[citation needed]
I grew up with plenty of poor high school kids who had no problem finding cigarettes even when the taxes were jacked up on them here in Canada. I know many of them as adults who continued to smoke even as the price has continued to climb over the last 10yrs.
I've never heard anyone say they quit smoking because it was too expensive. It was merely a perk of quitting. Especially considering it's always been an irrational and escapist habit.
I also smoked for years and I can't imagine the price being $5 vs $11 would have had any effect on my decision. High prices via taxes was merely an additional burden, a burden usually placed on people who are in the most need of money.
The only two major change I've seen in recent years pushing people off cigarettes is a) it's no longer cool and b) e-cigarettes
"Most studies found that raising cigarette prices through increased taxes is a highly effective measure for reducing smoking among youth, young adults, and persons of low socioeconomic status"
There used to be separate departments for each, but they were merged years ago. This was a slightly odd move, as the revenue were people who were good at doing very detailed analysis of paper trails, whereas customs were people who were good at kicking down smugglers' doors.
An important point to be sure. I think we should just execute smokers. Surely a study will show that reduces smoking. /s ...or maybe we can just realize the ends don't justify the means.
We grudgingly accept the emissions from cars because of their other usefulness.
If we could make cars with no emissions and no other negatives, gas-powered vehicles would surely be outlawed very soon.
Smoking has no useful purpose and frankly it's ridiculous that some people feel they are entitled to put other people's health at risk because of their own addiction.
In the town I live in, smoking is only allowed in adult-only establishments. And those allowing smoking are the minority because many business owners realized their customers don't want it at all. Best of all worlds and the state didn't have to completely outlaw its public indoor use, just restrict it.
Many countries ban advertisements of cigarettes and recently there is a culture shift in Movies.
I definitely think it’s a generational change.
(During WW2 which had extensive gas rationing, a black market for that appeared as well, and (you guessed it) drive by shootings.)
Of course, today we have the failed war on drugs, with drive by shootings.
There are limits to government power attempting to force morality on people.
I'm also sure no smoking indoors or on public streets laws works to reduce smoking well too.
I think we can both agree that taxation is the better ‘value’ policy [negative costs are hard to beat], but studies such as the described at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4396458/ suggest that generic packaging has positive effects too.
The smokes are kept behind a counter here to prevent theft. I buy a pack from a 14ish year old supermarket employee/girl. She turned around to get it, gazed over the packaging looking for the one I ordered, then she looked away, her head sunk between the shoulders and she made a face as if she just saw someone eat a baby. Took her a good 4 seconds to get back her senses and face the wall of death for a second trial.
The plain packaging with disgusting imagery as used in Australia has been shown to be effective in reducing youth smoking. The less people try smoking when young, the less continue smoking when older.
The tobacco industry's own studies show that their branding is an important part of getting people to start smoking initially.
Doesn't this just create an illegal distribution network that sells them cheaper?
> The city has argued that the availability of cheaper cigarettes is a public health concern because taxes were in part a way to discourage smoking.
There's also that story about that manfacturer smuggling cigarettes into a country I can't remember to avoid paying taxes.
The only measure that reliably gets people to stop smoking. Lots of other things can reduce the number of people who start smoking, which is at least as important. There's a reasonable evidence base for a large number of tobacco control measures - banning flavoured products, setting minimum pack sizes, banning advertising and sponsorship, mandating plain packaging etc.
As others have reported in this thread the tax on tobacco is 70% in Greece. I'm not sure what it is in the UK.
The detail to take into account is that Greece produces tobacco locally. So it's going to be cheaper.
Bottom line- I'm not convinced it's the price that's making a difference.
Although I partially agree; it's not only the price that affects the consumption of tobacco. It's could also be that there is nothing cool about smoking nowadays.
Varying the images matters, so that people don't tune them out. It is best to focus on sex appeal: wrinkles, erectile dysfunction, nasty teeth, etc. The next best thing is to focus on the harm to children, both unborn and living in the house.
Greece raised the tax rate on tobacco from 57,5% to 70% in 2010. So this effect was doubled (everything else became more expensive too, wages dropped...).
Not exactly. A better way to phrase it: "The only measure that has ever been shown to work to reduce smoking is to make laws around how smoking items can be sold." Whether that law is to require tax, or age, or whatever. In your example, they are laws around requiring extra money be charged when selling something. Whether something works should not be the only factor in its implementation, especially at the state/legal level. Otherwise, you fall victim to the prohibitionist fallacy.
I have a few colleagues who are way behind paycheck to paycheck, but will always have smokes. They would rather have a pack or 2 and skip meals not being able to afford them (packs costing ~$13 cad).
Another anecdote, I recall that when I was in the military I actually met a guy who would buy cartons on base and sell the packs off base (they were tax free on base). He was in to all sorts of fringe black market style activities like this. He was also a bootlegger. He hawked his shit at swap meets. This guy was active duty, an E5 with what looked to be a healthy start to a career focused on his service. I learned after I had separated that he had been caught up in an investigation and was court martialed.
I also heard from my brother, who was also in the service, that a handful of active duty guys in his own unit in upstate NY would cross in to Canada to buy cartons to smuggle back across the border to sell in the US. This would've been in the late 80s or early 90s.
I guess my point is, if there's a market for this sort of activity then there is safe money in betting that it's happening some how. And it attributes itself well to the notion that people without a whole lot of money are able to engage in what looks like a very expensive habit to many of us.
Definitely has been happening here as long as I can remember.
People pickup cartons coming back from US trips and resell them,, you can get it at less than half price locally. Cartons can be had for 30-40$ usd at duty free. I have coworkers who travel 90%, they always bring back cartons and charge $20 markup.
Bringing cartons across from another province as they have less taxes.
Buying from the "native reserves" as it's tax free.
Buy from Asian convenience store, cause they are importing illegally at a lower cost.
Heck, not sure how easy u can pass customs nowadays, but you could buy cartons online from europe 5-10 years ago with ease illegally.
There's many options.
Smoking is a convenient crutch for people addicted, it's crazy that something that can make you feel like shit, but can also temporarily make you feel better. (Mindset of a smoker... I could chain smoke, feel like crap. My next thought is, maybe I should have another one).
If anyone wants to quit, I suggest the following as mandatory Reading: Alan Carr: easy way quit smoking (many iterations on title).
This is a magnificent book that has helped many people I know, including myself.
Helps you understand the addiction, the hold it has over you (which is mostlt mental), and helps put you in the right mind frame to quit.
If we can do it with mosquitoes, no reason we can’t use it against tobacco.
I’d offer a vaccine for addiction if one existed, but until that time, you hack around the lack of political will.
http://www.no-smoke.org/getthefacts.php?id=13 - the first link I found from a google search for "secondhand smoke kills how many"
It's more politically easy to put money into paying celebrities to beg kids not to smoke, but it's not actually effective. It's just theater so politicians can say they tried.
Here, Greece is seeing the affordability fall just because the affordability of everything is falling for them. The result is the same.