The whole economical argument that billions would be lost on tax... Does that measure up? Surely if smokers save money they spend on cigarette's, then that would be more money to spend anyway? Doesn't it even itself out?
Well, yeah, sorta'. But the problem is not so much the billions itself, as where it goes. I.e., the billions that are spent/consumed/whatever in/on the cigarette industry, from farmers to transportation to manufacturers to transportation of product to advertisers to actors/actresses to wholesalers to retailers ....that is NOT the same industry as what might come afterward. So in effect, millions of people would be adversely affected. Just think about it in other terms ...we don't really need to eat beef, so let's get rid of the beef industry tomorrow, okay? Sure, the billions would be spent on something else, but how many people in the interim would be devastated? Baron Max
Well I just learned, that cigarettes (at least in this country) are taxed higher than most things, therefor perhaps there is some economical argument to a ban on cigarettes, although perhaps the money lost on tax would be made back on savings to healthcare due to a healthier society...
People wouldn't stop smoking just because it became illegal. It's a hard drug after all. So all the tax money would go into organized crime.
I think taxing is a better way anyway. smoking is, arguably, bad for you, so it is good that the government is controlling it. however, the government should not have so much authority over your personal decisions. so taxes are kinda screwing both sides of the argument by allowing people to smoke and still giving the government some control. so few get what they wanted, but everyone avoids being totally screwed. p.s. I don't think people should smoke and it would help our economy, in the long run, to stop smoking. think of the resources spent on farming tobbaco, it could surely be put to better use than to be simply burned. or if it is to be burned, it would be better if it were burned to produce power.
i smoked that crap for 17 years.... if they made it illegal, they would be doing all of you a favor.... i hate that shit... i say to hell with the lost taxes... and let us in an organized and legalized fashion, burn the fucking tobacco companies to the ground... the amount of smoke in such a fire. would be almost equal to the amount of smoke humans have been forced to injest due to their addictive crap they push on every street corner.... -MT THAT is the kind of hate you need to quit... and until i found it... i couldnt quit.
You got that right, brother sir... People would be setting up hydroponic grow-labs and creating kick-ass killer hybrids packing 100 times of the nicotene found in that "dirt weed" they growin' in Vir-Ginny... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
if they want people to stop smoking cigarettes, then provide a healthier and worthwhile alternative: legalise marijuana! by legalising weed, and taxing it at a low rate, then the government, and economy in general would benefit from revenue which is currently going into the pockets of druglords in the cities, that are getting kids hooked on hard drugs which cause health and emotional - therefore societal - problems. by legalising weed you tackle 2 issues - smoking, and drug use. if people are able to smoke weed, then they dont waste their money on tobacco which is nothing but harmful and addictive. and they are given a legal alternative to hard drug use, which reduces the black market in harmful drugs and leads to a far better society. bottom line: legalise :m: and we all win
Pardon me if somebody has already said this, but I suspect that the ultimate costs to society from smoking outweigh the tax revenues collected from sales of cigarettes. Those taxes are fed back into the health care needed later when the smokers start dying of heart disease, lung cancer and so on.
I would be in favour of decriminalizing them. I wouldn't hand them out to every joe on the street if that is what you are asking.
cocaine i would decriminalise, as long as it was accompanied by campaigns about health concerns that may result from its use(as it is a much more addictive and mind altering drug that marijuana). heroin on the other hand i would still outlaw for all but medicinal uses due to the way in which it is used(infections and transimiton of viruses, etc that may result from using dirty or secondhand needles) even with the current needle exchanges which provide clean needles for people to use there is still a large proportion that use dodgy old needles. keeping it illegal would be about on par with restricting the import of deadly viruses.
I might refer here to the Dutch drug policy: In my personal opinion it is easiest and most effective to fight organized crime by making it unprofitable for them to be active in a crime. The most effective way to do this is by making the crime not be a crime anymore. I'm not totally sure how you should do this in practice with heroin and coke, but a first step is education and information to be sure. Locking people up because they use cocaine and heroin definitely isn't going to solve the problem (look for instance at the US). When cannabis was first decriminalized in the Netherlands the use went up slightly, but in a few years it declined again and stabilized. It health hazards can be monitored much better in a decriminalized situation. The same is true for hard drug users in holland. People are seen as people and not automatically as criminals. Why shouldn't it be possible for the state to provide heroin users with heroin? They are already receiving methadon under controlled conditions. What are the costs of society to keep it illegal in all respects? Drug users need their fix. Drug users steal, conduct criminal acts in order to pay for this fix. The money goes into organized crime. It is plain madness. The state is sponsoring organized crime by making these drugs illegal. Why can tabacco and alcohol be legal at the same time? Both hard drugs. If society can find a way to incorporate those drugs into it then surely there must be a way to incorporate heroin and cocaine into it. I do not believe people will use hard drugs because they are available. Most people are not stupid. If good drug education is present in combination with a good monitoring system I think that society could have much less problems with heroin and cocaine than in the present situation.
