TIL: the smoking age was raised to 21
(media.scored.co)
Comments (29)
sorted by:
You can die for your government, but they won't let you buy cigarettes or beer.
Amazing.
But you can cut your dick off at age 13 in some states.
Or mutilate it at a few hours old.
Which can lead to death if botched badly enough.
It takes surprisingly little blood loss to put a baby's life in danger.
Like most disgusting vices, if you don't pick this garbage up until later in life, you tend not to pick it up at all.
I'm very libertarian on most things, but goddamnit will I put on my brown shirt and baby stomping boots to enforce the utter destruction of drugs and alcohol consumption in the world. Stop getting drunk and high, you fuckwads.
Alcohol for chemistry and medicine only. Tobacco plant extracts for medicine only. Cannabinoid extracts for medicine only. So on and so forth.
I know who I'm not inviting to my next party...
You say that like not attending it is some great loss.
How is that supposed to work? We already tried the prohibition of alcohol. Just give the government more power next time?
Australia increases the taxation on cigarettes regularly. It is about AU$40 a packet or so, depending on the brand. That works out to about $1 a cigarette.
All cigarettes are in the same coloured brown packets with regulations on the markings and font on the outside. All the packets and all the cigarettes look the same.
The Australian Taxpayer has to pay for end of life medical care. The government just keeps raising the tax to pay for the two years of cancer treatment and/or heart failure treatment for smokers. The high taxes on cigarettes just about covers the direct costs now.
The opportunity cost of smoking is really high. People roll their own tobacco (which is slightly cheaper, especially if they roll them very thin) or they quit.
I can imagine that it would be a lot harder to enact this strategy in countries that did not have such effective border control.
I have yet to see data that supports a net cost to the government/society for treating smoking related illnesses.
The Google says that smokers live 13 years less on average, which is 13 years less pension, Social Security, etc. Even assuming several years of end of life treatment, had these individuals not smoked, they likely also would have developed one of the numerous old age illnesses a few years later that are also expensive to treat.
Excessive taxation on tobacco is more the government's response to a price inelastic item. Simply put, they know they can tax the shit out of it and people will still buy it. In fact, if everyone stoped smoking it would jack up the government's budget pretty badly. Just look at places that have high gas taxes to fund roads- now that people are switching to electrics and hybrids they're buying a lot less gas and so the government is scrambling to find new ways to pay for it.
You are correct that exact figures are not available. You are right, taxes don't work that way. They are not directly earmarked for use on collection, rather they go into general revenue.
However efforts have been made to study the population wide effects of smoking. Smoking remains the #1 cause of preventable major illness.
From a public health perspective, it is cut and dried. Non smokers can work longer and be more productive, pay more tax and do more volunteer work. Raising taxes and preventing cheap imports forces smokers to pay closer to the actual costs of their addiction. In accounting terms they are required to internalize the costs of their decisions, rather than externalizing the costs to society as a whole.
Here is an article from 2019.
https://www1.racgp.org.au/newsgp/professional/smoking-costs-australia-close-to-137-billion
I'd rather the whole thing where the government pays for medical care just not be a thing. It's not my neighbor's fault if I smoke myself to death, it's my fault.
I remember there being something about how the US was gonna have some strict laws on packaging/labelling, but I have seen very little change over the years. But when I get my imports (from India..? don't recall), they're covered in gore pics. So, certainly other countries are making some attempt.
Even with paying for a neighbors health, Australia has a tax spend of less than 1/2 per citizen than the USA.
The USA has state funding for emergency life-saving care for everyone, even non-citizens. Hospitals are required to give care to emergency patients and then sort out the funding later.
What happens is that people who can't afford preventative care or even timely treatment wait until they are almost dead. Now it is an emergency. They present to hospital, and care is given. It is the most expensive care and the most serious interventions. The hospital provides just enough care that they won't die in the next day or so. They are discharged from hospital. They leave.
They come back. It is an emergency again. More of the most expensive treatment is provided. This continues until they literally die. The bills are sent to the state government.
Right now you are getting the worst of both worlds. Medical care is being provided to everyone, just in a way that is most profitable for hospitals and the worst way for taxpayers.
Canada has found a way around the treatment loop. They just euthanize people who present too often for emergency care.
The way Australia does it allows tax dollars to be spent on GP care, which is less than 1/4 of the cost of hospital care for the services that GPs provide. It allows public health programs, like vaccinations (actual vaccines, not Phizzer "therapeutics") contraception and dental care for grade school kids.
The Aussie system isn't perfect, but it (right now) gives a lot better value than the tax being taken from your wages.
Yes, I agree. That sounds more functional. Haha, but, I mean, it's government spending - of course there's better ways to go about it. I suppose it's strange the US is so bad about it. Can't say I know enough about other countries' histories to explore how they didn't end up with similar issues.
The Canada solution is awful, though. They've been a mess for a while. Terrible message to send their citizens.
The biggest drain, especially in cases like California, is illegal aliens. They are given the same emergency care as citizens; which is also paid for by the state if the alien can't pay.
So you have huge communities of undocumented illegal aliens who may or may not speak English (they mostly don't), who probably are not paying tax (because they work for cash) and can't afford insurance. They get really sick too. I know this because one of my brother's groomsmen is living in LA and attempting to organize state run health programs for them; because it is vastly cheaper than not running health programs. Personally I think it would be cheaper still to kick them all out ... but California.
In Australia if an alien just makes up a SSN (Australians have a "Tax File Number" but it is the same) then the tax contribution are paid for by the employer and they never get a tax refund. They are also not entitled to any government services that are paid for by tax. So the Single Payer Government Insurance Scheme (Medicare) which pays for all of an Aussie's medical costs is not available to them. If they go to a government hospital (almost all of them are) then they must pay for the costs of their own treatment.
Don't get me wrong, the treatment is affordable compared to the USA. A night in hospital with a high level of care is something like AU$1000. In the USA it would be a miracle to pay less than US$15,000 and pay US$40 each for a paracetamol tablet.
The Australian Taxation Office (ATO is the Aussie IRS) won't look to kick out working aliens; because they pay a lot of tax that they don't spend. Hospitals won't report aliens, because doing so would stop people from seeking care, which results in ambulances and emergency care, which costs 5X. Mostly the small number of illegal aliens here are from English speaking countries like the USA and the UK. The first time they are arrested for anything they get deported.
I think the biggest hurdle to sorting out the USA's health care system is that illegal immigration really has to be solved first.
The UK has bulk, legal immigration, and as a result the UK National Health Service is buckling under the strain. People arrive from overseas with (comparatively) poor health, later in life (30 or whatever) and require a lot of care, all in London. It doesn't matter how much money the UK government dumps into the NHS, it is never enough.
As for Canada, I am sure that there are minority populations that require disproportionate health spending. For example Native Canadian communities have high unemployment and low health. They don't pay much tax and they do require a lot of care.
In general a WELL RUN Government, Single Payer Health Insurance plan is more efficent and delivers a better service ... but how you get there from where the USA is now is impossible. It just can't be done. Even if it was done, I don't think that the controlling factions of US politics would have any interest in running it well.
Fuck off faggot.
Authoritarian prohibition and violent enforcement only leads to Barbara Streisand effects and illegal underground profiteers. Increasing the availabillity of drugs and alcohol, and even worse criminal stuff. Child sex trafficking wouldn't be as much of a thing if actual prostitution was legal.
What will rememedy the matter is education.Parental, State, and Private. Facts and consequences being made known to the general public. So they'll decide themselves that they shouldn't be doing it.
But we need to lower the voting age to 16, because there are teenagers that are totes mature at that age fr fr.
Also, we need our student loans forgiven, because 18-year-olds aren't mature enough to know what fucking compounding interest is.
There actually used to be an exemption to the drinking age for active servicemen. Not sure if there still is.
I believe it's still there overseas to match the drinking age in the host country.
It's less a matter of the military trying to be fair and more an issue of practicality: if the servicemen can simply go off base and legally drink anywhere they want, it will just clog the military legal system up with alcohol-related charges for something that would be legal for anyone other than the US servicemen.
either raise the age of majority to 21 or abolish smoking and drinking ages altogether.
You can be issued a machine gun at eighteen, but can't purchase a handgun (and I think even rifles in some states) until you're 21.
Also, to the smoking thing...fuck federal law. Why the hell is it any of their business? 10th Amendment, bitches. Fuck off.
The federal government should just go away completely.
The Tenth Amendment hasn't been relevant since Lincoln wiped his ass with it.
But muh Commerce Clause! We can regulate it because it crosses state lines! You don't understand, chud, we know better than you!
America has grown the world's finest tobacco for centuries and they are trying to wipe it out completely; America was built on tobacco and cotton.
The sad fuckers running this world are willfully destroying entire agricultural crops so you can't have any because they don't like it.
I am so sick of our overlords.
For those who forgot this happened during the Juhl panic where everyone & their brother was hitting Juhls in high school bathrooms and Karen’s flipped the fuck out on it & that the law was signed under Trump which is one of the laws like bunostocks I have disdain for him passing
God damn am I gonna have to join a smoking forum to hear about tobacco legislation in a timely manner?
When Obama banned clove cigarettes I didn't find out until the stores told me they couldn't legally sell me their stock anymore. Now I just buy it black market, thanks obama.
The less people smoking cancer sticks, the better.