The question is banal and specific. The tobacco lobby has penetrated into all structures of the state and defend their interests there. There is no special control over the composition of tobacco, they put all sorts of rubbish just to be cheaper. Few people know that the cost of a pack of cigarettes is just penny, the rest is cheating on sellers, delivery, VAT: Yes, and how the government will give up cigarette money. Everything is in the black, except for the consumer.
Such huge armies wouldn’t have them put the soldiers in a different direction in the right way so that the world smiles and does not choke on bullets and missiles to shoot at yourself like and destroy what you are standing on, because this is not right ... there is little of them in the world, because from everyone the world will be transformed if you give everyone a chance to fix it and not destroy it ... you can make paradise if there is a designer and we do it, it seems to me people are the other way around to save the planet from death and not to evolution
This is so that no one has reached out to retirement all this is not 120 years of life as before and 60 at most it is now unrealistic to live so much 100 at least and we are people from the word century, live and learn and we work all our life to live with a piece bread and football players but miltons of dodars earn a year ... and we won't earn that much in 20 lives because we need strength to work and then another generation worked in the footsteps of their ancestors they say we have to go, it sounds funny but we could live like that for a long time, it was an ideal world to make everything would come together and everyone would be happy and burn their swords and machine guns, and the missiles simply do not have a supreme ruler over all the officials and the soul has one life, not even who does not represent what this would lead to so many new technologies would open up that a person would not have to work everything would be done by glands and new fuel that would be made from the air and not oil and normal food and not hemodifitsirovannyh components artificially. probably ate the fruit alone and were full and After all, there would be no physical work in 10 years after the appearance of one caretaker for the whole world, and after all, money wouldn’t be needed long ago. Perhaps I’ll smoke a cigar and drink alcohol and look at the world with my own eyes and see that everything is like an illusion beautiful world in search of a better and not in search of death in a million ways .. kill the world and people further .. I don’t understand why only
Smoking does not bring pleasure, like drugs, one thing is smoking weed, another thing is tobacco ... After the ban, everyone will abruptly quit smoking and that's it ... There is no point in selling illegally or clandestinely, it will not be a hot commodity, so as those who quit, there will be no point in returning to Nikatin (it does not poke), it is simply useless publicized. Here the state is already mowing the loot) everything is simple)
I will supplement the answers above. As already mentioned, this is not beneficial to us, and if cigarettes are banned, clandestine sales will begin. It is necessary to allocate money to combat this, can you imagine how much money is needed to maintain a department to combat the sale of nicotine (in addition to other departments to combat drug trafficking). And naturally, a person should have the right to choose. Watch the film "at the height of culture". It shows very clearly why grass is already legalized in many states and countries.
As a fan of conspiracy theories, I would add that cigarettes contain nicotine and a lot of substances that kill a person. That is, cigarettes are even more dangerous than some drugs, such as herbs. So why are they legally manufactured and sold? I have only one answer to this question - it is beneficial to those "above us".
But why? Earning money, controlling the psychological state of smokers, legal extermination of the lower castes of the population, but washes and all this together?
Let me just say that smoking is beneficial and enjoyable. But not smokers.
I'll insert my 5 kopecks. In addition to the absolutely correct reasons indicated above, there is, in my opinion, one more important point. To smoke or not to smoke is a personal right and personal choice of each person. This will be an elementary deprivation of a person's right to choose to do what he wants.
Bhutan is the only country in the world where cigarettes are prohibited.
In other countries, smoking is allowed, to some extent. Smoking is a severe drug addiction, comparable to addiction to heroin or cocaine.
Prisoners are willing to tolerate a smaller ration, but if they are not given cigarettes, they will riot.
In many countries, people are encouraged to quit over the price of cigarettes. When cigarettes cost 15-30 rubles, I smoked 3 packs a week, when they cost 80 rubles, I bought it once a week. Now a pack costs about 100 rubles, and I quit.
The answer is quite simple, if smoking is banned, then the state will stop receiving income from cigarettes, but the number of smokers will not be much less, people will start getting them in an illegal way.
I don't think they care that much about people who smoke. It seems to me that we cannot even imagine how much money goes into the state budget due to the production of cigarettes and alcoholic beverages. Millions of Russians buy cigarettes every day. So do not rub in on what they are worried about people. If we were worried about people, we wouldn’t build such expensive (to put it mildly) dachas and don’t rat money out of our pockets. For them, cigarettes and alcohol are another way to make more money. Well, am I wrong?
There is a great video on this topic from an outstanding blogger. She puts everything on the shelves very competently and with a share of humor, you can watch:
If we take into account the fact that about 60 percent of the population of our country are active smokers. A ban on smoking in the first place will result in the discontent of a huge number of the population, which will lead to negative outbursts among strata of society.
It is also impossible to completely ban tobacco use. Rather, a very small percentage of people will comply with this law.
The tobacco industry is also a major sponsor of this or that country. The more people smoke, the more cigarettes they buy. Consequently, the economic chasm is filled with tobacco sticks.
It cannot be banned, if only because many citizens of this state will be against it. Indeed, there are a lot, all previous rallies will seem childish.
A one-time ban will not give anything, because there are many people who cannot / are not ready / do not want to give up instantly. And there will be other people who can and will want to sell cigarettes to smokers, even if illegally. Rather, there is a long persistent policy on the gradual withdrawal of smoking from the usual way of life (see the US policy in this direction since the 1960s).
For economic reasons, I agree with other answers.
In the era of the demise of the USSR, there was a serious shortage of everything, including cigarettes. Google "cigarette riots", smokers blocked roads. So the ban on tobacco is fraught with a change of government. And the experience of Prohibition in the USA and the USSR says that such bans give rise to crime, violence and instability.
I would like to add that if cigarettes are banned, then other people will be engaged in it illegally. Tobacco is a hot commodity, and the number of smokers will not decrease after the ban.
An example is Prohibition in the United States of the 1920s. After all, then organized crime was born and flourished, the echoes of which are still heard.
I think no one will dare to preserve the health of the nation, while giving rise to gangsters and the mafia.
A smoker is beneficial to the state for everyone. And taxes, and his lack of will, as a citizen, and of course his frail health and problems with it in the future. It is beneficial in that it is unlikely to live up to retirement. It is beneficial in that it will pay its medical bills (free medicine is a myth).
But it will not work to ban. We tried it with vodka, it didn't work. It's the same here. This is drug addicts. If you forbid them, tomorrow they will twist and smoke the leaves in a roll-up.
What is beneficial for the state:
Revenues from excise taxes on tobacco products.
Corruption related to income from lobbying interests of tobacco producers.
There are a number of studies that prove that the smoking population does not switch to "hard" drugs, being content with only smoking. But, by the way, there are studies that prove the opposite.
Tobacco factories are major employers.
Why is it disadvantageous:
Smoking is somehow a blow to the health of the nation and demography. If the state does not fight smoking today, then tomorrow it will build hospitals (in simple terms).
Why it is impossible to ban cigarettes at once:
The reasons are given in the first part of my answer. But besides the fact that employees of enterprises will find themselves out of work, and corrupt officials - without part of the money received, it is important to take into account the peculiarities of the time in which we live. With regard to our country, one can speak not about the tightening of legislation in relation to cigarette manufacturers, but about the reverse processes. Why?
There is a budget deficit in Russia. Expenses exceed income. Therefore, additional measures are introduced to increase the income base: the cadastral value of real estate, the Platon system, and so on. You may have noticed that advertising of alcoholic beverages on TV was banned several years ago. Allowed now. This is done again because of the economic benefits of the state: producers of alcoholic (as well as tobacco) products are large taxpayers, the more they earn, the more they will transfer to the budget in the form of taxes. Therefore, it is simply impossible to imagine a possible ban on the activities of tobacco manufacturers (the largest taxpayers).
It is beneficial because the state has very good money from excise taxes on tobacco and other taxes received from tobacco companies. Then it is always easier to manage a crowd of addicted people, even if it's just a tobacco addiction ...
And it is not profitable than. Everyone is told that tobacco causes a lot of diseases, and it is easier for the state to reduce the number of smokers now than to treat them all later and lose the able-bodied population ... It sounds, of course, beautiful. But it seems to me that in our country they hardly think about what will happen tomorrow))) Most likely this is the influence of the West, where cigarettes have cost 10 euros per pack for a long time, and you can smoke only in designated places.
And why can't they be banned at all, read in the first lines of my post) Well this is the collapse of an entire branch of the economy)