your diet? Too slippery a slope. 

[mclumber1]

I'm disappointed, but not surprised, that the leftists of this community want to control other people's actions and what others do with their own bodies.  A bunch of hypocrites. 

[Keyser_Soze]

5 minutes ago, mclumber1 said:

I'm disappointed, but not surprised, that the leftists of this community want to control other people's actions and what others do with their own bodies.  A bunch of hypocrites. 

 

#TooWokeToSmoke

 

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

9 minutes ago, mclumber1 said:

A bunch of hypocrites. 

 

I'm not seeing the problem here.

[mclumber1]

Just now, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

 

I'm not seeing the problem here.

 

It was never about a person having control over their own bodies.  It was about exerting control over society.  Leftists don't really care about freedom. 

[Kal-El814]

14 minutes ago, mclumber1 said:

I'm disappointed, but not surprised, that the leftists of this community want to control other people's actions and what others do with their own bodies.  A bunch of hypocrites. 

 

I lol'd

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

3 minutes ago, mclumber1 said:

 

It was never about a person having control over their own bodies.  It was about exerting control over society.  Leftists don't really care about freedom. 

 

Again, not seeing the problem here!

 

And for the record, if we're going to compare this to abortion, I'd like to reiterate once again that my "pro-abortion" position is largely predicated on the notion that I'm not particularly interested in society bearing the economic costs of unwanted pregnancies, a fairly "libertarian" argument if there ever was one.

[TUFKAK]

8 minutes ago, Kal-El814 said:

 

I lol'd

Damn leftists telling people they can’t consume intoxicating substances and have unrestricted freedom of movement.

 

So much for liberty.

[Kal-El814]

5 minutes ago, TUFKAK said:

Damn leftists telling people they can’t consume intoxicating substances and have unrestricted freedom of movement.

 

So much for liberty.

 

Firearm suicides "don't count" and even if they did they're fine because the framers said so, that's REAL liberty.

[legend]

2 hours ago, Ominous said:

Where is the line drawn? What about fatty fat people that eat shit and feed their kids shit? Oh so you want insurance to cover your type 2 diabetes meds, but you won't fix your diet? Too slippery a slope. 

 

Regulating diet is wildly complex. Regulating smoking is not. Also, it's at least possible for a parent to eat poorly themselves while giving their children a better diet. That's far less easy to do with smoking.

[Massdriver]

I have concerns about handing over a multi billion dollar business to criminals. I would rather us continue on a path of higher excise taxes, education, and smoking cessation products.  A lot of these arguments can be used against legalizing marijuana. If one smokes marijuana in the home, there is potential harm to kids and others.  The right way to go is to tax nicotine and THC products that can be smoked more than products that aren't.

 

If the result of prohibiting tobacco products is people still smoking with a gray market, I would question whether the policy was optimal or not. 

[stepee]

2 hours ago, mclumber1 said:

 

It was never about a person having control over their own bodies.  It was about exerting control over society.  Leftists don't really care about freedom. 

 

Your issue seems to be more about the slogan than anything else.

 

The proper comparison to abortion rights is if they forced people to smoke. 

[stepee]

I’m okay with having “Freedom Smokes” that cost literally $2,000 a pack.

[mclumber1]

1 minute ago, stepee said:

I’m okay with having “Freedom Smokes” that cost literally $2,000 a pack.

 

Then you are fine with a black market, and they corresponding violence that it brings.

 

...did any of you pay attention to the negative consequences of alcohol prohibition or the war on drugs has been on society?  

[stepee]

1 minute ago, mclumber1 said:

 

Then you are fine with a black market, and they corresponding violence that it brings.

 

...did any of you pay attention to the negative consequences of alcohol prohibition or the war on drugs has been on society?  

 

I mean, I could use a side gig 

[UpvoteShittyTakesOnly]

2/10 effort here and that may be generous 

[Keyser_Soze]

1 hour ago, legend said:

 

Regulating diet is wildly complex. Regulating smoking is not. Also, it's at least possible for a parent to eat poorly themselves while giving their children a better diet. That's far less easy to do with smoking.

 

Even easier if you take Wegovy!

[stepee]

I’m actually okay for some nuance in the actual discussion (probably still some bias as it’s only been two years since I quit and mannnn did I love it!) but debate over smoking control wasn’t the point of this topic, it was to make the worlds worst abortion rights comparison. 

 

I’d take away more “freedom” and nuke the thread 

 

[Dodger]

I don't know how things are going in the rest of the world but here in freedom land, including Arizona where you can open carry to the grocery store, hardly anybody smokes anymore. So all those cheezy shitty commercials everyone laughed at must have had some effect, plus the high taxes and everything else. Smoking is seemingly almost a non issue anymore. 

[Kal-El814]

7 minutes ago, Dodger said:

I don't know how things are going in the rest of the world but here in freedom land, including Arizona where you can open carry to the grocery store, hardly anybody smokes anymore. So all those cheezy shitty commercials everyone laughed at must have had some effect, plus the high taxes and everything else. Smoking is seemingly almost a non issue anymore. 

 

Smoking has gone down a lot even within the last 15 - 20 years, but it's still the leading cause of preventative disease in the US.

[mclumber1]

23 minutes ago, Kal-El814 said:

 

Smoking has gone down a lot even within the last 15 - 20 years, but it's still the leading cause of preventative disease in the US.

 

There's going to be a lagging effect of smoking related deaths as smoking decreases with younger populations.  People will still die from smoking, but at a rate much smaller than now.  Obesity and obesity related diseases are going to kill a heck of a lot more people in 20-30 years than smoking currently is. 

[Jwheel86]

6 hours ago, mclumber1 said:

 

It was never about a person having control over their own bodies.  It was about exerting control over society.  Leftists don't really care about freedom. 

 

Sure, but budgets to pay for healthcare are real and the choices are pay for a preventable condition or that rare disease treatment for a newborn. That's a choice that more and more is going to have to be made as super expensive low population treatments become more available. 

 

A Dilemma for Governments: How to Pay for Million-Dollar Therapies - The New York Times

WWW.NYTIMES.COM

---

A wave of transformative but hugely expensive treatments is challenging the budgets of health systems in wealthy nations. Now countries with far fewer resources are wrestling with how to cover the therapies.

 

Quote

The expenditures for Zolgensma have already gobbled up a hugely disproportionate share of resources. An analysis led by a researcher at Brazil’s drug regulator found that the court-ordered expenditures in Zolgensma’s first 14 months of availability in Brazil could have paid for more than four million doses of the Covid-19 vaccine.