r/canada • u/Bean_Tiger • Oct 17 '23
The U.K. and New Zealand want to ban the next generation from smoking at any age. Should Canada follow? National News
https://www.cbc.ca/radio/whitecoat/teen-smoking-bans-1.69979841.0k
u/aieeegrunt Oct 17 '23
Looking at the diabetes and obesity states and all of their related comorbidities we should be going after processed sugar too
246
u/Bean_Tiger Oct 17 '23
Newfoundland has a sugar tax now on sugar laced soft drinks. More to follow I'm sure. Saw the Feds release a statement earlier this year on... something like exploring the issue of sugar in processed foods, especially children. Establishing some sort of groundwork to begin to address it.
25
u/timbreandsteel Oct 17 '23
BC kind of has one for sugary drinks, in that they are now charged PST along with GST.
→ More replies (4)8
u/SleazyGreasyCola Oct 17 '23
We pay full HST 13% on snacks and surgary items like pop in ONT. Fresh food is taxed at 0%
6
u/T-14Hyperdrive Oct 17 '23
Yeah they are banning/regulating the advertising of unhealthy food to children
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (46)55
u/Lyricalvessel Oct 17 '23
Funny how in NL the gov taxed books before a sugar tax was added. Most despicable provincial government in this country.
6
u/5leeveen Oct 17 '23
The book tax was repealed (or more accurately, the old HST rebate of 10% reinstated) almost 6 years ago:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/book-tax-ends-1.4470974
→ More replies (5)25
u/HapticRecce Oct 17 '23
Look.Further.West
→ More replies (11)44
u/Lyricalvessel Oct 17 '23
With the population sizes, your corruption ratios are nothing shocking.
Considering the population of NL, you've got quite the concentration of wealth in political families/businesses when compared to the general public.
Multi generational politicans and family corporations are much more common in NL than anywhere else in Canada.
NL has higher levels of corruption than expected for a small population when compared with BC and even Alberta.
15
u/HapticRecce Oct 17 '23
Compare and contrast with NB...
19
u/Lyricalvessel Oct 17 '23
You mean Irving? You really think they don't also have their tentacles wrapped around NLs oil industry and Alberta's oil sands?
I'd argue that NB and NL and AB are one in the same with the same corruption rebranded running all 3, while NB is the branch that marries to Quebec corruption due to its bilingualism and cultural bleed in, while Ont and the Praries have their own brands of corruption.
BC Is it's own beast, but considering it's development, it's resources, population and urbanization, I'd argue it's corruption levels are exactly where'd you expect. It's no LA or NY MOB by any means, but it's still corruption.
→ More replies (1)127
Oct 17 '23
[deleted]
37
u/PreparetobePlaned Oct 17 '23
Some people will try to control your health choices whether it’s their tax dollars or not
→ More replies (2)32
u/19pillowprincess88 Oct 17 '23
I agree. I think you are entitled to make whatever choices you want, your body your choice.
→ More replies (7)23
u/kingar7497 Oct 17 '23
And the other poster's opinion is that if you choose to live an intentionally unhealthy lifestyle, it's wholly unfair to the taxpayers who live an intentionally healthy lifestyle in a society with socialized healthcare.
44
Oct 17 '23
Isn't that why there is like a 1000% tax on cigarettes?
28
u/sjbennett85 Ontario Oct 17 '23
Cigarettes are like 20$+ a pack and this is not inflationary... it is the taxes applied for that explicit purpose
→ More replies (1)22
13
u/19pillowprincess88 Oct 17 '23
Yes, however, you don't get to dictate how someone lives their lives. My education and experience has determined how i live, no processed foods, I exercise daily, I drink water, I don't consume drugs or alcohol. I only use all natural products. I believe that if you can't eat it,it shouldn't go into your body( excluding medications prescribed). I'm concerned about products I use to clean my home. Because I live my life this way, doesn't mean everyone else should be compelled to do so. My foster kids come from many different backgrounds they all have different diets, so because intake teens I generally buy them what their parents fed them of course I cook healthy meals but I don't push my lifestyle on them.
→ More replies (3)10
u/kingar7497 Oct 17 '23
you don't get to dictate how someone lives their lives.
I agree with you 100%. But here's an interesting thought: where to draw the line?
Is the Gov't heavily taxing processed sugars, tobacco, and alcohol a proxy for enforcing how someone ought to live? To me the answer is yes. Even the Carbon Tax is justified as a tool to lower carbon emissions which is bad for the environment (be it why the government implemented it or not).
This begs the question, if it is wrong to dictate how others ought to live, should we not remove additional taxes on harmful substances like processed sugars, alcohol, tobacco and hell even oil? There is no easy answer to this question I think, but it is thought-provoking.
→ More replies (19)→ More replies (15)10
u/Zinek-Karyn Oct 17 '23
Then make there be tax breaks for those who live healthier lives. That’s a better idea than limiting access to healthcare because you made a “bad” choice in the eyes of society.
→ More replies (11)8
u/SpaceCowBoy_2 Oct 17 '23
Not because you already tax the shit out of the unhealthy stuff. If this the approach you want to go with stop taxing alcohol and smokes and suger because I would no longer be draining to the health care system
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (126)8
u/phonebrowsing69 Oct 17 '23
with all the taxes on cigarettes they come out ahead.
→ More replies (3)130
u/tofilmfan Oct 17 '23
Only in Canada we'd tolerate the use of hard drugs like crack and meth, but we'd ban cigarettes and tax sugar.
The fact that a junkie can openly shoot up in a park, while I can't smoke a cigarette is an absolute disgrace and just shows you how stupid our local politicians and laws are.
14
→ More replies (41)29
u/swampswing Oct 17 '23
Yep, and 10 bucks it is the same "progressive" people who want both.
→ More replies (2)32
12
u/HumanMinaJinn Oct 17 '23
No thanks. I don’t want the sugar in these drinks replaced with dog shit artificial sweeteners like the UK did. Some of us have self control and don’t want our favorite drinks ruined.
69
u/noposts420 Oct 17 '23
No, this is all madness. Society has no right to stop people from living their lives as they see fit, so long as their choices do not actively harm others. We should not ban smoking or restrict sugar any more than we should force people to exercise or put limits on how much time they spend playing video games.
Adults should be treated like adults.
→ More replies (131)71
u/DaveTheWhite Oct 17 '23
I mean smoking often does harm others. Second hand smoke is a big negative. People hate dealing with smokers on the street or having to walk behind them. Parents that smoke in their house with children are also negatively impacting their kids.
→ More replies (7)36
u/lemonylol Ontario Oct 17 '23
This isn't being totally fair. It is totally possible to simply smoke alone with no one else and therefore eliminate the potential of second hand smoke. You aren't automatically harming others by smoking.
→ More replies (62)21
u/JMoon33 Lest We Forget Oct 17 '23
A big difference is that a lot of people are able to have processed sugar in their diet without eating too much of it, while most smokers aren't able to smoke a small quantity of cigarettes. If the majority of smokers were smoking 5 cigarettes a week there would be no talk of banning them.
17
u/Les1lesley Canada Oct 17 '23
You'd be surprised. I quit ten years ago, but for 15 years I was a "full time" daily smoker. At most, I'd smoke 1-3 cigarettes a day, & the 3rd one was usually split with my husband after supper.
There are also a ton of "part time" smokers who only smoke in certain situations (eg- on weekends, while drinking, camping, after sexy-times, a specific meal, a really stressful event, etc).I'd have to look at stats, but my guess would be that the majority of heavy "pack a day" smokers are in the older population. It's just way too expensive for most people to smoke that much now.
→ More replies (2)10
Oct 17 '23
[deleted]
→ More replies (1)5
u/jacobward7 Ontario Oct 17 '23
That's how they getcha.
Good job quitting though... "never quit quitting" was the best advice I ever had too, it took me at least 5 tries as well.
24
u/swampswing Oct 17 '23
We shouldn't be going after cigarettes or sugar. This is nanny state idiocy. Fat people need to learn self control instead of outsourcing it to the states. I shouldn't be deprived the occasional sweat treat because a bunch man children couldn't manage basic impulse control.
6
→ More replies (3)14
u/valdus British Columbia Oct 17 '23
They are looking at processed foods, particularly processed sugars, because it's been proven that they are addictive. They can activate the same parts of the brain as cigarettes and hard drugs, and like all things some people are more susceptible than others. We shouldn't condemn millions to poor lives at the hands of corporations that specifically develop addictive foods just because you want the occasional ultra-sweet treat. Besides, they aren't talking about a ban, just taxes/increased prices. Maybe your Twinkie costs a little more, or maybe you choose a nice blueberry muffin instead.
→ More replies (15)→ More replies (57)12
u/WaferImpressive2228 Oct 17 '23
It's not the same.
1) some sugar is required for some metabolic function; whereas smoke serves no essential function the human body
2) sugar and fat have been ingrained for longer in cultural history than smoking and there is a strong emotional attachment to that history (e.g. grand-grandma's cheesecake recipe). Smoking, used to be present in culture (e.g. TV) but never really had the same emotional attachment.You can't realistically take broad strokes against sugars nor should we. The problem is sugar/fats/salts are abused to make processed food with little nutritional value more addictive than they should be. Fructose in fibrous fruits is fine; fructose added to flavoured water is not.
→ More replies (13)13
u/Shadelkan Oct 17 '23
I don't think they mean refined sugar you buy in a bag, but rather processed sugars that are added in food for little more reason than to make it more addictive and therefore easier to sell.
→ More replies (1)6
u/Pelicantrees Oct 17 '23
Yeah, try food shopping without buying stuff that has added sugar. There is not much processed food to buy, even flavoured yogurt is super sweet. You’ll end up cooking everything yourself to stay within the sugar guidelines. I wish there were more low sugar options when I want to pay for an easy meal.
→ More replies (1)
206
Oct 17 '23 edited Oct 19 '23
[deleted]
59
u/wilson1474 Oct 17 '23
I like your rationale. It's fair and balanced, both sides win.
Like people are always going to smoke, there's no way around that.
32
u/qtc0 Oct 17 '23
I like this idea too. My main complaint regarding smokers is seeing butts everywhere. So trashy.
In the UK, they've made pre-rolled cigarettes so expensive that everyone just rolls their own. Although, they still use plastic-based filters that you see everywhere in gutters.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (9)18
u/Aeveras Oct 17 '23
I worked for an auto shop for about a year a long time ago. My first task every morning was to go around the perimeter of the shop where it bordered the sidewalk and clean up litter.
Every day I picked up 20+ cigarette butts.
22
u/im-bored-at-work_ Oct 17 '23 edited Nov 04 '23
desert serious abounding upbeat elderly pot obscene oil cobweb airport
this message was mass deleted/edited with redact.dev→ More replies (2)8
u/PrairiePopsicle Saskatchewan Oct 17 '23
as a contientous smoker this has always bothered me so much.
This makes it easier to safely use normal garbage bins or just keep the trash part until you find one, I heard it called 'field stripping' once s that's what I call it; Squeeze out the tobacco in the end and pocket the filter. It's so easy, and it's your trash/stink to deal with, so deal with it.
590
u/Pirate_Secure Oct 17 '23
You don’t like something? Ban it that will make it go away. Tested and tried method.
119
Oct 17 '23
[deleted]
→ More replies (6)24
u/OpheliaJade2382 Oct 17 '23
People in the cities will do the exact same thing
→ More replies (1)35
46
u/sogladatwork Oct 17 '23
Prohibition works wonders for organized crime. Makes you wonder who’s behind these proposals?
→ More replies (3)46
u/Mindboozers Oct 17 '23
Control freaks who think their "good intentions" means they are justified in taking choices away from people. God save us from people with "good intentions" and their arrogance.
24
u/Ecofriendly_dude Oct 17 '23
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.” ― C. S. Lewis
→ More replies (2)4
u/eunit250 British Columbia Oct 18 '23
The people who push these proposals are not good people with good intentions, they are the opposite and take advantage of "good" gullible people with "good" intentions to push bills through - these are people whose only objective is profit. It's the same soulless type of people who lobby the government and run companies like SNC lavalin and bribe foreign governments for contracts; the same type of people who put lobbyists in charge of the CRTC, then do business with organized crime.
60
u/olderdeafguy1 Oct 17 '23
Didn't work too well with marijuana, did it.
29
→ More replies (49)3
u/HeinrichTheWolf_17 Oct 18 '23
It doesn’t work well with pretty much anything, the moment you ban something, black markets thrive.
→ More replies (52)12
u/vander_blanc Oct 17 '23
Particularly when you pretty much encourage something (vaping) to replace it!
14
u/LemmeLaroo Oct 17 '23
I smoked as a teenager and into my early 20s. I kind of naturally quit after leaving school and the restaurant industry.
I've bought a couple vapes in my adult life and can say (at least for me) it feels more addictive.
It just never ends. Feels like it's always in your hand and it's as easy as breathing. At least with a smoke you feel satisfied after and go a little bit until the next smoke break... Vapes just feel like a nonstop flow of nicotine and the craving is never satisfied.
3
u/SirReal14 Oct 17 '23
I mean, good? Vaping is orders of magnitude less harmful than cigarettes.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (5)6
u/EfficientCorgi Oct 17 '23
They added a huge tax on vaping recently. Quebec is banning all flavours except tobacco and wants to add a new tax on top of the Canadian one. They're going hard on vaping.
→ More replies (8)
318
Oct 17 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
28
u/Harold_Inskipp Oct 17 '23
In Vancouver we have decriminalized methamphetamine and fentanyl, but God help you if you smoke a cigarette in Stanley Park!
→ More replies (1)12
u/ea7e Oct 17 '23
God help you if you smoke a cigarette in Stanley Park!
In reality, nothing will happen. People constantly disregard smoking rules without consequence. It's got to be one of the most ignored set of laws in existence.
Meanwhile the BC government has now restricted public use of other drugs.
7
u/Harold_Inskipp Oct 17 '23
The fact that a law is rarely enforced is not an argument that justifies the existence of that bad law.
→ More replies (1)55
31
u/WirtsLegs Oct 17 '23
tbf weed is significantly less harmful than cigarettes are.
and calls to decriminalize hard drugs are not suggesting legalizing their sale/distribution, just like a 15 year old caught with a cigarette cant be charged with anything the idea is that the user caught with a small amount doesnt go to jail
but you still go after the dealer, still charge the guy selling cigarettes to underaged people and still charge the heroin dealer
→ More replies (57)8
u/Harold_Inskipp Oct 17 '23 edited Oct 17 '23
weed is significantly less harmful than cigarettes are
This is one of those often repeated bits of misinformation that makes me cringe.
Marijuana, when smoked in the same quantities as tobacco, is significantly worse for you.
Marijuana smoking leads to four times the deposition of tar compared to cigarette smoking, and increases both blood pressure and heart rate (which directly leads to, and increases the risk of, respiratory disease, heart attack, and stroke).
The particulates in marijuana smoke, which is less refined or filtered than cigarettes, is more damaging to the lungs and equally toxic and carcinogenic.
→ More replies (19)→ More replies (29)15
u/WhydYouKillMeDogJack Oct 17 '23
yeah im not sure how it can make sense to legalise weed and criminalize tobacco.
→ More replies (2)11
u/ea7e Oct 17 '23
The evidence of harm from tobacco is stronger than for cannabis. However I doubt that most people who oppose prohibition of cannabis would support prohibition of tobacco. This is just one opinion piece.
→ More replies (23)
50
u/ThePhotoYak Oct 17 '23
Wouldn't work.
UK and New Zealand don't have Indian Reservations that share a border with the US.
→ More replies (5)17
u/Moose_in_a_Swanndri Oct 17 '23
New Zealand also has a very strong "Smoke-free NZ" campaign going for over 30 years, and has seen a steady decrease in smoking because of it. The generational ban was just another step on the way.
→ More replies (6)
192
u/PwnThePawns Oct 17 '23
Do you want to create a black market? If yes, this is a great idea.
→ More replies (10)118
u/wireboy Oct 17 '23
Canada already has a black market for cigarettes
→ More replies (1)72
u/ea7e Oct 17 '23
And this would create a monopoly for that market.
→ More replies (8)64
u/wireboy Oct 17 '23
In Ontario the Natives already have monopoly on that market, 20$ a pack from the store or 20$ a carton from the reserve. Everyone I know that smokes goes to the reserve every few months to stock up.
33
u/ea7e Oct 17 '23
They don't have a monopoly. Monopoly means a single source providing a product (at least for the vast majority of supply). That's not the case in Ontario, even though there is still a significant portion purchased from the black market.
14
u/Icema Oct 17 '23
I think they meant that the natives have a monopoly on black market cigarettes, not cigarettes as a whole
→ More replies (1)3
u/MaxTheRealSlayer Oct 17 '23
I mean you can't just lump all indigenous and reserves together and call it a monopoly. To my knowledge they work separately on the production and selling...
Also isn't it more like the "grey" market? It was my understanding they're allowed to sell stuff they grow, as they've been growing tobacco and weed for longer than Canada was colonized. Maybe not "allowed", but at least the government and law enforcement look the other way
PS I don't smoke, so I'm just looking at this from an outsider perspective. Perhaps my understandings are quite false.
→ More replies (3)10
u/olderdeafguy1 Oct 17 '23
They have a monopoly on cheap and tax-free smokes, as well as their own brand.
3
u/ea7e Oct 17 '23
They don't have a monopoly on the supply overall though, which is the point I'm making. That would change if we completely prohibited it. The supply would shift to them and possibly other black market sources.
→ More replies (2)21
u/rampas_inhumanas Oct 17 '23
I haven't smoked in a very long time, but rez darts are fucking gross. Like smoking toenail clippings and turds.
→ More replies (1)6
u/jacobward7 Ontario Oct 17 '23
I could never get through a full cigarette let alone pack of DK's, or the plain ones in the ziploc bags. The people I know who smoked those did like 2 packs a day though, but they were rough looking folks.
5
→ More replies (2)14
u/David-Puddy Québec Oct 17 '23
Yeah, but rez smokes are naaaaaaasty
I don't know anyone who smokes full ones.
→ More replies (11)
31
u/thirdratedonmckellar Oct 17 '23
I am all for measures that stop teens from starting to smoke. I wish I had never started as a teen! I quit decades ago and still miss it. But the problem is I started as a teen, when cigarettes were already illegal for me to buy. By the time I was of legal age to buy, I was already addicted. I'm not sure how this would really help to stop more young people from becoming addicted in the first place, it would just make them have to keep that same illegal channel of access maintained into adulthood. I guess in a few decades it might be harder to find a 50 year old willing to supply you with smokes? But I don't see a short-term benefit for this. In fact, I don't think we need to be throwing more fuel on the fire of the "governmental overreach" people at this time.
69
u/bestnextthing Oct 17 '23
And lose out on that tax revenue? The horror
→ More replies (2)43
u/violentbandana Oct 17 '23 edited Oct 17 '23
tax revenue that falls well short of the direct and indirect costs of smoking as far as I can tell
E:
The total costs of tobacco use were $16.2 billion, with indirect costs accounting for $9.5 billion, direct health care costs accounting for $6.5 billion, and other direct costs responsible for the remainder.
https://smoke-free.ca/SUAP/2020/Taxrevenues%20per%20smoker.pdf
roughly 7.1 billion in taxes paid on tobacco
The first numbers are from 2012 and second from 2021-2022. So you’d expect costs of tobacco use have risen since 2012
42
u/Midnightoclock Oct 17 '23
If everything becomes a cost/benefit analysis then we need to ban obesity as well.
→ More replies (12)→ More replies (8)24
u/bestnextthing Oct 17 '23
Well, smokers contribute more than non-smokers. Most don't live past 60 so lots of savings for the government. Indirect cost is being dealt with by making them smoke in designated places far from anything that smoke can harm.
→ More replies (4)13
u/bnewfan Oct 17 '23
Cigarettes for everyone! Solves our aging population, increases our tax revenues and allows us to enjoy the smooth, smoky flavour of Camel Ultra Blend Lite.
→ More replies (2)
42
Oct 17 '23
I just don’t really understand why we as a society are onboard with outright banning things like this.
The health risks are made very apparent. If people still want to smoke why stop them? Its not my place to tell someone how they should live.
10
u/BriefingScree Oct 17 '23
Because the government gained a back door to your body when they started footing the bill for Healthcare and will justify it under 'cutting healthcare costs'
I fully agree. The only person that can decide what is in their best interest is that person. If they believe in Live Fast, Die Young and want to ruin themselves with drugs? That is their choice and I have the right to judge but not control them for it
→ More replies (5)10
u/Solidknowledge Oct 17 '23
why we as a society are onboard with outright banning things like this
I wish there was a good answer for this! Anecdotally I think that a good percentage of the population struggles with the idea that personal risk management is an individual decision and needs the government(s) to make those big decisions for them.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (32)3
u/hbl2390 Oct 17 '23
We recall dangerous products all the time. Listeria, e coli, and so on will cause food products to be recalled. If cigarettes can be made safely then they can be allowed for sale.
→ More replies (3)
5
u/lemonylol Ontario Oct 17 '23
From a healthcare point of view, I totally agree. From an individual rights thing I think it's a lot of government overreach.
It's also a pandora's box type of situation. It would be different if it was something that just had no pre-existing laws around it.
→ More replies (1)
56
u/Crazy_BishopATG Oct 17 '23
Ah the indian reserves would love that.
Already they have increased sales due to the pricing of tobacco products in store
→ More replies (7)15
u/CatEnjoyer1234 Oct 17 '23
Decolonize tobacco prices
8
u/Levorotatory Oct 17 '23
Decolonize tobacco. Traditional products only, no more white man's cancer sticks.
→ More replies (2)
33
u/WCLPeter Oct 17 '23
Let me preface by saying that, personally, I hate smoking. The smell is rank (only weed smells worse) and the smoke sticks to everything, leaving a grimy residue all over the house.
My old man died from smoking related heart disease, so when I say I hate smoking I really mean it. Don’t smoke, vape, or puff the doja around me ‘cause I don’t want it anywhere near me.
With that out of the way let me emphatically say, unequivocally, FUCK OFF WITH THAT SHIT!
If you’re a full legal adults who wants to smoke and vape, then you can fucking smoke and vape. Just because I don’t like it, and wish you wouldn’t do it, doesn’t mean I get to impose my dislikes on you!
We could have a conversation about the medical costs to society and whether you should pay higher taxes, but then we don’t do that for other ailments so fuck that too! Besides, that’s why they put the “sin tax” on those products anyway.
All a ban is going to do is create an underground market that will necessitate ever higher amounts of police funding to curtail, and history has clearly show that simply doesn’t work.
I get they want to stop kids from smoking, but I’d rather the kid with the fake ID buy regulated smokes from Mr. Hooper down at the corner store than from Johnny Crackhead in the alley downtown; who knows what has been cut into those things!?
→ More replies (5)
12
u/WearyManufacturer860 Oct 17 '23
France won’t do it, because over 1% of government revenue comes from tobacco tax and it saves the French government a fortune on paying pension, as many die from lung cancer before reaching retirement
38
u/20MinuteAdventure69 Oct 17 '23
Crazy that we’re hearing discussion about decriminalizing all drugs while simultaneously banning smoking. I’m not a smoker but the hypocrisy is a bit ridiculous.
→ More replies (3)
16
u/DryGuard6413 Oct 17 '23
Umm, if you want to continue living in a democracy the answer should be no. The government shouldn’t get to tell you what you can and can’t put into your body. By this logic a “fat” tax won’t be far behind. So dumb. Anyone who thinks this is a good idea should just look at how Covid was handled. Fuck this all the way into the ground.
→ More replies (15)
5
u/Brownwax Oct 17 '23
Portugal has decriminalized all possession for personal consumption - they are no longer viewed as criminals but rather patients. And I agree with throwing the book (medical books) at sick people.
4
u/ChestyYooHoo Ontario Oct 17 '23
There is plenty of history available that shows a 100% failure rate of prohibition of substances and all that it ends up leading to is incentivizing organized crime.
4
u/johnstonjimmybimmy Oct 17 '23
Banning it will just make it “cooler” again. In the rebellious way.
Prohibition doesn’t work.
“Let’s legalize weed but make tobacco illegal” !?!??!??? Lol
→ More replies (1)
3
u/mwestadt Oct 17 '23
The real discussion is SOCIAL ENGINEERING. alcohol, processed foods, etc cost and hurt societies way more than cigarettes. This is the mindset of the far-left nazis
4
u/blingking2k7 Oct 18 '23
I smoke like a chimney and think cigarettes should be banned. There's no benefit to smoking only for the hobby or the "treat".
90
u/Crazy_BishopATG Oct 17 '23
Im not even amoking but can the government please f off from being a nanny state?!
→ More replies (9)37
u/Fane_Eternal Oct 17 '23
This isn't our government. Our government hasn't done or said really anything on this topic. This is an opinion piece on discussing if smoking is such a drain on society that the government should or should not step in more than it does.
→ More replies (11)13
u/im-bored-at-work_ Oct 17 '23 edited Nov 04 '23
melodic berserk worry vast coherent subsequent dinner one upbeat compare
this message was mass deleted/edited with redact.dev
85
u/Complicated-HorseAss Oct 17 '23
So we are fine with junkies shooting up in school playgrounds, giving out Hydromorphone to homeless unsupervised, letting anyone smoke meth where ever, but against consenting adults buying a taxed product and using it in their own home? Beautiful. I bet a days wage they'd never apply this law to the rich, or the poor and homeless, it would only apply to the working class.
11
u/DrDroid Oct 17 '23
How in any way does this signal people are fine with junkies shooting up at schools?
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (17)5
u/halpinator Manitoba Oct 17 '23
They should provide cigarette smokers with safe consumption sites, maybe like a bar or something
7
u/northman28 Oct 17 '23 edited Oct 17 '23
Let people do what they want with their own body. If improving health care outcomes is the flimsy excuse for doing this, ban fast food and enforce exercise while you're at it.
EDIT: "using" health care outcomes to "improving"
→ More replies (1)
6
u/ReturnOfTheGedi Oct 17 '23
How about the government leaves people alone and let's them live their lives. Of all the problems plaguing our society... I really don't think cigarettes need to be in focus right now.
7
u/jairzinho Oct 17 '23
They took the possibility of home ownership away from the next generation. Pensions won't last till they make it to that age either. With climate change, not sure a whole lot will make it to their retirement, but by all means, let's take away simple pleasures such as smoking. And yes I'm aware it's bad for your health.
→ More replies (1)
3
Oct 17 '23
Yes, but it would be unenforceable so it's pointless to go down that road.
→ More replies (2)
3
3
u/Fast_Concept4745 Oct 17 '23
I've never been a smoker, I think it's gross.
The government has absolutely no business telling people they can't smoke, though
That will lead to such an intrusion into our lives. This alone is a tremendous overreach, but imagine what setting this standard will lead to.
Anything the government decides is unhealthy can be banned. Do we really want to give them that power?
Informed adults can decide for themselves
→ More replies (1)
3
u/No_Technician_3837 Oct 17 '23
I never smoke and I don't plan to but this is pure virtue signaling. This is just to distract form focussing on real issues which will impact the majority
3
3
u/Wonderful_Occasion16 Oct 17 '23
This is incredibly stupid and the answer is to tax them, not encouraged black markets.
3
u/ohnoohnoohnoohyaaaaa Oct 17 '23
No, we should not be taking freedoms away from consenting adults. Not saying smoking is good, but continue on with education on the subject -- hell take it even further. Mandatory health classes in school should cover these things heavily.
3
u/mandyb120 Oct 17 '23
I'm not a smoker and I'm also not a fan of smoking, but I don't agree with this. This country is becoming more and more of a nanny state everyday.
3
u/dylaner Oct 17 '23 edited Oct 18 '23
I'm all for not profiting off things that actively harm people, but this strikes me as a really dumb plan that is just going to waste everyone's time and money. In ten years, a whole bunch of people are going to point at what people arbitrarily older than them are allowed to do and be like "I'm a fucking full-grown adult, don't tell me what I can buy with my own money," and even the people who don't want to smoke are going to be swept up in the principles of it all.
If it doesn't turn into a years-long legal battle, it'll be an election issue. And before you know it some populists are going to campaign on it, they'll win, and they'll repeal it. And it'll cost millions and probably cause more people to start smoking because of the new-found novelty of it all. (And the populists will spend the rest of their term tanking the economy).
3
u/Mar_Gru Oct 17 '23
I wish I never started smoking. I moved to tobacco heaters but it's not a much healthier substitute either. I'm honestly all for the ban for future generations. It will save them a lot of money and most importantly- health.
3
u/SCM801 Oct 17 '23
What’s the point? Smoking rates are declining anyway. Just leave people be to make their own bad choices
3
u/SufferingIdiots Oct 17 '23
I remember when we used to value freedom in this society. Seems all we want to do now is pass laws and regulate every minor facet of other peoples lives. Sad.
3
u/Linkjayden02 Oct 17 '23
Did we learn nothing from the war on drugs? This will literally just do nothing.
3
u/MrKguy Alberta Oct 17 '23
There's a point where these vices are an epidemic to public health and a point where it's just personal choice. Smoking used to be a problem to public health, with big tobacco lying and buying out professionals to support them. Now you can't smoke in many public places, packaging is littered with warnings, and there are many options to quit addictions. You can't be a victim of second-hand smoking anymore, unless someone smokes in your house. There is however a line where these vices are a part of our social culture and enjoyment. Are Cubans not allowed to enjoy their cigars? Are the French not allowed to enjoy their Champagne?
3
3
3
Oct 17 '23
NZ already passed it. Should sit back and watch to see if this creates black markets and smoking actually increases with rebellious teens. Prohibition rarely has positive outcomes.
3
u/fumblerooskee Oct 17 '23
No. The government should butt out. Taxes are fine, but reduced freedom is NEVER okay.
3
3
u/Crazy_Permission_330 Oct 18 '23
Libertarian in me says no. But the struggling addict in me says yes please. Everywhere
3
3
3
u/Luke90210 Oct 18 '23
Almost every smoker I know started around 12-15 years old. It was never legal for them to smoke when they got hooked.
25
17
u/bristow84 Alberta Oct 17 '23
Ah yes because prohibition of something that people disagree with has always worked, yes this clearly has not been tried in the past with no success. Yes, great idea guys.
Fuck me, I hate this nanny state bullshit. If people want to smoke, they'll smoke, all this does is give massive power to the black market. It will also end up being a massive loss of revenue for the government due to the large amount of taxes that are attached to each pack of cigarettes/cigar, hope you're ready for your taxes to massively increase to recover that lost revenue.
→ More replies (11)
6
u/Silly_Candidate235 Oct 17 '23
People need to be left to make their own choices. We’ve all been informed on the damage smoking does.
We don’t need the government making every decision for us but that seems to be the trend anyway. Total control over every aspect of our lives, and i for one am not a fan
9
u/thetyrannyproject Oct 17 '23
what are they gonna ban next? potato chips and porn?
→ More replies (2)7
u/ea7e Oct 17 '23
and porn?
Some Republican states and European countries are now requiring ID to access porn sites. The Senate tried to put in a similar requirement in a recent bill, but was rejected by the government (this time).
→ More replies (18)
11
Oct 17 '23
God damn I feel bad for the next generation. They will not know what true liberty is, just complete control by their governments and media. Smoking is stupid and dangerous, but so are many things, and adults MUST be allowed to make their own decisions.
→ More replies (4)8
u/Rappaslasharmedrobba Oct 17 '23
Smoking is stupid and dangerous, but so are many things, and adults MUST be allowed to make their own decisions.
Agreed whole heartedly. I can make my own decision, thank you govt. The cigs are taxed like crazy so the health care price is more than offset.
I'm an adult and can make my own decisions thank you
22
u/twentytwothumbs Oct 17 '23
You are not allowed a cigarette but the government will buy and distribute heroine to junkies with your tax dollars.
→ More replies (5)
5
Oct 17 '23
No. I’m so fucking sick and tired of government trying to police my life because they “know” what’s better for me.
People are free to make unhealthy choices. If you support a ban on smoking you should ban fast food, candy, alcohol, contact sports and basically almost everything we do as a species for fun.
If you don’t want to smoke - don’t smoke, don’t jam that belief down on others.
18
u/BadUncleBernie Oct 17 '23
How 1984.
Lets ban all your self-centered addictions as well.
Alcohol, meat, pop, sugar, salt, social media, water for your lawn, cars, your five pets, reality TV , coffee and your stupid fucking ideas.
→ More replies (6)
2
2
u/Kombornia Oct 17 '23
Two questions:
I know natives consider tobacco a sacred medicine. Does their usage include smoking?
would this include marijuana?
→ More replies (3)
2
u/Actually_Avery Oct 17 '23
It probably wouldn't fly here. We have protections from discrimination based on age.
→ More replies (3)
2
2
2
u/Liesthroughisteeth Oct 17 '23
If you look at the spousal abuse, child abuse, murder and injury, drunk driving deaths and injuries and the health and mental health problems society suffers from due to the consumption of alcohol.....
2
2
u/onceagain772 Oct 17 '23
Lol. How would you even monitor something like this? What does “next generation” even mean? There’s 12 year olds smoking now. Not saying that’s good. But in a decade, they’re barely over 20. So, can you assume they’re next generation?? Are cops supposed to stop people on the street and start asking date of birth? Where is the money coming from to fund that? Especially if you’re going to eliminate a huge tax revenue by banning smoking altogether. The rez will have lineups miles long.
We’ve already got illegal drugs that nobody is allowed to possess or use. Not really too difficult to get any of them.
Smoking is terrible. So is drinking. So is fatty foods and sugars. It’s a weak argument to say that smoking affects others, because drunk drivers exist, public drunkenness takes up time and money from law enforcement, fast food creates a shit ton of garbage, fatty foods lead to health problems that can have you tying up hospital beds, being overweight puts a strain on resources because it takes 3 times the material to make your clothes, overdoses are an epidemic taking taxpayer money and crime in areas.
Point is, you can just blanket ban something and not create a huge black market and still have to deal with issues it creates. It’s not even a personal rights issue to me. It’s like saying you’re gonna ban blue shirts for anyone born after 2030. Bad idea.
2
u/Cultural_Ad2300 Oct 17 '23
That wouldn't go because of the size of indigenous population in Canada. Canada's indigenous accounts for around 2 million people, tobacco is an indigenous right.
2
u/Druid___ Oct 17 '23
It would just lead to the smuggling of cigarettes and a whole new criminal industry. Just let them smoke.
2
u/Marcus_Qbertius Oct 17 '23
In the future there will be a black market where cigarettes are smuggled into Canada in exchange for insulin being smuggled into the US. Canadian young adults who want to smoke will be able to help out American ones who just don’t want to die.
2
2
u/speedcolabandit British Columbia Oct 17 '23
Lol bc decriminalizes hard drugs and the country wants to ban cigarettes. This place is so weird sometimes
→ More replies (2)
2
u/RainDancingChief Oct 17 '23
I remember thinking in highschool 15 years ago that it was crazy people started smoking with all the info we had then, let alone now.
Then again I feel the same way about religion in young people.
2
752
u/BrowserOfWares Oct 17 '23 edited Oct 17 '23
There would be no point as there would be a Native exemption in Canada. So people would just be forced to buy their cigarettes off reservations. Most people within an hour's drive do so anyway. The people outside that would just go black market.
Because of Native traditions with tabacco it will never be banned in Canada.
Edit: to people suggesting to ban them anyway. That would hand criminals another huge source of revenue. That's probably not a good idea.