Solution to Nicotine Addiction
How about a Federally-mandated cap on the amount of nicotine allowed in cigarettes? If x ppm is the current standard in 2008, reduce the cap to 90% of x ppm by 2010, 80% by 2011, ..., 10% by 2018, and 0% by 2019. By then people will have no chemical addiction that causes them to smoke.
Of course, combine this with an increasing tax on cigarettes, so that if y is the current tax per stick, double that to 2y by 2010, triple that to 3y by 2011, and finally 10y by 2018.
This double plan will make smoking increasingly undesirable by making the cost of doing so prohibitively high while the benefits nearly null. Smoking costs the world an immense amount of money in lost productivity and costs associated with bad health. This would be a good way to end the problem.
- Jinghao's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Comments
So you're going to assume
So you're going to assume that people "somehow" won't be able to tell the difference in cigarettes as the years progress? Seeing as how smoking is more of a pastime and a habit, rather than something people pick up every Sunday, thinking that way is sort of foolish, don't you think? People are going to be able to tell the difference (much like the way they can tell with food when something is missing), and are going to just go and find some other brand that will satisfy them. And no CEO of a cigarette company will lower the amount of nicotine. In a capitalist world where you want to maximize potential, CEOs would probably increase nicotine in hopes that their customers hang on longer.
And I think the other thing is that with smoking, its a very inelastic product. If you smoke, you're most likely going to buy cigarettes because you are addicted. $3 a pack? $5 a pack? $10? Makes no difference really, because you are satisfying a craving. Sure the economy stinks, and people have less disposable income to spend on cigs, but those who are really into the smoking thing will continue to do so, regardless of price. Just ask people who still drive SUVs with gas at $4.50/gallon...
What part of "federally
What part of "federally mandated cap" don't you understand? It should be administered by the EPA just as vehicle emissions are.
And how well have car makers
And how well have car makers listened to the EPA? It will take loads more pressure for car makers such as Ford to make more fuel-efficient vehicles. Sure, they are getting there, but its going to take awhile.
Companies such as Phillip Morris (how ironic with their anti-smoking ads too...) won't crumble under pressure until they are sued or someone brings something big up for them to deal with. And besides, smoking for the most part in the US has been curbed a lot with the laws that have come into effect. How about the OTHER 180 or so nations? You can make a change here, but places like China where it seems like everyone smokes ... not much will change.
Ford only does what the EPA
Ford only does what the EPA mandates them to do. Given how little the EPA demands, Ford is being fully compliant. What part of "federally MANDATED cap" don't you understand? It's MANDATED.
I didn't say this idea is for the US only. In fact, it will work better in China because people are more sensitive to income changes there, and there are so many smokers in China.
The Federal Government would
The Federal Government would face a lot of opposition for that. I would expect lawsuits.
But yes, God help us with China. If that is enacted there, the air would be cleaner in days.
It is not my duty to consider
It is not my duty to consider the political environment under which such proposals would be enacted. My duty is only to analyze the socioeconomic effects of the proposal and whom the benefits and costs fall to.