🔐 Learn about finance with us in a simple, free, and straight-to-the-point way: https://www.visualfaktory.com/free-gift/Join the VisualPolitik community and...
TLDR: Sweden focuses on harm reduction, had “snus” as an alternative, among other things.
And that is where the question becomes, would you rather pay more, or pay less? “None” is optimal, but also a fairytale. And where do you draw the line? Cycling every time you travel less than 3km is healthier than going by car and would bring health care costs down. So ban cars, I guess?
Cycling every time I travel 3km is encouraged by the the excise tax on fuel, which accounted for half of its cost before Trump went crazy and nearly doubled our diesel prices here in Estonia. Just like drinking less is encouraged by excise tax on alcohol and of course nicotine products have their own excise tax, but it doesn’t appear to affect snus as much, since at least the ridiculously strong pouches are actually super affordable since they contain so much nicotine that just one an hour is equivalent to chain-smoking cigarettes.
You also need to be 18 to drive a car without an adult present and you have PE classes as a teenager, whereas you can easily get started with snus at 14 or hell probably 7 or 8 because nobody checks if you’ve got a pouch in, unlike driving a car where they check your driver’s license. I smoked in 6th grade (and then gave it up and later picked it back up again), but that was a whole ordeal and you could sneak in a couple of cigarettes a day, with snus you can go all day every day in school without getting caught. It’s just so easy to start ruining your health from a much earlier age, making the tail end of your life more expensive to the people who actually have to work for a living while you’re retired already.
Like, I’m pro socialized healthcare because absolutely nobody should be bankrupted by medical bills, but that implies people being responsible and since people can’t be trusted to be responsible with health things, laws have to be used to force it.
And that is where the question becomes, would you rather pay more, or pay less? “None” is optimal, but also a fairytale. And where do you draw the line? Cycling every time you travel less than 3km is healthier than going by car and would bring health care costs down. So ban cars, I guess?
Cycling every time I travel 3km is encouraged by the the excise tax on fuel, which accounted for half of its cost before Trump went crazy and nearly doubled our diesel prices here in Estonia. Just like drinking less is encouraged by excise tax on alcohol and of course nicotine products have their own excise tax, but it doesn’t appear to affect snus as much, since at least the ridiculously strong pouches are actually super affordable since they contain so much nicotine that just one an hour is equivalent to chain-smoking cigarettes.
You also need to be 18 to drive a car without an adult present and you have PE classes as a teenager, whereas you can easily get started with snus at 14 or hell probably 7 or 8 because nobody checks if you’ve got a pouch in, unlike driving a car where they check your driver’s license. I smoked in 6th grade (and then gave it up and later picked it back up again), but that was a whole ordeal and you could sneak in a couple of cigarettes a day, with snus you can go all day every day in school without getting caught. It’s just so easy to start ruining your health from a much earlier age, making the tail end of your life more expensive to the people who actually have to work for a living while you’re retired already.
Like, I’m pro socialized healthcare because absolutely nobody should be bankrupted by medical bills, but that implies people being responsible and since people can’t be trusted to be responsible with health things, laws have to be used to force it.