Last time I went to Milan, I remember that when I was in an empty alley with my wife I noticed something and my wife did as well, it was the only moment in the city we weren't smelling cigarette smoke. The city is beautiful and alive, but the pervasive smoking everywhere diminished my interest in ever going back.
Vampiero 16 days ago [-]
Milan is the industrial heart of the country. If you didn't want to smell smoke (implying that exhaust smoke doesn't outweigh cigarette smoke by several orders of magnitude) you should've gone to a place near the sea or the mountains instead of going to one of the only landlocked regions that is known especially for its still air and constant fog (because it's a huge plain), on top of being one of the most densely inhabited areas.
Seriously, take a plane from anywhere to Milan and you'll know you've entered Lombardia when you can't see shit anymore. One moment you see circular rainbows and hills and mountaintops and rivers, and the next moment everything fades to white.
Also that city is not beautiful. It's like one of the ugliest places in Italy. It's so sad. There's this lone building all covered in trees [1] that taunts you by showing you how much prettier the city would be if it wasn't a soulless slab of concrete and advertisements where people with rich parents go and waste their fortunes on worthless startups.
Impressive, if just to reduce pollution from cigarette butts.
And even more impressive if it is executed:
> In November, a proposal in Britain to phase out smoking by young people passed its first parliamentary hurdle […]
> The bill would prevent anyone born after 1 January 2009 from legally smoking by gradually raising the age at which tobacco can be bought.
jerlam 16 days ago [-]
New Zealand was the first country to enact that type of absolute-date smoking ban a few years ago, but was recently repealed.
Why? The idea is to ban smoking for people who never smoke while still allow already addicted people to smoke. So no prohibition (because there is still a legal market anyway), nobody have to change any habits.
And I’d add that contrary to a lot of other drugs (including alcohol), cigarette is too old school and not cool enough anymore for youngsters to brave the law.
It’s pretty clever, no ?
diggan 16 days ago [-]
> The idea is to ban smoking for people who never smoke while still allow already addicted people to smoke
The idea seems to be about banning smoking based on age, not if they ever tried to smoke or not, which may seem like a minor distinction, but it's a vital one. I bet you most of the people who are addicted to smoking started smoking before the age limit (if there was one), not afterwards.
It seems to me like smoking was decreasing by itself already (probably because of vaping if anything), and making it more illegal could counter that decrease.
berdario 17 days ago [-]
Seems neat indeed... But
> nobody have to change any habits.
That could still be confusing though for tourists which are used to smoke at home
OTOH laws regarding which substances are ok to consume/purchase differ by country anyhow. I mean, tourists used to purchasing weed or alcohol already have to be mindful that it is not necessarily legal to purchase in countries in which they might travel to.
colejohnson66 16 days ago [-]
> That could still be confusing though for tourists which are used to smoke at home
Tourists are required to follow the laws of a country the visit. Visiting without researching the laws is your own fault.
jwagenet 13 days ago [-]
To the contrary of you last statement, my understanding is that alcohol and drug use is down and cigarettes are up among young people.
aaron695 17 days ago [-]
[dead]
instagib 17 days ago [-]
Just for cigarettes as e-cigarettes get a pass and if you can find a place that is 10m away from people. Smokers will find a way.
“The ban - which comes ahead of the Milan-Cortina 2026 Winter Olympics - does not apply to e-cigarettes.
Situated in the middle of the industrial Po Valley and filled with road traffic, Milan is one of Europe's most polluted cities in terms of air.”
dzhiurgis 17 days ago [-]
As they should - smoke lingers order magnitudes further than actual nicotine
potato3732842 16 days ago [-]
So how's this work for people who live in non-smoking apartments? Or is that not a thing in Milan?
synecdoche 16 days ago [-]
Cigarette smoke is one of the most disgusting and at the same time lasting odours. I think smokers are not aware of this. I can smell a smoker at 50 meters distance on the street.
bdangubic 16 days ago [-]
one person’s odour is another person’s aroma :) /s
hulitu 15 days ago [-]
> Cigarette smoke is one of the most disgusting
I bet you have never been near McDonalds. /s
Glawen 17 days ago [-]
[flagged]
noitpmeder 17 days ago [-]
What? How are they getting screwed
Glawen 16 days ago [-]
Where are they now allowed to smoke ? Outdoor was the last safe space as indoor is banned since a long time.
They must quit smoking from today then?
I just don't get how on one hand you can pass such brutal laws affecting so much people, and at the same time you are pampering kids with their "trauma" from COVID and giving them a pass.
My guess is that smokers are dumb and ugly, that's why it's ok to throw them under the bus.
ath3nd 17 days ago [-]
Smokers are a massive burden on the healthcare system, smokers also cause pollution of the air (and ground, due to cigarette butts) in public spaces.
It's not one's innate right to pollute our shared air in a public space with a cancerogenic substance, nor is their right to dispose of their trash on the ground.
> No need to back it up with numbers, of course.
People who smoke are 25-30 times more likely to get lung cancer. The numbers are better for passive smokers, but not by much! If a smoker is smoking around me, I am inhaling their dirty air, which I don't want to. They can go slowly kill and poison themselves in the comfort of their own house, but I don't want to take part in that.
Also, even one look at the streets of Milan shows that it's a definite pollution problem: there are cig butts everywhere. If smokers can't manage to responsibly dispose of their own trash, maybe they do deserve a ban and fines.
> It is no surprise that Trump alike are winning elections around the globe.
It's fine, populists and dictators never stay long enough in the long run. If the populace wants to vote for the likes of Trump for him defending their "right" to pollute the air for others and die young from self-inflicted poisons, then the populace deserves someone like Trump. Milan's local government, however, seems to go in the other direction. Also, Belgium just banned vapes, so there is maybe hope in this world.
AngryData 16 days ago [-]
Smokers are actually the least costly in healthcare costs because they die of heart attack and stroke at such a high rate, most often right around retirement age, they die before the most costly age related problems come up, and smoking in itself disqualifies people from many common procedures and surgery.
You could claim their earlier death causes social and cultural deficits, but from a pure financial point smokers are a boon. Especially once you factor in the income from sin taxes that usually far exceed a person's lifetime medical costs.
Glawen 16 days ago [-]
They are not really treating smokers heavily now, and they have a lower life expectancy.
In the grand scheme of things, i bet smokers are net contributors to society as:
They pay tobacco taxes their whole life and They die younger, so less retirement money to shell out.
And please, check out where Milan is on a map.
You basically always drive through Milan to get anywhere in Italy, it's a giant motorway crossing. It's really surreal to blame smokers for pollution.
ath3nd 16 days ago [-]
> In the grand scheme of things, i bet smokers are net contributors to society as.
I do believe you are entitled to your opinion, but it's a measured fact that smokers are of a tremendous detriment to health care, finance, and productivity. It's a general consensus that smokers are net negative to society.
It's fine to be pushing edgy thoughts, but there are numerous studies about the impact of smokers to society and healthcare, if anyone bothers to look.
Cigarette butt pollution is real, and in Milan it's reached insane proportions. It makes total sense to both blame smokers for failing to clean their trash, and regulating them out of the public spaces.
Additionally, smokers were responsible for a disproportionate amount of indoor pollution when smoking was allowed indoors in public spaces, but thankfully we regulated that. Now it's time to regulate the outdoor smoking and ban smokers to the confines of their own homes.
hulitu 15 days ago [-]
> It's not one's innate right to pollute our shared air in a public space with a cancerogenic substance, nor is their right to dispose of their trash on the ground.
Seriously, take a plane from anywhere to Milan and you'll know you've entered Lombardia when you can't see shit anymore. One moment you see circular rainbows and hills and mountaintops and rivers, and the next moment everything fades to white.
Also that city is not beautiful. It's like one of the ugliest places in Italy. It's so sad. There's this lone building all covered in trees [1] that taunts you by showing you how much prettier the city would be if it wasn't a soulless slab of concrete and advertisements where people with rich parents go and waste their fortunes on worthless startups.
[1]: https://www.stefanoboeriarchitetti.net/project/bosco-vertica...
And even more impressive if it is executed: > In November, a proposal in Britain to phase out smoking by young people passed its first parliamentary hurdle […]
> The bill would prevent anyone born after 1 January 2009 from legally smoking by gradually raising the age at which tobacco can be bought.
Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38443957
And I’d add that contrary to a lot of other drugs (including alcohol), cigarette is too old school and not cool enough anymore for youngsters to brave the law.
It’s pretty clever, no ?
The idea seems to be about banning smoking based on age, not if they ever tried to smoke or not, which may seem like a minor distinction, but it's a vital one. I bet you most of the people who are addicted to smoking started smoking before the age limit (if there was one), not afterwards.
It seems to me like smoking was decreasing by itself already (probably because of vaping if anything), and making it more illegal could counter that decrease.
> nobody have to change any habits.
That could still be confusing though for tourists which are used to smoke at home
OTOH laws regarding which substances are ok to consume/purchase differ by country anyhow. I mean, tourists used to purchasing weed or alcohol already have to be mindful that it is not necessarily legal to purchase in countries in which they might travel to.
Tourists are required to follow the laws of a country the visit. Visiting without researching the laws is your own fault.
“The ban - which comes ahead of the Milan-Cortina 2026 Winter Olympics - does not apply to e-cigarettes.
Situated in the middle of the industrial Po Valley and filled with road traffic, Milan is one of Europe's most polluted cities in terms of air.”
I bet you have never been near McDonalds. /s
It's not one's innate right to pollute our shared air in a public space with a cancerogenic substance, nor is their right to dispose of their trash on the ground.
> No need to back it up with numbers, of course.
People who smoke are 25-30 times more likely to get lung cancer. The numbers are better for passive smokers, but not by much! If a smoker is smoking around me, I am inhaling their dirty air, which I don't want to. They can go slowly kill and poison themselves in the comfort of their own house, but I don't want to take part in that.
Also, even one look at the streets of Milan shows that it's a definite pollution problem: there are cig butts everywhere. If smokers can't manage to responsibly dispose of their own trash, maybe they do deserve a ban and fines.
> It is no surprise that Trump alike are winning elections around the globe.
It's fine, populists and dictators never stay long enough in the long run. If the populace wants to vote for the likes of Trump for him defending their "right" to pollute the air for others and die young from self-inflicted poisons, then the populace deserves someone like Trump. Milan's local government, however, seems to go in the other direction. Also, Belgium just banned vapes, so there is maybe hope in this world.
You could claim their earlier death causes social and cultural deficits, but from a pure financial point smokers are a boon. Especially once you factor in the income from sin taxes that usually far exceed a person's lifetime medical costs.
In the grand scheme of things, i bet smokers are net contributors to society as: They pay tobacco taxes their whole life and They die younger, so less retirement money to shell out.
And please, check out where Milan is on a map. You basically always drive through Milan to get anywhere in Italy, it's a giant motorway crossing. It's really surreal to blame smokers for pollution.
I do believe you are entitled to your opinion, but it's a measured fact that smokers are of a tremendous detriment to health care, finance, and productivity. It's a general consensus that smokers are net negative to society.
It's fine to be pushing edgy thoughts, but there are numerous studies about the impact of smokers to society and healthcare, if anyone bothers to look.
- https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle...
- https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4494734/
- https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00917...
> It's really surreal to blame smokers for pollution.
https://fctc.who.int/news-and-resources/spotlight/environmen...
Cigarette butt pollution is real, and in Milan it's reached insane proportions. It makes total sense to both blame smokers for failing to clean their trash, and regulating them out of the public spaces.
Additionally, smokers were responsible for a disproportionate amount of indoor pollution when smoking was allowed indoors in public spaces, but thankfully we regulated that. Now it's time to regulate the outdoor smoking and ban smokers to the confines of their own homes.
DuPont would like to have a word with you. /s