The Evils of Forced Protection

I couldn't help but smirk arrogantly the other day at something I heard. Amazingly, I've completely forgotten where it was I heard it as my mind is like a sieve at times.

The discussion revolved around the issue of tobacco advertising. As we all know, laws are in place in many countries essentially banning tobacco advertising in the interests of the public good (more on that later), and have been for many years now. The following consideration was presented;

Let's say you have two tobacco suppliers (a duopoly if you will) and they must compete with each other for the available market. In order to compete, both must invest heavily in advertising and promotion to win their share of the market, the result being that they both spend roughly the same amount of money, and win roughly a 50% share each of the market. Now, the governments of the world in an effort to save people from themselves place a ban on tobacco advertising and hence the two tobacco suppliers must comply. The result of this is that because neither can advertise or promote their products, their market share is not going to be effected, it will still remain roughly 50% each. However, they now do not have the expense of advertising and promotion eating into their profits. Is it possible that their industry is now more lucrative?

I always get a kick out of seeing do-gooder policy being torn to shreds. And there's nothing that's more vile in the category of do-gooding than that of saving people from themselves. It shits me off when so called experts and politicians think they can tell people how they should live their lives, and force people to conform using policy and financial penalty. Here's a few arguments they put forward, followed by my rebuttles:

Argument - Smokers place an unnecesary burden on the health system.
Rebuttle - So do joggers who need knee surgery, people who contract injuries on the sports field, motorists who are involved in accidents, and stroke victims who didn't stick to a low fat diet every day. In fact, smokers have paid for their treatment through all the tax they paid on their cigarette purchases. Can the same be said for joggers and sports people?

Argument - It sets a bad example for the children.
Rebuttle - It's the least worrying of the bad examples the little urchins are going to experience. The world is a wicked place at times, the sooner they realise it and come to terms with it the better they will be.

Argument - People are stupid, they need to be protected from themselves.
Rebuttle - Yes they can be and frequently are, but no they do not need protection from themselves. Like any other gift, a life belongs to the recipient to do with what they will.

Think about the foods you enjoy eating, the drinks you like drinking, the literature you like reading, the activities you like participating in. Consider the possibility that your government or some expert decides to place some restriction on these because they decided it was not good for you.

Enough of this bullshit, leave us alone.