NZ considers $100-a-pack cigarettes to curb smoking

**SteveJones7** · 04-26-12 at 04:25 PM

Like L1b3rta I too enjoy cigars, mainly when getting together with friends or family.

If my country ever charged $100 a box, then I would be looking at alternatives, most likely black market sources, and I wouldnt know what exactly would be in the cigars, as regulation would be out the window (obviously).

This idea has alot in common with Piracy, prohibition, war on drugs.

It would turn everyday people into criminals over night.

Smoker/non smoker, its bad bad bad for both.

You cannot force people on every single little issue without big consequences.
In this case, crime would be the consequence.

Its too stupid, that this is even being put forth seriously.
Smart people making stupid decisions

**WillowSun** · 04-27-12 at 12:04 AM

the issue is not the smokers health, but the burden on the medical system I think ie once the smoker gets sick, needs treatment, etc, takes time off work, so economic productivity cuts down, etc. The effect multiplies eg smoker takes up bed in hospital someone else could be in, etc - and there's the impact of passive smoking.

Like obesity, its cheaper for society for prevention than cure. All these costs and their multipliers are likely to be significantly less than the loss in tax revenue. The reason its not banned is probably as its legally not possible and would trigger the mother of all lawsuits.

While alcohol may cause even more damage, its the opiate of the masses. Hence its not going to be banned, ever.

04-26-12 at 04:25 PM	#15
SteveJones7 Too sexy for this board Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: teh earth Posts: 1,544	Like L1b3rta I too enjoy cigars, mainly when getting together with friends or family. If my country ever charged $100 a box, then I would be looking at alternatives, most likely black market sources, and I wouldnt know what exactly would be in the cigars, as regulation would be out the window (obviously). This idea has alot in common with Piracy, prohibition, war on drugs. It would turn everyday people into criminals over night. Smoker/non smoker, its bad bad bad for both. You cannot force people on every single little issue without big consequences. In this case, crime would be the consequence. Its too stupid, that this is even being put forth seriously. Smart people making stupid decisions

04-27-12 at 12:04 AM	#16
WillowSun Therianthrope Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 5,187	the issue is not the smokers health, but the burden on the medical system I think ie once the smoker gets sick, needs treatment, etc, takes time off work, so economic productivity cuts down, etc. The effect multiplies eg smoker takes up bed in hospital someone else could be in, etc - and there's the impact of passive smoking. Like obesity, its cheaper for society for prevention than cure. All these costs and their multipliers are likely to be significantly less than the loss in tax revenue. The reason its not banned is probably as its legally not possible and would trigger the mother of all lawsuits. While alcohol may cause even more damage, its the opiate of the masses. Hence its not going to be banned, ever.