With heroin, I d argue people are definite victims. It's absolutely not like tobacco, the craving is physically painful for long, not just the mild annoyance of tobacco.
To give you a few exemples: it takes me 3 days to a week of being irritated to stop cigarets for a full year, cold turkey. For injected heroin, it's 2 weeks of extreme pain with possibility of hospitalisation, for Subutex, an alternative pill, it's around a month (so many addict complain it s easier to take a break from heroin than the progressively reducing alternative medicine).
My dad is a pharmacist in France where we treat drug addicts who want to recover as victims and help them get alternative subutex or methadone for free: he told me he never saw someone truly stop. They can reduce and live with it, but they cannot possibly stop.
Your increasing tax solution seems unfair, while it seems fair for me with cigarets: it's my fault and I can stop. Not an heroin addict. I dont have a magical solution, in France we focused on stopping the violence due to the craving with free Methadone in pharmacies and it changed the criminal landscape, but destroying the product supply at the source while keeping the last addicts on Methadone seems like the only path, if the goal is to free people from opioids in France.
In the US it's different: opioids became a for profit pharmaceutical entreprise, and most of the crisis there is due to opium sold hidden as painkillers totally legally on a large scale.
> My dad is a pharmacist in France where we treat drug addicts who want to recover as victims and help them get alternative subutex or methadone for free: he told me he never saw someone truly stop. They can reduce and live with it, but they cannot possibly stop. In the US it's different: opioids became a for profit pharmaceutical entreprise, and most of the crisis there is due to opium sold hidden as painkillers totally legally on a large scale.
A refinement might be to tax legal painkillers that pharmaceutical companies, drug distributors and hospitals are prescribing to the populace from which they make profit from. The tax proceeds could then be used to pay for the inevitable rehabilitation of the certain percentage of the populace that is going inevitably get addicted to it.
The refinement is that the general taxpaying populace doesn't have to pay for this out of the general funds, its explicitly the people profiting from the negative externality.
Interestingly, I think if hard drugs were legal, very few people who don't already use them would go out tomorrow and give them a try, "just because", so its' not like we would have a complete societal meltdown if it happened.
I just think the US should look to other countries, and start off by implementing what works there. Even that is radical!
"It's easy to quit smoking. I've done it scores of times."
But perhaps the addictive qualities and treatment is much greater than tobacco.