virus: tabacco

KMO (kmo@amazon.com)
Wed, 06 Aug 1997 13:44:33 -0700


Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 23:42:44 +0100
From: Tony Hindle <t.hindle@joney.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: virus: Re: virus-digest V2 #207

In message <33E4C49B.2781@amazon.com>, KMO <kmo@amazon.com> writes
>
>The social buzz a teenager gets the first time she lights up with her
>friends is immediate and powerful. Smoking is not attractive to
>children because they see Joe Camel smoking on a billboard. It is
>attractive to them because it is forbidden.

Then please explain why the tobbaco giants spend so much on
their advertising/sponsorship campagns.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Cigarette companies do want to induce people to smoke, and more
specifically, smoke their brand. You told someone else, "don't give me
the market share argument," but beligerence does nothing to refute the
argument. The drug dealer makes no money from the addict who's hooked
an a competitor's product.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

>> > Killing people would
>> >trivialize any arguments against tabocco use that appealed the inherent
>> >value of human life.
>>
>> Only for simple minded analysts.
>
>
>Are you trying to convince the critical thinkers who are already
>equipped to defend themselves against mal-adaptive mind-viruses, or do
>you want to defend the hoi poloi who would be induced to smoke by
>advertising?

The hoi poloi of course.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Then what milage did you expect to get out of the claim that only
simple-minded analysts would make the association?
---------------------------------------------------------------------

I disagree. There arent all that many people involved in the pro
tobbaco memetic campagn. Certainly far less than there are tobacco
victims. The extra cost would quicken the demise of the tobacco meme
significantly.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
The added cost would be minimal. The people can be replaced quickly.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

>
>>
>> Agian, costs up, less money to be made.
>
>Costs to the drug-lords up, street price of the product up. Addicts
>detered? Not likely.

But you also said above:
> If
>your aim is to increase their operating costs, then taxation or
>industrial sabotage would be a more effective strategy than murder.

You cant have it both ways, I think you are arguing against me
without thinking all this through.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
There's no contradiction. I did not concede that increased operating
costs would bring down the tabacco cartels. I maintain that just the
oposite is the case. If you increase their operating costs, they will
pass that cost along to the addicts who will pay it. What's more,
whatever price increase which accrued as a result of your campaign would
be miniscule compared to the impact taxation has on the cost of the
product to the addict.

YOU seemed to think that increasing operating costs would drive the
cartels out of business, and I argued that ***IF*** increasing operating
costs is your goal ***THEN*** there are more effective means than murder
of achieving that goal.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Who says just a few, if thr virtuous killing virus replicates it
will be a significant number, proportional to the no. of tobbaco
victims.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, there certainly are some successful memetic-complexes that include
the "virtuous killing" meme.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

> and they may kindle your funeral pyre with what remains of the
>bill of rights. Tabacco-lords employ master memetic engineers.

These are the ones that should be first on the hit list.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
To what does the pronoun "these" refer in the above sentence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I gave up smoking so I could spend the money I saved
on better, less adictive, safer drugs.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which are your favorites?
----------------------------------------------------------------------