Norway to Follow Swedish Model on Prostitution
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 2:28 PM

In Sweden, since 1999 it has not been illegal to sell sexual services, but it has been illegal to purchase them. This Swedish version of one-sided prostitution enforcement differs from that which often has been (and is) the norm, criminalising the behavior of prostitutes while giving a (de facto or de jure) pass to johns. Sweden's prostitution laws also differ from the more usual approach to criminalised vices of all sorts, where sellers are treated more harshly than buyers. During Prohibition in the United States, for instance, alcohol sales were illegal, but purchases were legal.

It now appears that Norway intends to follow its neighbor's example.

I do not support the Swedish approach, nor the standard US approach; rather, I believe that channels for legal and regulated adult prostitution should be available. (This is in keeping with my support for application of the "robustness principle" to all of the traditional vices; here's a paper that applies the principle to prostitution and pornography.) Over the centuries, anti-prostitution laws have suggested more than a hint of the demonisation of prostitutes; the Swedish approach (which defines prostitution as a form of male violence against women and children -- 4-page pdf available here) suggests different demons, but the demonisation continues. The robustness principle shields (some forms of) adult consensual prostitution from legal demonisation, though individuals can apply their own standards.

Incidentally, the Swedish approach, like just about all prostitution regulatory regimes, is rather controversial, of course. Here's a supportive view, and voices of opponents can be found here.

Labels: Norway, prostitution, robustness, Sweden

 
Norwegian Methanol Poisonings [Updated]
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 6:05 PM

As Vice Squad has noted in the past, most recently with respect to 65 fatal poisonings in Bombay, high taxes replicate some of the less savory aspects of vice prohibition -- including the production and smuggling of underground, and possibly adulterated substances. Six Norwegians are recent, fortunately non-fatal, victims of a methyl-alcohol-laced beverage. Their poisoning apparently stems from drinking from the same batch of adulterated hooch that has killed 18 people in Norway during the last three years.

[Update, March 4: "Fifteen people have died from poisoning after drinking fake Turkish raki, a strong aniseed-flavoured alcohol, at an Istanbul restaurant." Even unadulterated raki contains some methanol, but the batch that killed these poor folks had much higher-than-normal levels.]

Labels: alcohol, Norway, taxes

 
Smoking Ban Winners
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 11:26 AM

Tony Blair's government announced plans this week to adopt a New York City-style workplace smoking ban, one that would extend to most pubs and restaurants. Much of the debate about the wisdom of smoking bans centers around dubious claims of economic impacts, on both sides: do bans keep smokers away from bars and restaurants, does a smoke-free environment attract more non-smoking customers, and which of these two possible effects is likely to dominate? I don't think we have good answers to these questions, nor do I think that these sorts of economic projections should be determinative in whether or not a ban is a good idea. (Vice Squad does not favor public smoking bans, but is not opposed on principle to some public smoking regulations, short of a ban.)

A recent BBC article has pointed out some businesses that seem to have been helped by previously-adopted smoking bans, however:

In Ireland, outdoor heaters and wall-mounted ashtrays are springing up outside numerous establishments to accommodate their smoking customers, sparking a boom for those industries.

Worcester-based firm Fiesta Heaters said outdoor heater sales to Ireland in the year to October had surged 178% from the year before.

"The ban has worked wonders for my trade in Ireland and I'm looking forward to it coming in over here," owner and director Mark Fletcher said.

The ban could also see more innovative ways of getting around the ban coming to prominence.

In Florida, punters had the Nicotini - a tobacco spiked martini - to take the edge off their cravings.

Meanwhile in Norway the sales of snus - a plug of snuff-style tobacco popped behind the lip - soared in the wake of a public smoking ban, with makers expecting double digit growth in the years to come.

Thanks to a Friend (and former student) of Vice Squad for a pointer to the NY Times article on the plans for a British smoking ban.

Labels: Britain, Norway, smoking ban, snus

 
Swedish Alcohol Taxes
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 8:04 PM

Finland and Denmark gave into the pressure from low-priced alcohol imports by slashing their alcohol taxes. Sweden and (non-EU member) Norway have so far held firm to their traditionally high alcohol taxes. Sweden has been talking about implementing a big alcohol tax cut for some time, but now gives word that any such cut will have to wait until the spring. Norway isn't expecting any changes anytime soon, but recognizes that Swedish policy changes will have extra-territorial ramifications. Forbes.com provides the latest. Vice Squad, hoping to somehow manipulate this into a visit to Stockholm, has been following the Swedish tax story just a little too closely.

Incidentally, the Danish alcohol tax cut appears to be working, in the sense that Danes travelling abroad are bringing back less booze, while alcohol sales in Denmark to visiting Swedes and Norwegians have risen.

Labels: alcohol, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, taxes

 
Swedish Alcohol Developments
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 5:38 PM

Vice Squad has been tracking the possibility that Sweden will drastically cut its alcohol taxes, in the face of previous tax cuts in neighboring countries and EU rules that make importing for personal use easy. But not that easy: here's a story of a couple of fellows who ended up in jail when they couldn't explain the 2000 litres of alcohol that they were bringing into Sweden. It would be OK if it clearly were for personal use, or if they had other evidence that they were having a big party. But according to the article, "... it isn't acceptable to tell customs that "you're stocking up your reserves" or that it's been bought "for a large party"..." without supporting evidence.

The Swedish alcohol monopoly, enmeshed in a corruption scandal, is selling less because of the increased border trade -- another factor in making reduced taxes likely:

In September the Swedish Alcohol Retailing Monopoly recorded a 14.2 per cent drop in year-on-year sales. Sales of wine fell by 3.3 per cent, of beer by 4.7 per cent and of cider by 12.2 per cent. The drop in sales is most noticeable in Norrbotten and Skåne where consumers have the opportunity to buy cheap spirits in Finland and Denmark respectively.

Sweden is joining other countries (Finland, Norway, Iceland and Denmark) that have generally had tough alcohol policies and high taxes for negotiations with the European Union and the World Health Organization. Tight regulations do seem to work in terms of limiting consumption:

Norway, Sweden and Iceland, who charge the highest prices for alcohol, are also among the five nations in Europe with the lowest annual consumption of pure alcohol per person.

According to the WHO, people in Iceland annually consume just 4.41 litres of pure alcohol per person.

By contrast, Luxembourgers have the highest consumption with 14.47 litres per year per person, according to the WHO.

Norway, which is not a member of the EU, has the highest alcohol prices in Europe. But after Sweden lowers its taxes, Norway might feel pressure to follow suit, as the prospect of convenient, cheap imports will allow for avoidance of the high taxes.

Finally, the European Commission is coming after Sweden for taxing wine too highly, relative to beer. Why is the Commission sticking its nose into this business? Because most of the beer is locally produced, while most of the wine is imported, so the tax differentials might really be disguised protectionism -- which the Commission is tasked with fighting -- as opposed to a legitimate alcohol control strategy.

Labels: alcohol, EU, free trade, Norway, Sweden, taxes, WHO

 
Vicewire, 9/15/2004
- posted by Ryan @ 3:37 PM

1) The last part of Nevada's first legal brothel was air-lifted out of its original location, taking its new place in the Wild Horse Adult Spa and Resort. [Update, September 20: Here's a previous Vice Squad post on the relocation of the Mustang physical plant. -- JL]

2) Paypal, the company that handles much of the online payments for eBay, is fining customers who use its service to purchase items related to gambling, pornography, or illegal prescription drugs. Such payments are already prohibited, but now a $500 fine is included.

3) A new study shows that elderly people who gamble are healthier than those who don't. Yale epidemiologist Rani Desai said this: "There's this whole concept of healthy aging - that folks who continue to remain engaged in activity, especially in the community and in social activities, stay healthier longer, so I think this is a reflection of that. It's not that gambling makes you healthy, it's that gamblers are healthier".

4) Here's a great story about how 2 underage Norwegians took advantage of expired beer to make a boatload of money off a local store. In other beer news, a study has shown that beer may be helpful for fighting heart disease and cancer, though it was funded by Guinness and Labatt.

Labels: alcohol, gambling, Nevada, Norway, prostitution, Vicewire

 
Snus Loses a Round in the EU
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 1:03 PM

Swedish Match, a leading producer of the smokeless tobacco product "snus," is trying to have snus legalized throughout the EU. (Right now, the only EU country where snus can legally be sold is Sweden.) Snus appears to be much less harmful than smoking, so smokers who switch to snus are probably enhancing their health, everything else equal. Norway's recent introduction of a New York City-style public smoking ban has apparently spurred snus use there, and Swedish Match undoubtedly sees increased demand throughout the EU as the result of smoking controls -- except for that darned ban! (Norway is not an EU member; snus is legal in Sweden because it negotiated an exception when it joined the EU in 1995.) The Swedish Match case before the European Court of Justice took a step back yesterday, however, when the Court's Advocate General issued a recommendation that the snus ban should not be overturned, at least until new EU legislation regarding snus is passed. Final word from the Court, however, is still a few months away. Here's the story, from EUobserver.com. Vice Squad has been following the snus saga in Europe and the US, most recently on August 9.

Labels: EU, Norway, smoking ban, snus, Sweden

 
Selling Beer at a Loss
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 6:32 PM

Norway is not a member of the European Union, so Norway has not been party to the many alterations of alcohol policies throughout other European countries that have been inspired by EU regulations and expansion. Further, Norway continues to tax alcohol at higher rates than any other European country. Nonetheless, a price war has broken out among licensed beer sellers in Norway, cutting the price of a bottle of beer by more than one-half. In fact, the going price is lower than the tax, meaning that the retailers are actually losing money (indeed, quite a bit of money, more than 100% of the wholesale price) on each bottle of beer that they sell.

The government is rescuing the sellers from their own competitive propensities, however, by declaring that such low prices are a violation of the alcohol laws. To protect their licenses to sell beer, then, retailers have to raise prices. When this became clear on Friday, a rush to buy the cheap beer while it lasted ensued, of course.

Labels: alcohol, Norway, taxes

 
Paying for a Party By Being in a Porn Movie.....
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 5:24 PM

...Tyler Cohen at Marginal Revolution has the details -- it seems that a month-long party upon the completion of high school is traditional in Norway.

Labels: Norway, pornography

 
Smoking as a Human Right
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 6:14 PM

Usually it is the opponents of smoking who invoke "rights talk" -- in this case, the right to a smoke-free environment. But rights are such a valuable trump card that all sides of a debate are tempted to invoke them.

The Norwegian town of Levanger banned smoking by municipal employees during working hours. The ban applied whether or not the employees were actually on city property. The county in which Levanger is located was asked to assess the legality of the municipal rule: "the county declared the ban invalid because it violates the European Human Rights Convention.

It said the city can ban smoking on its property, however not, for example, if a worker was driving his or her own automobile or was on private property."

One might ask whether smoking marijuana (or taking heroin) at home is similarly protected.

Labels: Norway, smoking ban

 
I still haven't seen Old Jack City
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 6:45 PM

A few days ago Norway's national film board lifted a ban on some 300 movies, including New Jack City and Robocop 2. The head of the board noted that the historical use of "moral" criteria for approving films was being replaced by "professional" criteria, though in the reports that I read, precisely what these professional criteria consist of was not spelled out. Hardcore pornography remains banned in Norway.

In their 1991 book Pornography in a Free Society, Gordon Hawkins and Frank Zimring suggested various private (non-state) approaches to regulating pornography (alongside a limited role for the state). Boycotts, industry self-regulation, and even the possibility of a sort of private anti-certification committee, one that would provide a stamp of disapproval for particularly offensive offerings, were among the suggestions. These seem preferable to me to a system that denies all Norwegian adults access to films (and printed material) that some of them might wish to see, based on the unexplained criteria of one small committee.

Labels: Norway, pornography