Butt out of New Zealand

[d000hg]

New Zealand will ban the sale of tobacco to its next generation, in a bid to eventually phase out smoking.

Anyone born after 2008 will not be able to buy cigarettes or tobacco products in their lifetime, under a law expected to be enacted next year.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-59589775

This caught me totally off-guard in my morning news check. Really a very bold move and to be honest, not one I thought any government would dare try let alone succeed with.

Also an bizarre implementation - depending on your birthdate you will still be allowed to smoke for decades while younger people are not. Quite a way to divide society?

Draconian government overreach or Sensible protection of the population?

[vetran]

I will watch this with interest, I eventually gave up smoking nearly a decade ago. I wish I had done it sooner. Keeping the kids off tobacco is one thing we can do for their health. Next booze!

Bold authoritarian move...

[Lost It]

I mean what could be worse than them smoking tobacco?

[jamesbrown]

I mean what could be worse than them smoking tobacco?

Reading General.

[mattster]

Also an bizarre implementation - depending on your birthdate you will still be allowed to smoke for decades while younger people are not. Quite a way to divide society?

Draconian government overreach or Sensible protection of the population?

It's an interesting question. I've been addicted to nictotine for most of my adult life, although I did quit cigs almost 20 years ago and went nicotine free for a decade, I somehow relapsed onto the dreaded vape sticks. Bit of a shame those things exist, actually, as I am able to convince myself they are not too bad but I know that I would not have relapsed onto the real thing.

Nicotine represents addiciton in it's purist form, IMO - no real upside, it is all about preventing the downside of withdrawal symptoms at vast financial and health costs (and speaking of financial costs, 20 cigs is almost £20 in NZ and you earn a lot less there - that's £7k a year for a moderate smoker). I'm not sure of the ethics of banning on age, but it is a worthwhile goal - if they could completely eradicate smoking within a couple of generations then that would be a massive win, but then no one has ever been able to manage it with illegal drugs..

[d000hg]

I mean what could be worse than them smoking tobacco?

I don't know. Why don't you expand on whatever point you were trying to make?

[mattster]

I mean what could be worse than them smoking tobacco?

Medically very little. It's not even close when comparing tobacco to other legal and less legal drugs and habits.

[xoggoth]

Hmm. Prohibition didn't work too well.

[d000hg]

Hmm. Prohibition didn't work too well.

In which country?

Of course, if you only ban the young then those in power can continue to enjoy it. Maybe this is a very clever approach Although it sounds like this is being done with the population's endorsement which is rather different than the USA.

[Fraidycat]

Also an bizarre implementation - depending on your birthdate you will still be allowed to smoke for decades while younger people are not. Quite a way to divide society?

I wonder if that is to protect tax revenue.

The UK collects £10 billion a year tax from fags, if they banned them overnight there would be a lot of lost revenue.