UK plans to pass law banning anyone born after 2008 to buy cigarettes

There were two points. The way I replied/quoted things probably confused the situation. Grapeg: > Catalyst2422: > >> The biggest victim from a ban on tobacco is the tobacco corporations and their shareholders > > Good point, why should they be picked on? To which I asked: Catalyst2422: > Why should they be allowed to prey on others? Then the following exchange about healthcare costs: Catalyst2422: > Would you be in favour of smokers relinquishing their rights to state healthcare? People don’t exist in a vacuum. What one person does affects others. Grapeg: > Can you make a case for it? I can’t think of one that isn’t simply prejudiced against smokers. Catalyst2422: > Can you make a case in favour of it? I can’t think of one that isn’t prejudiced against non-smokers in need of health care. We seem to have both done the same thing to each other by just pointing/flipping our argument back. Without actually making a case for our view. So for my point on healthcare: A public healthcare system creates a reciprocal obligation. You pay for others healthcare just as they pay for yours. By knowingly consuming a substance that leads to severe health issues. You are in effect leaching off of others. Yes, there are other things that do the same. But this discussion is about a smoking ban.