1. I can't find drinking-by-income data, but anecdotally, I think the idea that underaged drinking and smoking is only a problem in poor neighborhoods would make most Americans laugh out loud.
It may seem like hand waving to those constantly repeating the "data" refrain but it is also very naive ignore the rather obvious qualitative analysis. World societies are not like ant colonies.
There is not enough time in the world to gather complete and precise sociological datasets and even if there were, it would, honestly, be a waste of time for those some, and this will unpopular, common sense about the problem.
It's sort of ironic that those crying most about the data are just shrugging off the several orders of magnitude quantitative difference between Iceland and the US across a panoply of population datapoints.
You cannot just try every single possible experiment for "completeness"; it is impractical and especially when it flies in the face of common sense (or substitute "good qualitative analysis" if you like).
Also, on some level it is a bit silly, do people think there have not been after school programs in the US already? It is hardly a panacea; I mean it is not even in the ballpark.
Aka facts and evidence, as opposed to wild speculation based on gut feelings?
Wow, your "non-reference reference" is a brilliant way to criticize that my comment was not based on factual reference!
I didn't say that 'drinking and smoking' is only a problem in 'poor neighbourhoods'. So your comment is not relevant.
In fact, I didn't even refer to 'poor neighbourhoods', I indicated 'Aboriginal communities' in particular - where the problems are systematic and acute.
What is 'laughable' is that anyone would consider that the total social break-down in Aboriginal communities - and the issues that some kids in wealthy areas are remotely related, or should be treated the same way.
In Scandinavian countries, as I mentioned, there is no 'taboo' about drinking. It's 'not positive' but nevertheless 'socially acceptable' to be a kid, drinking every so often. A 'drunk 14 year old' is nothing to make a huge fuss about. Of course, 'a community of drunk 14 year olds' is.
In America - there would indeed be much fuss over a single incidence of fairly underage drinking. It's not socially accepted.
There are basically zero middle or upper class areas in America wherein 42% of 14-16 year year olds have been 'drunk in the last month' and also none where 25% of 14-16 year olds are smoking.
In America overall, the data (which was trivial to find) has it at about 5% [1] (using average of 8th grade and 10th grade).
As it would stand America already has lower teen drunkenness than Iceland even after Icelands 'amazing social program'.
Iceland before: 41%, after: 7%. America now: 5%.
Whoops!
Also - smoking is definitely a much greater issue among lower economic classes, this is consistent in most advanced countries. Drinking - it's a mixed bag. College kids drink the most of any group.
[1] https://responsibility.org/get-the-facts/research/statistics...
That would be a real zinger if I had said it wasn't. Look, I'm not sure what you're on about, but it doesn't seem to be related to my comment. Could you go find someone who disagrees with whatever-it-is you think about Aboriginal communities and argue with them?
Over 60% of Icelandic voters voted for complete alcohol prohibition in 1915, and in 1933 much of the ban was lifted; however it wasn't until 1989 that all of the restrictions were removed. I don't know how you can say it was never taboo or an issue of justice.
I've been to rich communities, and that's where I see perhaps the most drug and alcohol consumption, all in the name of "fun" (Hell, I even unfortunately know more than a few people who as teenagers got drunk on Moet, but that's a whole other tier). Of course, in troublesome communities people will seek refuge in drugs, but "normal" suburbs are not immune to it, it just manifests differently.
Edit: Gonna add, drugs are expensive. If anything, I think I'd assume economically troubled people have a harder time maintaining a drug-filled lifestyle.
Alcohol for example - there was never any taboo about drinking in Iceland. It was never seen as a justice issue before or after the program.
Also - the communities as a whole were never failing. You had 'decent families', decent municipalities etc..
I'd imagine, in most of America where there is decent governance, decent jobs, good families: there is not a massive problem with smoking and alcohol. There might be issues with marijuana and hard drugs possibly, both of which represent a different kind of issue entirely.
To me - the 'Iceland' solution seems pretty straightforward on the scale of 'social malaise' to deal with. 14 year olds getting drunk and smoking - just by 'cracking down' a little bit on under-age serving, liquor stores/cigarettes - changing a few laws, trying to change social norms - you'd likely be able to move the needle a bit. A more integrated social program would yield even better benefits as we see.
But imagine an Aboriginal community trying to do the same thing: there is usually a lack of coherent leadership, lack of basic justice and trust in the justice system, lack of funds, and much deeper social problems (incidence of rape is through the roof, there's a lot of violence, suicide etc.), there's poverty, joblessness, and very few have any hope for the future. Now that puts alcohol abuse in a different category.
If there were 'normal suburbs' in America with vicious underage drinking and smoking problems, I'd say Iceland provides a good solution.
Outside of that, I think it's much more complex.