spocklet

Wed Apr 10, 2013 5:43 am

So it's legal to buy booze, legal to gamble, legal to do many things. But it's illegal to buy cigarettes ??

Guess the tobacco corporations aren't making big enough profits, huh ?? I mean, that IS what happened with booze and gambling - made them illegal, built up a demand, and then legalised them, and now those markets are worth billions every year, right ??

slutpuppy

Wed Apr 10, 2013 6:24 am

its not illegal to buy cigarettes, but in some states the taxes are so high that people buy them off the black market.

Quote:

 

Alisium

Tue Apr 9, 2013 5:00 pm

Different perspective. Here in the US it's very coercive. Smoking is banned and the banning continues to creep closer and closer to one's own home. In parts, like NYC (I shall resist the urge to describe the nanny-statism there), there's an actual black market for cigarettes, and people go to jail for purchasing and selling on that market.

But, for me it's a matter of freedom of choice. One should be allowed to do with one's own body as they see fit, including ingesting that which they desire, even unto their own detriment. I don't feel that it's the government's place to use my money to attempt to change minds in that regard. There are plenty of private advocacy groups to take up that mantle.

That story wasn't about banning anything or limiting anyone's choice. It was about informing consumers of the dangers of the product. And on a bit of a tangent, but if there was, for example, a serious influenza outbreak like a bird flu pandemic, do you think it should be left entirely to the private sector to produce and distribute a vaccine or should governments play a role then? These are all public health issues of different kinds.

Quote:

 

Quote:

 

Regarding the celebrations of Ms. Thatcher's death, I think they are in extremely poor taste. It seems to me the height of buffoonery and thuggery. One needs only to read stories like this, to righteously impugn the character of anyone out in the streets celebrating Ms. Thatchers death. I think one can disagree, even vehemently, with someone's policies, and still connect with them on a human level and show a tinge of compassion in the end. Were Jimmy Carter to pass today or Obama thirty years hence, I certainly wouldn't celebrate. And there is almost no other person, that affects my life, on this earth, I dislike more than Mr. Obama.

I think you can read stories like that and righteously impugn the character of anyone directly involved with the incident in question. We're all individuals aren't we?

And the point really is not to celebrate because everyone feels great. Things are pretty bad at the moment. The point is that this is an historic occasion, and the media and the authorities are trying to produce a narrative of a nation in mourning for their feminist icon saviour. Her opponents, of which there are very very many, have to make as much noise as they can for the sake of posterity, and so that Thatcher's successors who are in government now know will be mindful of their own legacies. About 1/5 of British people are republicans who oppose the monarchy, but as far as broadcast and print media were concerned last year during the royal wedding and jubilee we don't exist, and at no point was a republican perspective on those events acknowledged. There are considerably more than 1/5 people who dislike Thatcher and her legacy.

Quote:

 

Still at least troubling stories are now starting to emerge.

Alisium

Wed Apr 10, 2013 2:31 pm

The government should be there to facilitate, but not lead. Lord knows it's very ineffective and even destructive in a true emergency.

Quote:

 

So, you're saying that the purpose of the celebrations is to make it known, that not everyone is a Thatcher-ite. I get that. I just think it could be done in a more tasteful way. You always suggest the idea of a silent protest. Why not that? Dancing in the streets, can't be anything but divisive.

wissaboo

 

If I am understanding stiggy correctly; we are talking about a head of state using their influence to dictate domestic policy in a foreign nation for their own personal gain. That is reprehensible and criminal. I would certainly be upset to see such a person hailed as a hero in my country. We may quibble with the form people choose to display their position but the fact remains that they are entitled to their freedom of speech even if you don't agree with it.

stigmata

Wed Apr 10, 2013 3:59 pm

Tastefulness and respectful discourse are not British political traditions.