I spotted some material at http://www.burningbrain.org/newsletters.htm . In the newsletter an Indian based anti Hemant Goswami is suggesting nationalisation of tobacco industry across the world.

How do we counter such bull shits. Any suggestion.

[B]I am posting the article from the website[/B

Many found it an unusual conclusion (and some apparently radical) when speaking at the “Conference on Strategy Planning on Tobacco Control” I suggested that “Nationalisation of the Tobacco Industry” is a possible solution to tackle the tobacco menace. Many jaws dropped and I could clearly see many mouths wide open on this suggestion; a few also labelled me as “Removed from the reality” and suggested me to become “Practical.”

For me, this “Nationalisation” option was not an out-of-the-blues impromptu bombshell but rather a well thought out and deliberated suggestion. I had carefully pondered over the possible options after considering the actual state of affairs and the condition of governance in India before arriving at the suggested conclusion of taking over of the tobacco industry by the government as one of the most practical ways of containing tobacco. Some may not agree; I am willing to provide all of them reasons on how and why this is one of the best options for India.

It is impossible to restrain the profit minded tobacco companies just by enforcing legislation or other such methods so we have to find more effective and practical ways to stop the five million annual death-toll due to tobacco. The industry is incorrigible and for them profit will always weigh over the human lives. Even with the most benevolent intentions, it is a foolish assumption (I think it is) that the tobacco industry will work for it’s own de-growth. If tomorrow, cocaine and marijuana becomes even partially legal many greedy hounds will happily jump in to sell that too. We have no phase-out plan for tobacco so that’s a good thing for the industry; it sends a clear message that they can continue doing what they are doing and that tobacco will remain in the society for time immemorial.

A phased de-growth can only be worked out by the governments and not the industry. For this it is pertinent that the government takes over the tobacco industry under its complete control by nationalising tobacco and working on a fade-off plan.

This can be done by chalking out a 20 years phase-out plan with a targeted and properly planned 5 to 10 percent de-growth for the tobacco industry every year. After the premeditated period of 20 years the tobacco industry will shrink to the size of less than one sixth of the present size and then it could be extinguished. This kind of planning is also in the interest of the highly exploited tobacco farmers as the earning from tobacco during the intervening period can go to these marginalised farmers and thereby enable a scientifically phased shifting of the tobacco crop with other cash rich crops. Currently all the earning generated by exploiting tobacco farmers and by tobacco sales are siphoned by a handful of rich tobacco manufacturers and individuals but after nationalisation of the industry a part of the tobacco earning could also be used to treat tobacco related ailments and to meet other health care costs.

Who loose if tobacco industry is taken over by the government?

Public; No. All sections of the society stand to gain out of it.
Tobacco users; No; tobacco would be still available as it is on date; there is no proposal to ban it.
Farmers; No; rather they stand to gain by the additional revenue and by better wages if the government takes over the industry.
Government; No; there shall be greater revenue now available besides by phasing out tobacco, the health care cost will also start coming down.
Share holders; No; system to pay them back the share value over a period of time can be worked out and no economic loss would be caused.

So it’s only a win-win situation barring some minor losses to around 10-20 people around the world who illegally siphon most of the tobacco money.

In a civilised society why should any individual be allowed to profit from someone else’s miseries and death? When for a relatively minor violation affecting human health like selling pest infested food articles, etc. one is put behind bars (for years) under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, then how can we turn a nelsons’ eye to a deadly product like tobacco?

The other urgent requirement (For which we are working since the last two years) is that of licensing the tobacco trade. When even benevolent medicines are sold only through licensed chemists then why should a fatal drug delivery product, “Tobacco” be openly sold? Immediate licensing of all tobacco related activities will add billions of rupees to the government kitty and also be highly helpful in regulating most of the tobacco related demand side violations.

It is a historical mistake that tobacco became a legal product but now is the time to rectify the mistake. We have all the facts, rationale and means to correct one of the biggest mistakes of the civilised world. Let’s work for it.


Yours,
Hemant Goswami
Chairperson,
Burning Brain Society

(Download the presentation from http://www.burningbrain.org/pdf/tobaccofuture.pdf)

I suggest this person open their eyes and look around the world - in China - not far away from India - the government does own and control the tobacco industry. China has NOT been on the forefront of tobacco control.

Regardless of any one government's control of the product tpbacco from other nations are still available.

Regardless of controls the product will still be consumed. It is not like tobacco can not be grown by the individual user in their back yard. Tobacco is a weed and will grow about anywhere.

I suggest the author moves to their own island and create their own personal utopia where they and their followers can prosper using their own vices.

Governments, around the world are always looking for increased revenue and may absorb their tobacco industry, but why should they when they derive more income from it now than the industry and do nothing to earn it.

Tobacco is increasingly being utilized by the drug companies to formulate medicine and treatments for a briad range of medical solutions. Most of these solutions are the result of research being done by the tobacco industry. Most tobacco companies have a sub division producing medical compounds from the plant.

It is the this research that is driving the medical drug companies to try to gain control of tobacco. Tobacco does provide benefits to the smoker and the drug companies realise that while the consumer uses over the counter tobacco products their current offerings are not selling up to their potential.

Regardless of who controls production the plant will continue to be grown and harvested forever.

Either I can't read or this is gobbledygook.

"We have no phase-out plan for tobacco so that’s a good thing for the industry...tobacco will remain in the society for time immemorial."

"After the premeditated period of 20 years the tobacco industry will shrink to the size of less than one sixth of the present size and then it could be extinguished."

Time immemorial = 20 years?

"This kind of planning is also in the interest of the highly exploited tobacco farmers as the earning from tobacco during the intervening period can go to these marginalised farmers and thereby enable a scientifically phased shifting of the tobacco crop with other cash rich crops."

Cash rich crops (tobacco) = exploited farmers?

"Currently all the earning generated by exploiting tobacco farmers and by tobacco sales are siphoned by a handful of rich tobacco manufacturers and individuals but after nationalisation of the industry a part of the tobacco earning could also be used to treat tobacco related ailments and to meet other health care costs."

Okay, and after nationalizing the tv and movie industry the earnings generated by exploiting actors can be used to treat couch potatoism.
Same goes for the automobile industry if they have one.

And after nationalizing the Twinkie industry the exploited workers can find new jobs as street beggars.

Bruce, it looks like tobacco control is spreading to China. I heard on the news last week that Beijing wants to ban smoking in all indoor public spaces and on mass transit for the upcoming summer Olympics.

They do but only for the games in an effort to attract the few non-smokers willing to travel.

China is more than their capitol city. They also have high rates of smoking especially among the male population. As more of that population moves in from the coutryside smoking among their female population is rising. For all the money being made by the country, the people are not necessarily enjoying western standards of living. As the cities prosper the countryside remains in the 12th century. More than any other government the Chinese government earns not only taxes off tobacco but also the profits of producing it. The government feels the need for greater funds to build an olympic village and venues. They also have to build the infrastructure for a modern economy while still placcating the peasants in the fields.

So they need to turn the capitol into Disneyland in order to sell tickets to the games.