“I think Iceland can be a test tube to try out progressive things because we are a small country and we don’t have a massive lobby for tobacco,” said Thorarinn Gudnason, a cardiologist at Landspitali University Hospital in Rejkyavik. ”We are taking care of people who are dying of this disease in their 40s and we’re fed up with it.”
Iceland’s smoking rate is already one of the lowest in Europe. Just 15 per cent of the population lights up compared to an average of 31 per cent across the continent. However, the story among young Icelanders is more worrisome: 20 per cent of children and teenagers smoke. Dr. Gudnason hopes the new plan will dramatically reduce that figure and cut overall smoking rates to less than 10 per cent…
Tobacco and nicotine would be classified as addictive drugs and second-hand smoke would be treated and controlled like other carcinogenic substances. Lighting up in public places such as parks and in cars with children would be outlawed.
Eventually, smokers who are unable to kick the habit through treatment and various addiction programs — or those smokers who simply refuse to quit — may get a prescription for tobacco from their doctors. Once cigarettes become available only through physicians, the price will go down again — as it would be unfair to tax those unable to quit supporters of the plan say.
“Tobacco is very addictive and we would recognize them as addicts,” said Ms. Fridleifsdottir.
Bravo! It would force a lot of people with lazy personal ethics to confront a personal problem. They can still maintain their addiction if they wish.
Saving their lives is a side effect.
GregAllen,
Governments around the country have been raising their tobacco taxes in recent years because they realized that drug addicts are a gold mine for making up general budget shortfalls, not just for treatment programs. Clearly smoking cessation is a ways down the priority list.
I’d rather smokers just kill themselves, and I’ll even buy them a carton.
#33–Sea Lawyer==I agree that free choices should have consequences. So you and I agree that if/when/when isn’t it/ down to monetary limits on healthcare spending, we both agree no cancer care for people who smoked.
what about innocent charity workers who never smoked at all. Or how about people who gave up their lungs in coal mines. Should they also not get the care they need because they can’t afford it….. or what?
Can you state a near universal rule that can be used or is it just a gut recognition?
#42, bobbo,
I will be as clear as I possibly can, which will also betray how heartless I am:
I do not care in any way about the long-term welfare of people who consciously engage in self-destructive recreational activities.
Any other people you may mention who do not fall into that category, but may be affected by similar ailments, have my great concern and sympathy.
Really…At least you fucks are consistent. You just cannot be happy unless you are championing people having their money taken away from them and being told what to do. Oh, and the ignorant canard with libertarians and Somalia. That one never gets old.
Those of you trying to determine the medical costs of smoking are leaving something out of your calculations. That is that we all eventually die of something. In America, at least, we typically use a whole lot of medical care in the last year of life, be it at 25, 55, or 95. The last time I recall seeing figures, on average, more than half of our medical expenses over our lifetimes occur in the last year or two of life.
So, while treating smokers might be expensive, it really isn’t any more so that it is for anyone else, on average. Except, that the smoker dies younger, without collecting as much Social Security, and they pay a lot of taxes over their lifetimes.
Some years ago, I recall seeing a pretty comprehensive study on this which came to the conclusion that smokers make for a small net gain for government over non-smokers, all other things being equal.
And then there’s the breath mint and air freshener and disposable lighter business. Heck, since I quit, I use far less glass cleaner, paper towels, Kleenex….
#43–SL==why are you so belligerent and aggressive when we agree? THAT and the lack of additional detail really doesn’t make any sense.
#44–nutball==please state how your liebertardian philosophy does not create a Somalia wherever fully implemented? Hmmmm? If what you “really” want to argue about is whether or not a specific tax/regulation is appropriate, then that is what you discuss. When you go jump in the stupid hole to “taxation is slavery” position, you fail to express yourself with any credibility at all.
So, what you are saying is that it doesn’t physically hurt to be as stupid as you are. Is that about it?
Everything that is bad for you should be free, as in “Free Government Cheese”
If you take money out of the equation, the sexiness dies, and the market shrinks to it’s lowest possible size. Money, and the need to make it, drives businesses to sell this crap.
Whether the business is a Global Corporation or the dealer on the corner!
Give it all away, and the problem goes “away”.
No one wants to be seen smoking the Government “Cheese”!
#46: “please state how your liebertardian philosophy does not create a Somalia wherever fully implemented? Hmmmm?”
Since I’m obviously debating a 7th grader (the poor knowledge of history and making fun of peoples’ names is a dead giveaway), this is the only post I’ll give you personally.
You mean the Somalia that was born of a socialist regime, where the public was disarmed by the government and when said socialist government collapsed, a mob of former government soldiers and police and other scum took their weapons and ravage the disarmed populace that never learned to fend for itself because of the former government’s oppression? You mean that Somalia? Yeah, that’s what libertarianism is [/sarcasm].
Get our of you mom’s basement and read a book or two. And no, the Lord of The Rings books don’t count.
What–actually what you say is quite true. Take the money out and for profit slime balls are not motivated to get you hooked. Just reason no 42 why legalizing drugs makes simple common sense once you get past the mindless morality connection.
Whats better–a society where drugs are illegal with x million addicts and y crime, or a society where drugs are legal with x-a million addicts and y-b crime?
What “is” morality anyway? Stating the value or evaluating the consequences?
We all know the fix is in but its time to switch monkeys.
#48–nutball==yep–that Somalia. Now answer the question.
Heh, heh. Details most likely not to follow.
A few years ago I interviewed a rugged-looking, jut-jawed fellow named David Goerlitz, a former model who was once known as the Winston Man because he had appeared in Winston cigarette ads for the R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company.
Mr. Goerlitz described an outdoor photo session in which several cartons of Winstons were scattered around. A number of Reynolds executives were at the session and Mr. Goerlitz asked if it would be all right if he took a few cartons for himself.
One of the executives said, sure, take them all.
Mr. Goerlitz, surprised, said, “Don’t any of you smoke?”
The executive shook his head. “Are you kidding?” he asked. “We reserve that right for the poor, the young, the black and the stupid.”
Perhaps we could print that disclaimer on cigarette packs along with the new one (proposed in the House and supported by the Surgeon General) that says bluntly, “Cigarettes can kill you.”
The poor, the young, the black and the stupid.
http://nytimes.com/1993/11/28/opinion/in-america-tobacco-dollars.html
I already did, child. No be quiet…grown ups are trying to have a conversation.
Dvorak, seriously…how much $$ to get a bozo filter on the site?
Ready–and tobacco industry is still putting out shills saying there is no proof that tobacco leads to cancer. Not as often as they used to, but that is still their position even as they were caught manipulating the nicotine levels “for taste.”
The same mindset is busy now FUDding our free market with the No Global Warming failure of proof scam.
The same mindset that say paying for government is slavery and lack of regulation is freedom and that as long as you don’t directly recommend anarchy, Somalia is irrelevant.
“They work hard for the money…..taking advantage of the poor, the young, the black and the stupid.” Although I think orientals seems to like the weed as well. Ha, ha. I love being racists when there’s a libitards worth of truth to it.
#50 I see you love your tautology. Never lose a chance to exhibit your verbosity.
#55–Pedo==who here is using a tautology? I’d like to see that, verbiage not withstanding.
#56 Is obvious why you can’t see it is you, Dumbbo. Sick people rarely acknowledge their problems, just like smokers
A tautology is a tautology is a tautology.
#58–foobar==glad you are here as Pedo doesn’t seem to want to identify who/what he is talking about. What a silly boy he is. But you say that a tautology is a lot like location huh?
My, that is important. What else besides tautology, location, and Pedo blowing his donkey always appear in three’s?
ICELAND is cold, there is less available potent sunlight leading to a possible vitamin d deficiency.
while smoking isn’t good for you, it can be said that a lack of vitamin D will cause all manner of health issues.
perspective people. if there was an equal amount of people with smoking related diseases and a 15% smoking rate near the equator i would be more likely to believe this exaggerated bs.
diesel fumes from your local highway, fluoride in your water, and the plastic in your food containers is more of a worry to me.
if you are optimally healthy you body will be able to heal itself, lack of vitamin D is not going to allow your body to fix itself.
funny how anecdotal evidence (because the establishment wouldn’t allow a study like this to become common knowledge)pot smokers have generally a lower incidence of lung cancer, funny that.. google “run from the cure” for more info