Who says that the "natural experiments" era is over? For those looking to research another topic besides for the correlation between debt ratios and growth, I would like to suggest that you consider working on the consequences of UCLA's new smoking ban. While the penalties for violating this new rule are not listed, let's suppose there is compliance. Could the following happen?
1. Will anger and fights on campus rise as the smokers go cold turkey? (free nicotine patches will be distributed for 2 weeks).
2. Will the smokers actually reduce their total daily consumption of nicotine?
3. Will the smokers gain weight? Six months from now will they be healthier than they are now?
4. If certain nations have higher smoking rates than the U.S, will their students choose to attend another pro-smoking school?
5. For those smokers who wanted to quit, will this new law solve a peer pressure co-ordination problem that our smoking students wanted to quit smoking but only if all all of their campus friends also quit. They feared being labeled "losers" if they unilaterally quit while their friends continued to smoke?
In this age of benevolent paternalism, the faculty hope that our Leaders introduce more policies to improve our quality of life. There could be a single choice of entree each day at the Faculty Center that offers the highest nutritional value and minimal ecological damage. The Leaders could also choose what clothes faculty and students wear?
I do support this smoking ban but precedent is always dangerous.
