• PonyOfWar@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    144
    ·
    2 months ago

    Smoking. Millions of euros of taxpayer money spent every year on those lung cancer patients which could be well spent elsewhere. It’s also an activity that negatively affects not just the smoker but everyone around them.

      • SanguinePar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Thanks to taxes (81½% of the price is tax on average), smokers are currently making my government a profit, including all the cancer care. Old people need a lot of healthcare, so people dying of cancer saves a lot of healthcare cost in the long term.

        You been hanging out with Sir Humphrey? ;-)

    • Kanzar@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      2 months ago

      The tax on cigarettes is so high, it’s been claimed they pay more into the system than they claim out, as they die too soon. 🫣 (In Australia)

      • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        At least here in Germany this is apparently still not true as smokers in particular add a huge cost to the healthcare system due to the long-term and repeated damage. For example, once they get parts of their feet amputated from clogged arteries, most actually continue to smoke (“Ah well now it’s too late anyways”), and hence will get half a dozen such amputations over time.

        • SupraMario@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Obesity is the issue these days not tobacco. Tobacco use is a fraction of what it once was. Now a huge portion of the EU and USA is obese, which causes way more strain on the healthcare system.

      • Dave.@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Australian here, in Finland. Holy shit it seems everyone smokes like chimneys here.

        Never really thought about how much smoking has declined in Aus over the last 20-40 years, but yeah coming over here has been an eye opener.

        • Kanzar@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          Seems to be a Europe thing, or really a rest of the world thing. It’s very rare to smell cigarettes, particularly after vaping took off.

          • Bye@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 months ago

            In my country there was like 10 wonderful years when almost nobody smoked.

            In the last 5-10 years all that got reversed by vaping, it’s everywhere now. Not as bad as smoking though.

    • Taalnazi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      Nederlands
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yeah, and unlike what people commonly think, it doesn’t just directly affect the user (first hand smoke) and the people around it (second hand smoke), but also the furniture and nature around it (third hand smoke).

      I despise those cigarettes laying around everywhere in nature. You can even smell them on remotes if someone was a hardcore smoker.

      They need help in kicking off from it.

    • umbrella@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      i hate tobacco but prohibition doesnt work.

      we should have learned that lesson with alcohol and weed but it seems we did not.

    • 0stre4m@lemmy.wtf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Outlaw industrial cigarettes with tons of shit in them. Natural tabacco isn’t nearly as addictive.

      Same with everything really. Two generations ago kids were drinking beer at school, but the beer was 1% alcohol.

    • Hawk@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Maybe this is an unpopular opinion, but I have less problems with the “luxury” items, such as cigars.

      They’re usually hand-crafted expensive stuff that’s made to enjoy once and a while, compared to cigarettes which are mass produced with the sole purpose to get you addicted.

      I think the same is true with alcohol. There’s the cheap, mass produced stuff vs the more expensive “hand”-crafted stuff.

      I wish we could just enjoy these things without corporations trying to get us addicted to them at every opportunity, disregarding any of the dangers associated with consuming them.

  • Mothra@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    109
    ·
    2 months ago

    Supermarkets and businesses throwing food away and not allowing people to take it for free. (“If I can’t sell it nobody can have it”).

  • WagnasT@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    92
    ·
    2 months ago

    Requiring the purchase or use of proprietary software or formats to view or submit public records.

  • boatswain@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    80
    ·
    2 months ago

    Making a profit from healthcare and health insurance.

    Or even just make private health insurance illegal.

      • No_Ones_Slick_Like_Gaston@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Not sure Rick when one can insure a hole in one is just a business decision.

        But I get it health housing and catastrophic losses could be better monitored and regulated.

      • Swordgeek@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        I’d qualify that as for-profit mandatory insurance.

        Canpt get a mortgage without home insurance. Canpt drive a vehicle without at least liability. Those rates should be strictly government regulated to be sustainable and non-profit.

        But if you want to insure your collection if priceless Whitworth wrenches, well maybe I care a bit (Just a bit!) less about insurance gouging.

    • Bob@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’d go further and ringfence all the basic needs so that you can’t profit from providing them, just make enough to live off if needs be.

  • bandwidthcrisis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    2 months ago

    Nutrition information based on unrealistic serving sizes.

    I’ve seen an individually wrapped muffin “servings per pack: 2”.

    Then there’s that Tom Scott video on how “zero calory” sweetener can be 4 calories.

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        A throwaway reference to another thread on here …. Someone tried to sue a restaurant when he choked on a bone in his boneless chicken wings. The court ruled he can’t sue because “boneless” is just a style of cooking and doesn’t make any claim about whether that meal has bones. …. That kind of misrepresentation, and dodging responsibility should be illegal. All sorts of scamming the customer should be illegal and isn’t

        If I can go on a bit of a rant, I do believe in the power of the market to shape our lives, our economy, our society. Conservatives got that part right. But a market is only “free” when everyone plays by the same rules and has same facts and knowledge, free choice. A market is only beneficial when it is shaped by regulators to benefit society. A market is only sustainable when it incorporates externalities. If Conservatives are gung ho about free markets, they need to step up and do their part. While there’s a nice theory about the usefulness of Marketting, the primary use is to lie, subvert, fool, distort the market, and THAT should be illegal

  • MerchantsOfMisery@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    2 months ago

    Qualified immunity for police officers. Prosecutors and judges basically get qualified immunity, too-- in that they can be caught engaging in all sorts of inappropriate and illegal activity without facing punishment because like police, it usually doesn’t even get to the extent of being charged.

  • chameleon@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    2 months ago

    Requiring agreement to some unspecified ever-changing terms of service in order to use the product you just bought, especially when use of such products is required in the modern world. Google and Apple in particular are more or less able to trivially deny any non-technical person access to smartphones and many things associated with them like access to mobile banking. Microsoft is heading that way with Windows requiring MS accounts, too, though they’re not completely there yet.

  • eran_morad@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    2 months ago
    • not having the day off to vote
    • FPTP
    • unlimited funding from unrestricted sources in politics
    • impunity for blatantly corrupt unelected political appointees

    Etc.

  • nickiam2@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    2 months ago

    Billionaires. Nobody ever needs that much wealth. Resources better used elsewhere for the public good.