SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the all-those-in-favour,-please-cough dept.
Austria has one of the highest rates of smoking and youth smoking among high income countries, and that might not be changing anytime soon:
Many Western countries have banned smoking in bars and restaurants, but Austria is bucking that trend. Under a law passed in 2015, Austria was due to bring in a total ban this May, but now its new government of the conservatives and the far-right Freedom Party have scrapped the plans.
The move was spearheaded by the leader of the Freedom Party, Austria's Vice Chancellor Heinz-Christian Strache, himself a smoker, who told parliament last month that it was about freedom of choice. He said restaurants should be free to decide if they want to have smoking sections, where "a citizen has the possibility to decide perhaps to enjoy a cigarette or a pipe or a cigar with their coffee".
The move has horrified Austria's medical establishment. Dr Manfred Neuberger, professor emeritus at the Medical University of Vienna, says it is "a public health disaster".
"The decision is irresponsible. It was a victory for the tobacco industry. The new government made Austria into the ashtray of Europe."
Meanwhile, the country is considering buying more jet fighters, recruiting more police, defunding its public broadcaster, and examining its past.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 16 2018, @04:22PM (3 children)
The smokers actually subsidize as lot of stuff via tobacco taxes. Banning smoking in restaurants, bars and pubs is stupid and a lost opportunity.
The government could do stuff like issuing a limited number of "smoking allowed establishment" licenses per area per period (e.g. 5 years) and have businesses bid for them with a minimum reserve price. That way you control the number of smoking places and you don't lose out on another opportunity for making the smokers pay for stuff.
Then people like you can go to restaurants that don't allow smoking. While those who want to smoke in restaurants can go to restaurants that allow smoking.
And rest like me can go to either depending on how our "cost-benefit" equation works out.
(Score: 4, Informative) by julian on Friday February 16 2018, @05:53PM (2 children)
This is a variation of the broken window fallacy. Smoking causes far, far, more costs than are recovered by taxes.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Friday February 16 2018, @08:45PM
And the taxes likely go to government general fund, not to offset the damage caused by smoking.
http://boston.cbslocal.com/2010/10/01/curious-where-cigarette-tax-money-goes/ [cbslocal.com]
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by dry on Friday February 16 2018, @10:21PM
How? By killing off people early when they could spend decades sucking on the healthcare tit, perhaps with Alzheimer's like my mom the non-smoker who seems to have had her brain dissolve about 20 years ago and needs full time care vs my smoking dad who died quite quickly of cancer at home, mostly consuming morphine.
It's really not clear which group uses the most resources at end of life and I've seen studies arguing both.