Politics, News & Issues >
Political Issues
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedAre high taxes on cigarettes fair?
Results so far:
| Yes | 61% | 830 votes | Total: 1367 votes | |
| No | 39% | 537 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesMy reasoning on this one is a bit different than many of the others who support a higher cigarette tax. It so happens that I smoke. I don't particularly want the cost to go up, but I do support a higher tax-if the tax is used for a specific purpose. (For instance, I support higher taxes on the price of gasoline as long as the surplus tax money is used for highway repairs and things of that nature.) If higher cigarette tax money is used for education of junior high and high school aged kids and helps reduce the chance of their ever starting smoking, I could support that. The easiest way to quit smoking is to never start. If higher taxes help more kids to never start, thus improving the overall health of the nation, I'm all for it.
There was a time when I was against higher taxes on cigarettes, alcohol and other so-called "sin taxes." My thinking was, why penalize someone for doing something that really only hurts him/herself? But, I've come to realize that, when a person engages in activities that are harmful to him/her self, it still affects all of us, financially. When enough people are "doing the wrong things" from a health standpoint, we all pay in the form of increased medical costs, increased insurance premiums and a host of other costs that affect everyone-not just the user. It is for this reason that I've had a turnaround in opinion.
There are other reasons to support a higher cigarette tax. If the costs of cigarettes goes high enough, this may provide the impetus for a good number of smokers to quit. I know that I've "quit" a number of times-just because of the cost. Even now, I don't smoke nearly as much as I used to. I used to smoke a pack to a pack and a quarter of cigarettes per day. Nowadays, a pack of cigarettes lasts me between three and four days. For people who've never smoked that may still sound like a lot, but this is a drastic improvement. If higher taxes end up causing a number of smokers to quit, that's another good thing.
Are high taxes on cigarettes fair? Perhaps "fair" isn't exactly the right word. But, if raising taxes on cigarettes can keep a few thousand kids from ever starting to smoke. If raising taxes can cause the users of harmful substances to stop using the substances to begin with. If the raising of taxes helps better the overall health of the nation, then it might just be the best thing for everybody.
Learn more about this author, Paul Schingle.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
Imposing higher taxes on cigarette smokers, along with anyone that uses tobacco products is an injustice because it focuses taxation to generate income from a specific portion of the general public to be used toward projects and services that benefit the whole.
It would be much easier to swallow the idea of higher tobacco taxes if the funds were targeted at programs to help people who are addicted to the substance. There are cessation programs for other types of drugs, including alcohol, that are funded by taxes paid by everyone. It has been drilled into the minds of our society that nicotine is one of the most addictive substances there is, yet there is no government aid directed toward helping people quit.
In a society bent on eliminating this supposedly unacceptable habit, wouldn't it make more sense to direct these funds toward the goal rather than using them as a punishment on those afflicted with the addiction? Why should smokers be singled out to pay more money for road maintenance and development for example? They are not involved in activities that cause additional wear and tear on roads.
Some will argue that smoking incurs higher health costs. While this fact is undeniable, smokers already pay much more for health and life insurance to help offset such costs. As such, it is difficult to understand any argument that justifies higher taxes for this reason alone. Whats worse, those who don't or can't quit are punished further as taxes are raised to compensate for losses of revenue caused by the decline in smokers.
Quitting tobacco is a difficult thing to do. However, the initial high prices on smoking cessation products makes the prospect unattractive. While logic would suggest that in the long run smokers would save untold amounts of money by quitting, it is a lot easier to come up with a few bucks for more cigarettes than a few hundred for products to help them quit. Instead of higher taxes, allow for tax breaks on money spent for cessation products and programs thus making the idea of quitting that much more attractive.
While I believe that tobacco products should be considered a taxable commodity, the products should be taxed for the right reasons.
Learn more about this author, Joseph Branch.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- Political Issues
- Is taxpayer funding for political campaigns a good idea?
- Should international law have a significant effect on Supreme Court decisions?
- Should pharmaceutical companies be required to give up patents necessary to developing a vaccine against pandemic flu?
- Is the International Space Station falling apart?
- Should Puerto Rico remain a US territory or become the 51st state?
- Should the US Congress support funding to help the Capitol go green, despite budget constraints?
