1y ago

the FDA is considering a ban on menthol cigarette sales

www.verifythis.com /article/news/verify/health-verify/fda-menthol-cigarette-ban-sales-manufacture/536-3806043b-3043-4e35-a249-dbf1ae24b97f

You're viewing part of a thread.

Show Context

158 comments

Incorrect. Prohibition decreases supply. Supply and demand have an inverse relationship. This is economics 101.
There exists no accurate data of consumption during prohibition because it was a black market.
- Supply and demand do not have an inverse relationship. Demand exists, and when supply exceeds demand, prices fall. When supply does not meet demand, prices rise. You understand they are related but forgot the actual curve on the graph. Supply and demand can both be low, for instance, as is the case with mega yachts. Supply and demand have no direct effect on one another, though low supply does tend to encourage firms to increase supply to try to compete and meet the demand.
  Data during prohibition is irrelevant to this specific discussion, because your claim is that demand goes up when goods are prohibited, which is false, as I showed with my link
  I don't believe you have actually taken Econ 101, given the things Ive seen you say here.
  
  When supply does not meet demand, prices rise.
  Thanks for proving my point for me. I appreciate it.
  Your link shows an estimate of alcohol consumption during prohibition based on mortality, but there is. Zero. Accurate. Data. of alcohol consumption during the prohibition.
  
  The important part of that link was not during prohibition, which is irrelevant, because regardless of demand the number of people with access to alcohol was lower, but rather that after prohibition, usage rates did not surpass pre-prohibition levels.
  When supply does not meet demand, prices rise
  This is not an inverse relationship between supply and demand. The supply is not affecting the demand, which is what "inverse relationship" requires.
  
  usage rates did not surpass pre-prohibition levels.
  How many times do I have to tell you that this is impossible to know based off indirect estimates before you get it? Because this is the third time.
  
  Maybe read to the end of that sentence and it will make more sense. I know it was a long sentence, and that's scary, but I believe in you.
  
  Are you okay? You seem to not be able to understand what "no direct data" means.
  
  I don't understand why you refuse to engage in good faith with a person who is just trying to teach you things, but now this conversation is over.
  
  I don't understand why you have a problem grasping basic concepts. 🤷

158 comments