[thebean11]

Sure let's say it's 10%, is the conclusion you draw from that that free will doesn't exist? Do 100% of people need to give up the freedom of choice to lower that figure?

Not sure what you're getting at about elections, are you saying that's a reason to intervene? I don't really want the government making policy for the purpose of influencing election outcomes.

[oblio]

So dramatic.

100% of people will need to give up some luxuries so that everyone can benefit, and especially <<vulnerable groups>> can benefit.

Taxes work the same way. Laws in general work the same way (otherwise we'd assume everyone is smart, fair and calculated heck, perfect, all the time).

[thebean11]

Can you be more specific then about what we're discussing, if it's not "ban things that the 10% is addicted to"?