The last point is so underrated, it seems minor but honestly feels life-changing when you actually get that for the first time

You are conflating two different problems here imo - Choosing one but not (mostly equally harmful) another thing to restrict, and government banning something as a way of restricting freedom Regarding first one - I don’t are a problem here, everything else can be addressed after this one, but even if it’s not, it’s still a net positive, I don’t understand your argument here naming this policy bad because it doesn’t do all or nothing Regarding ban as a restriction of freedom - banning something just lies on the far scale of taxing something - i.e. the more you tax something, the less people can afford it (tax is always passed onto consumer), so at some point only rich people can afford to smoke which is even worse than ban imo There’s a benefit in additional money from taxes, sure, but tobacco is already taxed quite a lot so this is nothing revolutionary, and the more taxes on something the less revenue from it at some point (considering that less and less people can afford it) Banning it from the certain age and not for everyone is obviously to not make existing smokers suffer and make younger population healthier Some things just should be banned, like murder for example, when there’s no benefit from that thing to anyone at all You would agree that products with lead or coke in in should stay banned and not be sold, right?

Going 35 vs going 30 on collision increases chances for pedestrians to die by up to two times btw

Yeah such an American take lol

In EU I would be glad that anyone going over speed limit is fined, even 1kmph, these rules are there so drivers don’t kill pedestrians. If someone is afraid to be fined for going 1kmph over limit, just slow down a bit

like who in their right mind would want to actually do either of those things?

Me, for starters, and many other people. Previous poster was just talking about how it’s better to be able to actually walk between towns (even if distances are unrealistic), instead of being forced to fast travel because it’s much more interesting and immersive, not sure how did you miss this point

Problem is “why now”, but also comparison to username field is not really valid - username is actually useful, what’s the point of birth date apart from age verification? You need some kind of username to converse to fellow engineers, birth date is completely unnecessary for that

Not arguing for or against the gulag point but this graph doesn’t prove anything apart from the fact that in 40s-50s there were medical advancements that reduced mortality rate of prisoners (duh) Proof that works here would be number of prisoners in gulag per capita for example (which would paint completely different picture btw)

Not sure why is he lunatic, but he definitely apologised for and acknowledged what he’s done multiple times

Not sure about OP, but I think that yes, end goal should be banning alcohol consumption completely.

I world disagree because vast majority of the posts from different countries are labeled so (e.g. “In Germany, we had so and so”). Posts from US are almost never labeled so, hence the “defaultism”

It’s more nuanced that that - he definitely doesn’t want USSR back in terms of economical or political system as is, but he does want to bring back USSR in the name (to get legacy and accomplishments association) and get the same consolidated power to build the totalitarian oligarchy somewhat similar to USSR, but without some checks and balances that were still present even in USSR

I dunno dude, I find “trying to stay human and fight off actively hostile part inside me that was forced upon me” pretty anti-fascist…