iriyan

The vast majority of homeless in the US historically has been women with children (not and but with) who were not substance abusers. The image of being homeless because of substance abuse was right-wing/neo-liberal propaganda to shift blame to the victims. And just like their spiritual father Goebels said, throw mud and some of it will stick (for generations I might add). The way the image was reinforced was because sub.abusers were more visible, declining shelters when available, or safer out of site places. So people actually saw what they were told. When you see a woman with a cart full of stuff and a kid or two following her on the street you don't identify her as homeless, the sub.abuser laying down in a carton box you do.

https://web.archive.org/web/20220123110138/https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/blogs/business-blog/2014/03/alcohol-advertising-ad-placement-self-regulation

Am I making this up?

What media can safely say 71% of the audience is over 21? A scary movie? Something with explicit sex, what, because that is what teens will run and watch.

Federal and local courts went head to head about alcohol advertising in the 90s and targeting teens (or under aged drinkers 21 in the US since early 1980s). Remember Coors nearly going bankrupt, or Camel being attacked because of their camel cartoon character ads? Superficial hypocritical measures that only lawyers and insurance companies can appreciate.

The division between beer and malt-liquor/liquor in the US is very specific to US regulation that separates beer from liquor. From state to state to sell liquor beer and wine may be separate licenses.

Did any of this have an impact in reducing under 21 addiction, mortality, DUI rates? NO!!

Those who live in a historical vacuum and think the world is summerized in a still picture ... For decades there were no tv ads in America's public tv ... are we living in parallel universe ... The first hit I get on search engines is NBC admitting to voluntarily end a 50y long policy of not airing liquor ads.

I see big tobacco just fine, and consumers didn’t hit big tobacco, the US government did by stepping on falsified findings of the ills of 2nd hand smoke.

What do you mean “falsified findings?”

There is no evidence today of the ills of 2nd hand smoke, so how did this support back then came about the 2nd hand smoke is just as dangerous?

There is so much false rhetoric and propaganda in addictive substances it is pathetic. Just search around on medical centers treating addictions, look for nicotine, being accused for cancer, heart disease ... there has never been any evidence that other than a psychological addiction that nicotine alone causes any harm. If you suffer from hypertension and have weak vessels, yes you can die from it, but you can die from coffee or just getting scared.

Ok, peace, tell us more about Hitchens :)

I think it is stagnating. people having more access to technology based gadgets but the only thing that changed is earth abuse to support production of gadgets. So not only is it not saving us, it is literally killing us.

That is what I "always" thought, motorcycling will get me and I wouldn't want to live without being able to ride ... but then it happens, you don't and you get to live with what you never though you would be. ...

Some friend came along today and had Frank Sinatra "my way" playing for a ring, immediately I searched the tube and found Sid Vicious' "my way" and played it back ... he never got old. I guess they can take our lives away but we get to keep the mind young if we want... and look back to see if we are happy with choices, even the worst mistakes.

The weirdest feeling is that the older you get the more you feel time is accelerating ... you get older faster and faster after a certain age.

The realization that I may never live to see capitalism collapse

Anthopology has provided clear evidence, in all times, in all tribes and continents, the percentage of people that will abuse substances that affect the mind has been steady, and there is nothing anyone can do about it, they will find the substance in the wilderness if it is not in the market.

Alternatively both politically and economically certain entities will use this weakness to control and manipulate people, either by promoting one, or by criminalizing another. Miami became big and important during prohibition because politicians would travel down there to drink and ... whatever else they needed. Bootlegging lasted twice or more after prohibition was reverted, mostly because industrial production wasn't there to cover the need/market.

Opium smoking was common in Europe among the elites all the way to early 20th century. The poor just smoked cheaper stuff.

The WHO are hypocrites than need to hang high and dry

If you don't understand something in specific ask me to explain it. Summary: The WHO are a bunch of hypocrites serving big-pharma interests and feeding propaganda We have more important things to discuss than what WHO does or doesn't when we will never be asked by WHO on our opinion or whether we choose to support those nobodies. For decades US-TV wasn't showing alcohol ads, no effect. Since I watch no tv or US sports, I wouldn't know they begun showing them again. During the decades I watched tv (star-trek NG, taxi, cheers, mork&mindy,SNL) there were never alcohol commercials.
Cigarette labeled packs with horror pics and messages in EU had no effect, but socially pressuring people to quit smoking had a dramatic increase in anti-depressant medication. CIgarettes in the EU all look alike now, less than 10% of the box is left for brand/color/label etc. Nobody pays attention to what the box says.
Italian hospitals first, then French, came out saying they had deaths with symptoms and went back to stored blood samples and were positive for SARS-cov2 ... 2months before the first case in China. The Who was still saying that the evidence on where in China the virus originated were inconclusive. They are still publishing reports on covid based on data that only a handful of countries are still providing. They are the joke of the health sector. Big-Pharma must have cut their bribes down and they are seeking bribes from Alcohol companies.

What is the legal drinking age in Aus? When the Kuwait war started there were kids sent to fight in an unheard land before, and they did and some came back and still couldn't drink legally in the US. You can drive at 16, on a mandatory draft you could be drafted as young as 16, but you have to be 21 to drink and 18 to buy cigarettes. You can sell crack and crystal-meth on the streets, illegal weapons, flesh, easy when you are 15, but you have to pay a homeless drunk to buy you wine or a pack of Camels.

That is your free market hypocrisy at work.

How else can I explain it, there are millions of children dying because of food and water shortages, but WHO thinks alcohol labels will benefit peoples' health ...
Somebody get us some rope ...