As they say what happens in the closet, stays in the closet.:smile:And do you want to talk about how you know about this Goober?:lol:
As they say what happens in the closet, stays in the closet.:smile:And do you want to talk about how you know about this Goober?:lol:
As far as tobacco, I do think use in youths is declining but taxes increasing the price of a pack of cigarettes is a small part of the equation. I think the bigger influences are that society, as a whole, no longer holds smoking in a positive light, as was the case in past generations, and hand in hand with goes the education of the long term effects: the increased frequency of lung diseases, heart disease and cancerm etc. Another contributing factor, especially in youth, is the cosmetic effects: the stink of cigarette smoke is unappealing to most, it yellows teeth, and the "ashtray taste" of kissing a smoker.
Well I guess it depends on how the government is gathering those statistics. If it is based in any way on cigarette tax collection it's not exactly a honest statistic. For lack of a better word.
I don't know what would be more objective, I just question whether the present system is as effective as the politicians would have us believe.
ConclusionsYoung adults are sensitive to cigarette prices. Reductions in cigarette prices will lead to increased smoking initiation among this group. Tobacco taxation should be an effective strategy to reduce smoking initiation among young adults.
I won't dismiss the fact that there are some unregulated tobacco producers. But the majority are regulated. Including First Nations.
Cheap alcohol is easily attained in certain areas.
Most of the kids I see smoking aren't puffing on Players or Export. They're smoking Rez cigarettes.
Ok...what about the other 99.9999% of Canadian youth who smoke? If you're going to go back from large survey data to anecdotes about what you see, and what your brain perceives as significant, then we're going to need to chat about objectivity versus subjectivity.
Smoking statistics are clear. Price increases lead to reduced prevalence. Price decreases lead to increased prevalence. There's a clear association between the price of a good (most goods), and consumer behaviour. For some goods more so than others.
Ok...what about the other 99.9999% of Canadian youth who smoke? If you're going to go back from large survey data to anecdotes about what you see, and what your brain perceives as significant, then we're going to need to chat about objectivity versus subjectivity.
Smoking statistics are clear. Price increases lead to reduced prevalence. Price decreases lead to increased prevalence. There's a clear association between the price of a good (most goods), and consumer behaviour. For some goods more so than others.
Sounds to me like you are buying the whole thing hook line and sinker.
If there is a study that links all drug use to marijuana as a gateway drug are you going to look at that study objectively or subjectively?
We are being presented with studies, but they are not including the number of youth moving from buying taxed cigarettes to rez cigarettes.
And that doesn't just go for youth a lot of adults buy the cheap Rez smokes. You need to stop looking at the question I am raising as an attack on your ideology regarding using taxes to change peoples habits.
RCS may have a valid observation (anecdotally) local to his circle of observation.