It’s good taxing the indolent habit of cigarette smoking, a major strain on the public health system.
Smokers should be forced to take out private health insurance, with exclusion from the public health system as an end result.

Dave needs to oil the wheel of his pro-tobacco cart, the wheel is squeaking in this article.

David,

There’s a certain irony to railing against people who think they know what’s best for others, while confidently prescribing what society shouldn’t do, based on your own beliefs. It’s just a different flavour of superiority.

Yes, illusory superiority is real, and often funny, but turning that psychological quirk into a blanket attack on public health policy is a classic bait-and-switch. You start with science, then pivot into libertarian dogma, as if one justifies the other. It doesn’t.

The biggest flaw is your suggestion that public health measures stem from intellectual arrogance rather than evidence or concern for public wellbeing. That’s a straw man. Helmet laws, smoking restrictions, and dietary guidelines weren’t invented by smug academics trying to flex their degrees, they were responses to demonstrable harms, often backed by extensive research, cost-benefit analysis, and (ironically) humility about what happens when we ignore data.

Then there’s the selective caricaturing. Academics = arrogant busybodies; tradespeople = humble, wise realists. It’s a tidy narrative that flatters your worldview, but it’s also a lazy stereotype. Plenty of academics are cautious, evidence-driven, and public-minded. Plenty of tradies are outspoken, confident, and, yes, sometimes wrong. Likewise, there are all too many tradies who are anything but humble - let alone wise or realistic. Intelligence and humility aren’t exclusive to one class of worker.

Worst of all, you conflate “being told” with “being controlled.” No one likes overreach. But you blur the line between informed policy and authoritarianism, as though every regulation is an act of moral vanity rather than a response to measurable risk. That’s just reflexive anti-government sentiment dressed in pop psychology.

The problem isn’t that some people overestimate their intelligence. The problem is pretending that expertise and concern are the same thing as elitism. And that’s its own kind of delusion.

WTF?

Linking superiority to the "nanny state" seems to be a recurring theme with David Leyonhjelm.

It's not the first time that he has tried to link the wearing of bicycle helmets and smoking regulations to some type of imagined moral panic by those with "superior guidance".

All this from someone who has said in the past: that teenage vaping is "a proven safe alternative to cigarette smoking."

The last time this author tried to bundle the "nanny state", perceived superior intelligence, smoking, bike helmets and other behaviours into an article he synthesised into the following:
" It can reach peak absurdity when a homeless, penniless, destitute person is still considered unworthy because they are white, male, heterosexual, or enjoy any of the other imagined sources of advantage. It takes a rare kind of superior intelligence to come to that conclusion."

My thoughts at the time were: "It takes a rare kind of intelligence to come up with this statement and not expect people to see it for what it is - a constructed nonsense."

It's time to move on David. I don't think you convinced anyone last time and I don't think you've convinced anyone this time.

Reworking the same articles for the same audience serves no purpose

What passes for "education" these days has nothing to do with intelligence.

“It is simply not possible for more than half a population to be above average”. That is borne out, not by the ‘average’, but by the majority in Australia, who re-elected the worst government ever.

That has left Australia with a PM, who has the intelligence of a door knob, telling us that Welcome to Country is not controversial.

Anyone who seen this blokes performance in Parliament, yes he was an Australian Senator until being booted in 2019, known what he's like. He has been a member of about 6 political parties, including Labor and Liberal. Leyonhjelm believes that every Australian (including children) should be armed with guns, that speaks volumes for his mentality.

Why are those knuckle draggers on the extreme right, so jealous of intelligence, is it because they have none, but wish they did? i suspect it's because intelligent people see them for what they are, numbskulls!

Ordering people how to live is morally repugnant because it is a form of violence, not because it is "unintelligent".

The people who order others around could well be very smart and well versed in the health and safety of the body, but "smart" is almost an antonym to "wise" and the body is only a clothing for the spirit.

I do however agree with Diver Dan that the public need not finance the poor choices of individuals.