The year is 1920. Alcohol has just been prohibited in the United States and rum-running is roaring business. Your average Jane and Joe, looking for a cocktail or an after-work whiskey, will find themselves in a speakeasy, funding the underworld and lining the pockets of the likes of Al Capone as they sip their illicit drinks.
Fast-forward almost 100 years. As a non-smoker, I'm a happier person for no-smoking rules in malls and glassed-off areas in restaurants. But I'm also not stupid enough to think that if cigarettes as a whole are banned, that people are just going to quit smoking. They won't. And the market, well, it'll just move underground like it did all those decades ago. Considering there are some countries whose main export is tobacco - just think what it'll do to their economy. And all that sin tax? It certainly won't be going to the state coffers anymore.
So while keeping cigarettes on store shelves and in the pockets of smokers around the world is its business, BAT does have a point when it says that
keeping tobacco legal is a better option than criminalising the industry. What do you think?
Stay warm!
Shan Radcliffe, Group Head - Retail (@Biz_Retail)
PS Don't forget to check out the latest cartoon by
Rico in our new weekly
Cartoons showcase!
Comment online in our ed's column archive. Go mobile with apps and m.bizcommunity.com. Engage with us on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and Google+. Subscribe to YouTube and via RSS. Send all your retail news to retailnews@bizcommunity.com, exclusive opinion pieces to contributors-retail@bizcommunity.com and international news to internationalnews@bizcommunity.com. Read "How to contribute to Biz, from op-ed pieces to news".
