Hommie said:
You'll be surprised, those shouting for total ban are mostly smoker themselves. Non-smokers like me have never push for such to happen because it never will. Why? Because smoker dare the garment to ban it totally instead of increase the tax constantly, spare their addiction and pain.
Actually I'll equate it to a individual choice rather than putting it as a social culture. Which part of social culture is it that encourages smoking? Or is it peer/social pressure? But you got it there when you mentioned that its your choice, your choice.
I can't remember the time when the smoking packages didn't label slogons like "smoking kills or smoking causes lung diease or thinks about your children/ spouses". Nowadays, graphic images are displayed instead on the box and commericals running on the TV showing that its baaaaaad! Its been as long as I can remember, what do you mean by 'only started in past few years'?
Its a sin tax, they have a guilt free time collecting it in the name of detering more smokers to smoker and decreasing the health issue of lung diease. No rights or wrongs.....
Smokers only dare to ask the gahmen to ban it totally out of frustration at constantly having to pay more and more for cigarettes. But in actual fact we know that they will never ban it. So far, I think only Bhutan has banned public smoking, something to that effect. There will most definately be a social uproar if the gahmen banned the sale and consumption of tobacco products.
Which part of social culture encourages smoking? Product placements and actors in movies and tv shows I'd say. People pick up smoking or get 'interested' in it through these avenues. True it is an individual choice, but what influences that choice can be put down to social culture, what's seen as 'cool' and mature. Like that might as well censor the parts where people are smoking (not serious)?
The warning and labels on the boxes have been around forever, yes. But how many people actually will bother with it if it's only text? Ask any smoker, would they care? Every country has these. Would you ask the shop vendor to change the cigarette box because it said 'Smoking Causes Cancer' instead of 'Smoking Harms the Family'? Now that the new and graphic boxes are out, yes people are taking a look and having second thoughts. Many smokers would try and get the vendors to give them the 'Family' pack instead of all the other more graphic pictures. These shock tactics will work.
The tax issue isn't one of right or wrong, it's just what they have to do to further deter existing and young smokers. Same reason they eliminated to 10 stick packs, pricing reason. Combating the situation on both fronts which is increasing education and prices will lower demand, but as you can see there are 'cheaper' cigarettes out there like Limos, Texas, More which target the pricing problem, while incrasing the supply of cigarettes more.
Maybe a fixed tax to all cigarettes charged on a per stick basis instead of amount/weight of tobacco per stick will solve this problem right? Or fix a price floor on the price per pack, so no more 'cheaper' and 'more expensive' brands. Even though the increase in tax led to price of the Marlboros, Kents and Dunhills increasing, thus leading to a drop in demand for those brands, supply of the newer cheaper brands which use less tobacco per stick (Limos, Texas, More) has fufilled the 'shortage'. So the only outcome of constant increases in tax has led to new and cheaper cigarette brands emerging, utilising the loophole. Instead of constant increases in the price, why dosen't the gahmen plug this loophole?