Many people didn't, which is why so many regulations exist now.
Some time between my childhood and today, society collectively lost its mind and decided that the only acceptable way to manage risk is to relentlessly drive it towards zero through the force of law. We are going to end up with a boring, sterile and ultra-safe world.
It should go without saying that children dying from preventable causes is not a very good thing to have happen.
But beyond child mortality, here's another example that regulation does impact: traffic deaths . Government regulations surrounding car safety, seatbelt use, airbags, etc have had a massive impact. Looking at the data from 1970 (a time when older HNers would say "when I was young") to today, there were 4.74 deaths per 100 million miles traveled, compared to 1.16 today. And even as the US has added 120 million new Americans to the population since then and vehicle miles traveled has basically tripled, not only have we reduced deaths per mile traveled, we've reduced deaths period, without worrying about normalizing the data to population or VMT.
I hear quite a bit "when I was young we didn't have seatbelts or airbags and we rode on the back dashboard and didn't have child seats and we survived just fine" except a lot of people didn't. A lot of people died, and that's why regulations were created and that's why fewer people are dying now.
Somehow I bet he still has armed guards, though.
Do you have a source? I know it sounds intuitively correct, but I remember reading the opposite. Basically it goes like this: end of life/senior care is a very large percentage of medical spending. Unhealthy people don't live as long and die faster once their health deteriorates. So they actually cost less to the healthcare system than healthy people.
But I get your point. I pay a heavy tax on cigs though. I just hope the government puts that into a fund for cigarette relate health care issues instead of financing some wars in the middle east. Ah no, they don’t. They just exploit the addiction.
State level taxes of course depend on the state.
Why should I pay taxes for schools and roads and services I don't use?
A million forces tell you what to do, very very few of them are telling you to do good things.
Just say no?
As I recall, the research found it was highly effective at improving subjects (vs. non-subjects) images of law enforcement, but had no discernable effect on subjects (compared to non-subjects) when looking at drug use, drug abuse, or drug-related crime.
So your answer is having Nanny Government ban it?
Can't worry about free will if you don't have it, I suppose.
Vapes are an easy target right now. Heart disease and auto accidents are some of the greatest threats to the average American, but you'll never hear a politician going after those.
E-cigs are a relatively new vice. Hardly comparable.
In the free market those rules wouldn’t exist and people would be upset about taking their rights away when you regulate them.