3 ms·

That's not the right behavior to be encouraging at the macro public health level, though. The goal of the taxes is to discourage use, by making the cost outrage

That's not the right behavior to be encouraging at the macro public health level, though. The goal of the taxes is to discourage use, by making the cost outrageous, and while you can make them safer, ultimately you want to be discouraging their use entirely.

dexterdog 9y ago
The taxes have the main goal of raising revenue for the government. Discouragement is just a side benefit.
- dsr_ 9y ago
  That would depend on which government is doing the taxing. To the US states, tobacco taxes are revenue. For the Federal government, they are a policy measure.
coldtea 9y ago
>That's not the right behavior to be encouraging at the macro public health level, though. The goal of the taxes is to discourage use, by making the cost outrageous And why's that the government's business exactly? In a country that they actually offer free public healthcare, I'd understand it (sick people incur costs), but in the US and other such places, it's mostly the state playing nanny (even more so than the tax money).
- barrkel 9y ago
  Because people vote for it? Smoking culture has a lot of knock on effects for third parties who aren't in a position to fix things themselves, children especially. I know; I grew up in a house with two smokers. Now I can scarcely handle visiting my parents' appartments.
  - coldtea 9y ago
    >Because people vote for it? Really, like you ever got asked to vote "for it"? First, it's usually a wholesale vote: you only like this 1-2 things about the party's/candidate's platform? Sorry, you're getting those 200 other things too. And there's just 2 parties, so pick wisely, lest you get the one you really don't want. Not to mention that even for the things people explicitly vote for, they don't get. Empty promises is the name of the game... >Smoking culture has a lot of knock on effects for third parties who aren't in a position to fix things themselves, children especially. I know; I grew up in a house with two smokers. So, like almost everybody pre-90s? They seem to have come out alright...
    - ricardobeat 9y ago
      > The cancer death rate for men and women combined fell 25% from its peak in 1991 to 2014 Attributed mainly to reduction in smoking. Also, the biparty system is peculiar to the US. Other countries have more fine-grained political platforms, and mostly end up with similar policies. Public health is, well, a public matter.
    - ShabbosGoy 9y ago
      It’s easier to have a sin tax than make an actual policy that requires years of research. Nobody explicitly voted for taxing cigarettes, but I do know that there was quite a bit of pressure to ban smoking in public areas. Again, even that policy/ban doesn’t address the root cause, it only prevents people from suffering the effects of secondhand smoke.
- adventured 9y ago
  > In a country that they actually offer free public healthcare, I'd understand it (sick people incur costs) About ~50% of Americans are receiving health coverage or healthcare through the government. Whether Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP, SS disability, VA services, or heavily subsidized ACA plans, etc. Government in general is by far the single largest interested party in healthcare costs in the US at this point.
no_identd 9y ago
Didn't I just say "don't say 'false sense of security'"? :P

dexterdog 9y ago

The taxes have the main goal of raising revenue for the government. Discouragement is just a side benefit.

dsr_ 9y ago
That would depend on which government is doing the taxing. To the US states, tobacco taxes are revenue. For the Federal government, they are a policy measure.

coldtea 9y ago

>That's not the right behavior to be encouraging at the macro public health level, though. The goal of the taxes is to discourage use, by making the cost outrageous And why's that the government's business exactly? In a country that they actually offer free public healthcare, I'd understand it (sick people incur costs), but in the US and other such places, it's mostly the state playing nanny (even more so than the tax money).

barrkel 9y ago
Because people vote for it? Smoking culture has a lot of knock on effects for third parties who aren't in a position to fix things themselves, children especially. I know; I grew up in a house with two smokers. Now I can scarcely handle visiting my parents' appartments.
- coldtea 9y ago
  >Because people vote for it? Really, like you ever got asked to vote "for it"? First, it's usually a wholesale vote: you only like this 1-2 things about the party's/candidate's platform? Sorry, you're getting those 200 other things too. And there's just 2 parties, so pick wisely, lest you get the one you really don't want. Not to mention that even for the things people explicitly vote for, they don't get. Empty promises is the name of the game... >Smoking culture has a lot of knock on effects for third parties who aren't in a position to fix things themselves, children especially. I know; I grew up in a house with two smokers. So, like almost everybody pre-90s? They seem to have come out alright...
  - ricardobeat 9y ago
    > The cancer death rate for men and women combined fell 25% from its peak in 1991 to 2014 Attributed mainly to reduction in smoking. Also, the biparty system is peculiar to the US. Other countries have more fine-grained political platforms, and mostly end up with similar policies. Public health is, well, a public matter.
  - ShabbosGoy 9y ago
    It’s easier to have a sin tax than make an actual policy that requires years of research. Nobody explicitly voted for taxing cigarettes, but I do know that there was quite a bit of pressure to ban smoking in public areas. Again, even that policy/ban doesn’t address the root cause, it only prevents people from suffering the effects of secondhand smoke.
adventured 9y ago
> In a country that they actually offer free public healthcare, I'd understand it (sick people incur costs) About ~50% of Americans are receiving health coverage or healthcare through the government. Whether Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP, SS disability, VA services, or heavily subsidized ACA plans, etc. Government in general is by far the single largest interested party in healthcare costs in the US at this point.

no_identd 9y ago

Didn't I just say "don't say 'false sense of security'"? :P