Be Careful What You Ask For!

[prjkt]

I could probably make a few guesses if I knew which state or city

[dalesys]

That really pinpoints your location. You're on dry land, most likely.

Naval chauvinist!

[fireheart]

I regularly see people at my local supermarket trying to articulate what the want without ever saying a brand name or strength. But then, my area isn't known for it's intelligence.

Lemme guess....Northern Territory? *ducks*

I'm sorry, but these laws are just crazy. What are they trying to accomplish? If they're trying to reduce smoking by making the cashier go crazy and gun down the cigarette customers, I suppose they're working, otherwise what good is obscuring the packaging and names and all that?!

I believe the goal with the packaging is to discourage new smokers from taking up the habit. There are VERY VERY prominent quitline messages on each of the packets. (Quitline is the government's stop smoking hotline. You can call them for support) From there, the rest is towards funding things like Quitline and where possible, reducing the cost of stop smoking aids.

[Canadian In Maine]

A "regular" coffee is cream and two sugars in the Northeast states, iirc. 'course, it tells you nothing about size. Double suck if you are not, in fact, IN an area where this is common nomenclature.

A 'regular' coffee here is one cream and one sugar so when a customer asks for a small regular I know what to do.

It's the ones who ask for a medium regular with 2 sugars that confuses me. I had a guy ask for one of those the other day. Partway through explaining coffee parlance to this guy his wife approached and chided him for confusing me saying, "I told you, a regular is one cream and one sugar!"

[dawnfire]

They are not allowed to, listing prices is classed as advertising. They make you ask for something specific due to the law.

that's strange my local IGA supermarket has a screen above the cigarette cupboard with all the prices

[TopEndDave]

Lemme guess....Northern Territory? *ducks*

Hey, don't pick on my idiots. Some smokers reported that the cigarettes didn't taste as good when the plain packaging came in.

[Sapphire Silk]

That's right, every single pack of cigarettes is now an ugly olive green, with a health warning in large type at the top, followed by a disgusting picture related to warning, and the brand and variety at the bottom in small type.

SC: I'll have two packs of googly eye, and the wife will have a pack of rotten teeth, make it snappy!

[wolfie]

That's right, every single pack of cigarettes is now an ugly olive green, with a health warning in large type at the top, followed by a disgusting picture related to warning, and the brand and variety at the bottom in small type.

Do the tobacco companies try to minimize the impact of the health warnings through targeted marketing? For example, a retail outlet with mainly male customers (e.g. a "roach coach" that goes around to construction sites and machine shops) gets packages with "smoking during pregnancy will harm your baby", while one with mainly female customers gets "smoking causes impotence".

[SongsOfDragons]

I don't think they get an option; the warnings and pictures are all different. Maybe they get stuck on later. IIRC we have the warnings in the UK; the rest of the packet is still brand-coloured. The big supermarkets all have to hide them in cupboards, so I haven't seen them for ages ^^;;

[purple]

that's strange my local IGA supermarket has a screen above the cigarette cupboard with all the prices

I am referring to NZ law there.

Wolfie; I don't think they get a choice I what warnings they have but I do know that over here people attempted to collect the whole set of warnings.

[sms001]

... over here people attempted to collect the whole set of warnings.

I love human beings sometimes.

[Gilhelmi]

I am glad America does not have any of those stupid "reduce smoking" laws. I honestly believe that the only thing they should do is a simple (but prominent) black-box warning, and anti-smoking education (paid for by taxing tobacco). Which we already do.

The plain packaging just annoys workers and the obscene packaging is just tossed for a 'hard case'.

[ADeMartino]

I am glad America does not have any of those stupid "reduce smoking" laws.

It's coming, trust me. The anti-smoking push is still ramping up even as we speak.

[Gilhelmi]

It's coming, trust me. The anti-smoking push is still ramping up even as we speak.

It would be a First Amendment Violation (I think there was a case ruling on it, or I am mixing it up with something else). They might be able to pass the 'no-open advertising' part. As there are already restrictions in place for tobacco ads. But that may be a bit of a stretch of the law.

The US government will never be able to force the 'plain' repackaging or the obscene pictures on packaging, though. Even the anti-smoking people would be outraged by some of that imagery. I know some anti-smoking ads had to be pulled in the US because people complained about the obscene nature of them (I think it was depicting some type of medical/surgical procedure of the face or lungs).

[ADeMartino]

They might not be able to make it 'law', per se. But most of this push comes from insurance companies, who want desperately to reduce their liability. What they CAN do is drive up the taxes on tobacco, making it prohibitively expensive to smoke, and the insurance companies will push up their premiums for smokers. The govt will enjoy even more tax dollars, the insurance companies will get richer, and the Constitution gets neatly sidestepped. Most rational people will dump the cigs, and the hardcore smokers will continue to pay the exorbitant prices.

And lest we forget, they have already made considerable inroads against smoking.

I can see $20+ for a pack for cigarettes in the not-so-distant future.