= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Tobacco import and distribution (and in some cases, production) are already nationalized in many countries,
that's not what nationalising means
I mean nationalized, as in the distribution of tobacco products (imports, wholesale, retail) is handled by companies that may or may not have been private at some point, but are now property of the state.
What do you mean by nationalizing?
Artificial scarcity cannot last: a black market of RYO tobacco, and home-made cigarettes of dubious origin is always ready to serve customer demands.
True, but if it's less than the total market that existed before hand, that's still a public health gain
In the end, the health effects of nationalizing the tobacco industry, and winding down operations, can easily be negative.
It can be, but that's just not the best supported hypothesis. The weight of evidence best demonstrates that control measures have thus far been quite uniformly positive.
The weight of evidence best demonstrates that control measures have thus far been quite uniformly positive.
I see. The black market effects are well-documented, but I am not familiar with evidence which shows that control measures have any measurable effects on public health. Where could I find that data?
In response to
Open Thread, Feb 8 - Feb 15, 2016
Whenever I used to think of nationalising industries, I would think of industries relating to critical infrastructure or 'prestige industries'. Reading the following threw my intuitions overboard!
A tobacco industry buy-out
In the current model, the tobacco industry has a corporate mission of selling unhealthy products so as to profit its shareholders. Its aims and purposes are intrinsically misaligned with the public good and will ever remain so. However, if the tobacco industry were nationalised, with the intent of winding down operations, the interests of those providing tobacco and public health would be aligned.
For the amount of health harms caused, the tobacco industry is not highly profitable. The total profit of the three major tobacco companies in Australia in 2007 was $600 million on assets of $3.6 billion.27 The profit per tobacco related death was approximately $20 000. Profits must decline in time as smoking rates fall as intended. Based on asset base and a reasonable profit to projected earnings multiple, a buy-out in Australia might cost in the range of $5 billion. Estimates of the cost of nationalisation in Canada range from $0–15 billion.28 Purchase could be sweetened by protection from civil litigation. Even if it costs of the order of several billions, it would rapidly return that in terms of quantifiable reductions in healthcare costs.
-http://www.racgp.org.au/afp/2012/november/towards-an-endgame-for-tobacco/
Would the tobacco industry be for or against this? Would there be an opposition except from deontological libertarians?
Dagon's points are very good. There's another aspect as well:
Tobacco import and distribution (and in some cases, production) are already nationalized in many countries, especially in the EU. National governments try to impose artificial scarcity (winding down operations, tax increases, fixed pricing), and this makes the statistics look better - officially monitored tobacco sales decrease.
Artificial scarcity cannot last: a black market of RYO tobacco, and home-made cigarettes of dubious origin is always ready to serve customer demands. In the end, the health effects of nationalizing the tobacco industry, and winding down operations, can easily be negative.
In response to
Consciousness and Sleep
You still have experiences while you are asleep
During some periods of sleep. So far as I am aware, in deep sleep there's no reason to think you are having any experiences at all.
Anyway, for those who don't object to thought experiments: imagine that there's some machine that completely suspends all your brain activity for five minutes, after which it continues from exactly its previous state. Are you the same person after as before? If you answer yes to this -- which I bet almost everyone does -- then the implications are the same as those you'd get from sleep involving a complete cessation of consciousness.
I bet if you phrase the question as "your brain is destroyed and recreated 5 minutes later", most people outside LW answer no. I guess this might be another instance of brain functions inactive vs lack of ability to have experiences.
In response to
A note about calibration of confidence
In row 8 of the table, P(D) should be replaced by P(~D).
Library Genesis provides a way to access pdf of textbooks. In many cases PDFs are superior than textbooks. They aren't heavy objects that you have to carry around. You can search in them.
Location-specific advice
Libgen is blocked by court order in the United Kingdom, but if you're a student, you can usually access it through Eduroam.
Source: been making my own jam for years, had plenty of time to experiment.
So did you actually make jam without sugar and then stored it for years before eating it?
Pretty sure the sugar is necessary for preserving. You could make it without sugar, but it would just be pulpy juice-water (the sugar is also a thickening agent), and you would have to eat/drink it pretty fast because it will go bad quickly (I would guess a couple days)
In a sterilized and sealed jar, jam made without sugar can last for years. Once you actually open the jar, you have about 7 days to eat it, and you better keep it refrigerated. You don't need the sugar for thickening - the pectin in the fruit thickens jam just fine.
However, if you don't add any sweetener, the result will be very sour.
Source: been making my own jam for years, had plenty of time to experiment.
In response to
Stupid questions thread, October 2015
I have a feeling which seems related to satiety, in that I get it after eating and it makes me disinclined to eat more, but I experience it in my upper throat/back of my mouth rather than in my stomach. It's not exclusive with hunger in my stomach.
Does anyone recognise the sensation I'm describing, and know anything about it?
Possibly relevant details, but I haven't been keeping good track so maybe don't take them too seriously: I first noticed it, I think more than a couple of months ago, but less than three years ago. I associate it with chips (fries, but moreso thick-cut ones), but I definitely don't always get it from them. Also to some extent with bananas. Those might be a red herring, because I think I'm mildly allergic to them - if they're not sufficiently ripe they can give me a burning sensation in my throat, but possibly also separately the sensation I'm describing now. I have it currently, the last thing I ate was cuppasoup, about three hours ago. I eat cuppasoup most days and don't think I usually get this sensation from it.
In my experience, acid reflux can cause similar sensations.
View more: Next
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
Thanks for giving a name to this phenomenon.
It's much worse. In my experience as an academic, most departments simply pre-hedge-drift their press releases. Science journalists don't - and are often not qualified to - read and comment on the actual papers, all they have to work with is the press release.