• FishFace@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    11 months ago

    But this isn’t clear cut; I tend to hear that smokers are a net plus for a country’s finances because of the taxes on cigarettes and due to dying younger, before costlier chronic disease treatments and social care are required.

    So yes, you should be asking where to draw the line.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      A lot of the reasoning for banning smoking is second hand smoke. So far we’re drawing the line at when your bad havit affects someone else

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        Where I live (the US), smoking in most public places is already banned unless you’re outdoors and far from the entrance to act building. Any additional ban would apply almost exclusively to people who smoke alone or in the presence of other smokers.

      • FishFace@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        That’s not been the argument where I live for a generation ban, because smoking in public is already banned - so the argument is all about the health of the people who can no longer buy cigarettes.