Being a "Nanny State"

Johnboner

Why we along with the UK top the nanny state index? It obviously does not work so why do we keep getting new laws making our country more and more restricted. I have attached a picture so you can have a look and see that Germany is at the bottom, who would say that Germany is an unsuccessful country of drunks or smokers? Nobody, Germany is one of the biggest economies in the world and people are not oppressed by nonsensical policies. What is your opinion on this? Do you agree with the governments decisions to increase the price of alcohol and cigarettes? To put disgusting pictures on the cigarette packets? I personally want to live in a society where we are allowed to make our own choices and there is no government interference with our daily lives. I very rarely drink and I am not a smoker.

Peregrinus

Who compiled this, and what exactly is being measured?

fritzelly

http://nannystateindex.org/

See where they are coming from

jamesbere

I can't see how this makes us a nanny state, just looks like a list of the most expensive country countries to me.

fritzelly

jamesbere wrote: »

I can't see how this makes us a nanny state, just looks like a list of the most expensive country countries to me.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/nanny-state

Seems pretty clear to me

hatrickpatrick

Decades of far right social conservatism stemming from our nation's past as a virtual theocracy. Unfortunately it will take a few more generations for that to be fully expunged.

jamesbere

fritzelly wrote: »

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/nanny-state

Seems pretty clear to me

Well it doesn't apply to me so, I don't drink or smoke and eat what I want.

Peregrinus

Well, in fairness to jamesbere, he has a point. A signficant component of the index does come from comparing tax rates between different countries, and the Scandinavian countries tend to be towards the top of the index in part because they have high tax rates on alcohol, etc. But that's not necessarily just a manifestation of their attitude to alcohol, etc; they tend to have high tax rates on everything, because they are high-tax, high-spending countries that provide a high level of government services and have to finance them somehow. You may like that or you may dislike it, but it's not telling you anything meaningful about their attitude to drinking and smoking. And it's generally true that, while taxes on alcohol and tobacco do impose on drinkers and smokers, that's not necessarily because the state is being a "nanny state"; the state may just like the revenue, and may find that taxing grog and ciggies is a cheap and effective way of getting it.

Ireland comes high up on the list because of our scores on tobacco and alcohol. (We are lower down when it comes to e-cigarettes and food.) But, apart of course from tax, our scores on tobacco are high because we have fairly wide smoking bans in a variety of public places. But that's not an example of a nanny state protecting smokers from themselves; rather it's the state preventing smokers from imposing on the rest of us.

Peregrinus

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Decades of far right social conservatism stemming from our nation's past as a virtual theocracy. Unfortunately it will take a few more generations for that to be fully expunged.

It hardly has to do with theocracy, given that we are up there with the UK and the not very theocratic Scandinavia. More to the point, to the extent that we are theocracy, we're a Catholic theocracy, and Catholicism has never been especially puritanical about smoking, drinking or the pleasures of the table. The usual anti-Catholic criticism is, if anything, that Catholicism is too indulgent on such matters.

jamesbere

Peregrinus wrote: »

Well, in fairness to jamesbere, he has a point. A signficant component of the index does come from comparing tax rates between different countries, and the Scandinavian countries tend to be towards the top of the index in part because they have high tax rates on alcohol, etc. But that's not necessarily just a manifestation of their attitude to alcohol, etc; they tend to have high tax rates on everything, because they are high-tax, high-spending countries that provide a high level of government services and have to finance them somehow. You may like that or you may dislike it, but it's not telling you anything meaningful about their attitude to drinking and smoking. And it's generally true that, while taxes on alcohol and tobacco do impose on drinkers and smokers, that's not necessarily because the state is being a "nanny state"; the state may just like the revenue, and may find that taxing grog and ciggies is a cheap and effective way of getting it.

Ireland comes high up on the list because of our scores on tobacco and alcohol. (We are lower down when it comes to e-cigarettes and food.) But, apart of course from tax, our scores on tobacco are high because we have fairly wide smoking bans in a variety of public places. But that's not an example of a nanny state protecting smokers from themselves; rather it's the state preventing smokers from imposing on the rest of us.

yeah what I said :pac:

Avatar MIA

Johnboner wrote: »

Why we along with the UK top the nanny state index? It obviously does not work so why do we keep getting new laws making our country more and more restricted. I have attached a picture so you can have a look and see that Germany is at the bottom, who would say that Germany is an unsuccessful country of drunks or smokers? Nobody, Germany is one of the biggest economies in the world and people are not oppressed by nonsensical policies. What is your opinion on this? Do you agree with the governments decisions to increase the price of alcohol and cigarettes? To put disgusting pictures on the cigarette packets? I personally want to live in a society where we are allowed to make our own choices and there is no government interference with our daily lives. I very rarely drink and I am not a smoker.

OP,

Shur, aren't you banging on about how great the UK is, we're right up there with them. Are you doing a college project on Ireland, what's with the fixation?

Grayson

This is what they have on the website.

The Nanny State Index consists of three main categories: alcohol, nicotine and diet. Each of the three categories is weighted equally at 33.3 per cent. Nicotine is subdivided into tobacco and e-cigarettes, each with an equal weighting within that category, meaning that they both have a weighting of 16.66 per cent overall.

Each category has a number of different criteria. Points are scored for each criteria and are then weighted and combined to reach the final score. The Nanny State Index is concerned with policies that have an adverse impact on consumers. Policies are given different weights to reflect the extent to which consumers are negatively affected, from relatively minor inconveniences to heavy taxes or outright prohibition.

Paternalistic policies typically reduce the individual’s quality of life in one or more of the following ways:

– raising prices prices (through taxation or retail monopolies)
– stigmatising consumers
– restricting choice
– inconveniencing consumers
– limiting information (with advertising bans)
– reducing product quality

Now this is where it gets interesting. At the bottom of the page it says that it's created by The Institute of Economic Affairs

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_of_Economic_Affairs#Funding

The IEA does not formally disclose their sources of funding but has been criticised by health charities and The Guardian for receiving funds from major tobacco companies whilst campaigning on tobacco related issues.[17] British American Tobacco confirmed it had donated £40,000 to the institute in 2013,[18] £20,000 in 2012 and £10,000 in 2011 and Philip Morris International and Japan Tobacco International also confirmed they had provided financial support to the IEA.[19] In 2002 a leaked letter revealed that prominent IEA member Roger Scruton had authored an IEA pamphlet attacking the World Health Organisation's campaign on tobacco whilst consulting for Japan Tobacco International in a personal capacity.[20][21] In response the IEA said it would introduce an author declaration policy.[21] The IEA also states on its website it "accepts no tied funding".[8]

So it's a "Thinktank" that lobbies on behalf of tobacco firms.

Johnboner

Grayson wrote: »

This is what they have on the website.




Now this is where it gets interesting. At the bottom of the page it says that it's created by The Institute of Economic Affairs

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_of_Economic_Affairs#Funding


So it's a "Thinktank" that lobbies on behalf of tobacco firms.

The information is accurate and it is factual. Google search if you don't believe me.

Johnboner

Avatar MIA wrote: »

OP,

Shur, aren't you banging on about how great the UK is, we're right up there with them. Are you doing a college project on Ireland, what's with the fixation?

Every country has similarities in some things.

Grayson

Johnboner wrote: »

The information is accurate and it is factual. Google search if you don't believe me.

You think I haven't googled? I certainly researched it more than you.

It's a right wing think tank that takes it's money from tobacco firms. Bet you didn't the website was funded by tobacco companies. Did you take a look at the index? We score low on tobacco because we don't allow vending machines in public places and we don't allow advertising.

The site is a load of bull. I guarantee that you'll see that site used by right wing papers to talk about the "nanny state", especially over the next few months as plain packaging is introduced here and in the UK.

It's got nothing to do with our freedom, it's about the ability of tobacco to advertise and sell their products to kids.

Johnboner

Grayson wrote: »

You think I haven't googled? I certainly researched it more than you.

It's a right wing think tank that takes it's money from tobacco firms. Bet you didn't the website was funded by tobacco companies. Did you take a look at the index? We score low on tobacco because we don't allow vending machines in public places and we don't allow advertising.

The site is a load of bull. I guarantee that you'll see that site used by right wing papers to talk about the "nanny state", especially over the next few months as plain packaging is introduced here and in the UK.

It's got nothing to do with our freedom, it's about the ability of tobacco to advertise and sell their products to kids.

Do you even know what nanny state means? ''It's not a nanny state!'' proceeds to name nanny state policies, ok I will change it for you, let's just say restrictive policies better? So yeah you didn't Google more than me and you are just doing this to disagree. I am done with you. Ireland is a nanny state it's a fact. Germany is not and it's a fact go to Ireland and to Germany then compare the policies related to cigarettes and alcohol. Like I don't understand what are you saying? Literally the definition of a nanny state is restrictions on alcohol and tobacco. You just give your opinion that ''it's for kids'' that's your opinion.

osarusan

Johnboner wrote: »

Ireland is a nanny state it's a fact. Germany is not and it's a fact

FACT is the cornerstone of any debate.

Trent Houseboat

What units are being measured here Social Justice Kilojoules? PC Gone Madicules per metre squared?

Johnboner

Trent Houseboat wrote: »

What units are being measured here Social Justice Kilojoules? PC Gone Madicules per metre squared?

Lol, to put it simply it's basically cigarette restriction eg. taxes, packaging etc. same story with the alcohol. Let's just say how easy it is to buy alcohol and cigarettes to make it simple. There are obviously many more factors but that's the idea.

kunst nugget

Johnboner wrote: »

Lol, to put it simply it's basically cigarette restriction eg. taxes, packaging etc. same story with the alcohol. Let's just say how easy it is to buy alcohol and cigarettes to make it simple. There are obviously many more factors but that's the idea.

What would you favour as an approach to the sale of tobacco products? As an ex-smoker, I'd have no problem with the approach the government are taking in terms of taxation and the restrictions placed on the sale of cigarettes. The minimum pricing of alcohol I'm not really in favour of and some of the other policies being discussed in relation to the sale of alcohol at the moment do seem ridiculous.

osarusan

Only vapers have so far escaped the fire of the paternalists

A farcical line about Ireland from the report.

KingBrian2

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Decades of far right social conservatism stemming from our nation's past as a virtual theocracy. Unfortunately it will take a few more generations for that to be fully expunged.

Like to point out hatrickpatrick of you have a problem with theocracy here in Ireland with Catholics than you won't like Orthodox Christians nor Muslims either.

Johnboner

kunst nugget wrote: »

What would you favour as an approach to the sale of tobacco products? As an ex-smoker, I'd have no problem with the approach the government are taking in terms of taxation and the restrictions placed on the sale of cigarettes. The minimum pricing of alcohol I'm not really in favour of and some of the other policies being discussed in relation to the sale of alcohol at the moment do seem ridiculous.

One word for you
Germany

Grayson

osarusan wrote: »

FACT is the cornerstone of any debate.

Thanks to a childhood watching VHS I see that word in capitals and think Federation Against Copyright Theft.

Johnboner wrote: »

Do you even know what nanny state means? ''It's not a nanny state!'' proceeds to name nanny state policies, ok I will change it for you, let's just say restrictive policies better? So yeah you didn't Google more than me and you are just doing this to disagree. I am done with you. Ireland is a nanny state it's a fact. Germany is not and it's a fact go to Ireland and to Germany then compare the policies related to cigarettes and alcohol. Like I don't understand what are you saying? Literally the definition of a nanny state is restrictions on alcohol and tobacco. You just give your opinion that ''it's for kids'' that's your opinion.

We have age restrictions on cigarettes. So to stop kids buying them, vending machines can only be in pubs/hotels and you can't advertise them.

We are so oppressed. It's like living in North Korea.

I'm currently a smoker. You know how I get cigarettes/tobacco? I buy them. I walk into a shop and hand over my money. The effort of finding a shop that sells them is a lot though. There's only about 20 points of sale in the village I live in. Only 3 of them are 24 hour. If only there was a vending machine closer to me. They could stick it outside the school I live next to.