The EVIL of the Smoking Ban

I’m not yet really in a fit state of mind to be bothered. I’ve vaguely decided that I have no power, and therefore it does not matter what I say or do, except as an individual who will pay as little as possible, in every way that I can, to support the corrupt system of politics and government which we currently have to endure. But just as a little thought that I had on my hols, it popped into my mind that we often do not see just how evil the smoking ban legislation is.

What I have often said is that the legislation placed a burden upon the proprietors of various establishments which was unfair. It required publicans to become enforcers of the legislation whether they wished to be enforcers or not. They were not paid to be enforcers.

It is a curious thing that they accepted this unpaid duty without demure. Is it any wonder that the Tobacco Control Industry becomes more grotesquely demanding by the day?

But here is the most important thing.

The smoking ban ENABLED.

Note the difference between FORCED TO ENFORCE  (as regards the duties of publicans, for example) and ENABLED. The ban GRANTED POWER to lots and lots of otherwise powerless people to flex muscles that they did not know that they had. Thus, for example, we see some people complaining about tobacco smoke drifting into buildings from outside. And these complainants shout at those who can stop it. Thus, these complainants are empowered to force their will upon others. These people are a tiny minority, but they have been granted great power.

Such consequences are evil. They create, and have created, fear among the populace of stepping out of line.

Where will it end??

 

Advertisements

8 Responses to “The EVIL of the Smoking Ban”

  1. michaeljmcfadden Says:

    “Where will it end??”

    Excellent question Junican. I wish I knew the answer. All I know is that it won’t end well unless we manage to stop it.

    – MJM

  2. smokingscot Says:

    Where will it end you inquire.

    To answer that one needs to get into the mind of a sociopath with an over inflated sense of self and a belief that their crusade is just.

    Also I’d need to be prepared to lie, cheat, embezzle; have absolutely no consideration for anyone, especially those innocently caught up in my war against smokers / smoking / tobacco manufacturers and producers.

    And professionalism, integrity, trust. Scrub those as well… the end justifies the means.

    So – sadly – I cannot in all honesty answer your question simply because I am incapable of stooping to those depths of depravity.

    However on the off chance that you’ve overlooked this one, I’d ask that you spend a minute or two going over the comments made by “History”. Enlightening I felt – and well written too.

    http://www.redheadfullofsteam.com/ok-were-out-of-ideas-raise-taxes-again/#comments

  3. beobrigitte Says:

    “Where will it end??”

    I am more interested in WHEN will it end.

    Fact is: tobacco control is out of control – this signals it’s end.

    It takes ONE single country that has politicians with a back bone to abolish the smoking ban and the fuse of the vat full of dynamite tobacco control is sitting on is lit.

  4. junican Says:

    You cast around in your mind looking for chinks in the armour of tobacco control and it is hard to find any. Those which exist, such as the non-existent science which they pretend exists, are too difficult to exploit on a large enough scale. My image of the juggernaut, plying the seas and destroying all in its path, with its 15″” armour plating protecting it, springs to mind. How could one stop such a beast? I suppose that the only answer is to stop ‘feeding’ it – stop fuelling it and stop arming it. I suspect that something like that it most likely, but it might well come indirectly. For example, hasn’t it been calculated that Ireland has lost about a billion euros through smuggling of tobacco? Isn’t Australia suffering the same consequence? It is tobacco control which has caused that loss through demanding higher and higher taxes. TC would claim that its costs are justified by health service savings, but one might reasonably ask when and where are these savings going to appear. Or do they only exist in the computer models of the likes of Pell et al? TC costs the UK millions of pounds per an, but the Government is also losing hundreds of millions in taxation income. The savings in NHS costs do not exist.

    • michaeljmcfadden Says:

      “How could one stop such a beast? I suppose that the only answer is to stop ‘feeding’ it – stop fuelling it and stop arming it.”

      You could be right, and the best way to push that agenda might be the open and all-out encouragement of self-growing and black-marketeering support. Tobacco taxes in most countries have long since surpassed criminal levels: there is no guilt involved when a government taxes not only tip over 25% of a product’s value but actually tip over 250% of that value.

      Tobacco Control has watered and fertilized general attitudes toward government’s laws and taxation policies that are ultimately destructive of our governments down to their core. In TobakkoNacht I argued that:

      A democratic republic that allows its policies to be built on the basis of lies, and a citizenry that accepts those lies as being the norm, is a republic and a citizenry in very deep and serious trouble.

      I’d extend that now to add:

      … and such a republic that allows its policies to be funded by unjust taxation is a republic doomed to fail completely as its citizenry withdraws that support.

      People will put up with unjust taxation in the short run, but ultimately they will always seek to balance it in some way, and once they get a taste for such balancing they’ll almost invariably move to the point of overbalancing in their own favor — at which point the government will begin to collapse. The balancing doesn’t necessarily involve law breaking. Right here in the blogger world we’ve seen individuals like Junican moving to resist tobacco taxes by growing their own, and individuals like Leg Iron saying “Screw it.” to high taxation by finding satisfaction in a simpler lifestyle that doesn’t demand a six figure income. When enough people begin moving to various degrees in such directions, the government, for its own salvation, begins to see little choice except to further increase the already-resented tax levels … thereby increasing the damage.

      It needs to simply learn to say “No. Sorry. We can’t make things as nice as we’d like to with our social programs, and we can’t do as much fiddling overseas with our military as we might like, and we can’t maintain all of our infrastructure at as high a level as everyone might want. BUT… we can cut everyone’s taxes in half.”

      There’d be grumbling… but the decreased taxes would keep it in check, and if the taxes were kept high enough at a clearly specified amount for a clearly specified length of time to knock down the deficits and interest payments, there’d be support for it despite the grumbling.

      – MJM

      • junican Says:

        You might like to read this, MjM:

        http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/05/15/The-Conservatives-have-become-statist-supporters-of-high-taxation

      • michaeljmcfadden Says:

        Thanks Junican. I think most people support a reasonable amount of taxation, and I even think most people support some degree of escalated taxation on those with higher incomes (Although a “fair” tax of that kind could be argued to simply be some sort of “sales tax” since the wealthy would then contribute more simply by virtue of the fact that they’d tend to spend more. Such a “sales tax” could even be fiddled with a bit to avoid taxation of some level of “basic life necessities” — e.g. basic foodstuffs, the first couple of hundred/month toward basic housing, etc.)

        Those making good money would reap extra rewards from their work while also contributing more toward the tax base.

        I guess you’d still have some degree of black market problems, but I doubt there’s much black marketeering going on in areas that are not subject to punitive taxation: ever tried looking for a “man with the van” selling broccoli?

        :>
        MJM

      • junican Says:

        We have a sales tax. It is called “Value Added Tax”. The rate is set at 20% (used to be 171/2% until a couple of years ago). Food is exempt and so are children’s clothes. Fuel for home heating, lighting and cooking etc is set at 5%. Several years ago, the then conservative gov tried to increase this to the top rate, but there was such a furore that it backed down.

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: