Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The Causes and Effects of Smoking
Tobacco use as a public health concern
The danger of smoking
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The Causes and Effects of Smoking
While if the money from the extra taxes goes to medical care people probably would not mind it that much, but using higher taxes to force consumers to quit smoking and drinking is not right. Not only does the government try to put a sin tax on tobacco and alcohol they also try to put extra tax on food deemed unhealthy. Families will go without so people can pay the higher tax, and the money from the higher taxes does not always go to the programs it was supposed to go too.
What is sin tax? “Sin taxes” is a popular term for fees charged for guilty pleasures or human indulgence, such as smoking cigarettes and drinking alcohol. Sin taxes can be defined as those government revenues garnered from the purchase or consumption of resources or services exhibiting the following characteristics: 1. Consumption exhibits an inelastic demand curve. The behavior is addictive. That is, a small change in behavior will generate significant tax revenues yet not eliminate the behavior.
2. The behavior can be considered self-destructive or harmful to the individual. Sinful behaviors generate immediate or long-term personal negative consequences like poor health or obesity.
3. The behavior generates negative externalities— other people suffer. However, sins are often generally, but not universally, considered to be socially undesirable. Consumption of the product or service raises concerns or is generally judged to be counter to socially desirable behaviors or to be dysfunctional in terms of the social welfare. Others suffer from the acts of an individual.” (Lorenzi, 2004) In other words if it is deemed bad for us in an offical way then a sin tax can be added to it wheather the people like it or not.
First, using higher taxes to force consumers to q...
... middle of paper ...
...drink make the choice to consume these products so why should they be punished by having to pay a higher price? Sin tax has been around as long as anyone can remember and it has never ended well but does that stop the government from implementing them over and over again? No, it does not! We all understand that smoking and drinking are bad for us and possibly, sometime in the future, we may need to have long term care because of using these products we should also have the option of putting the money in to a government fund to help us in the future if needed.
Works Cited
Black, P. A. (2006). 'Sin' Taxes and Poor Households: Unanticipated Effects. South African Journal Of Economics, 74(1), 131-136.
Green, R. (2011). The ethics of sin taxes. Public Health Nursing, 28(1), 68-77.
Lorenzi, P. (2004). SIN TAXES. Society, 41(3), 59-65.
The Bible does not forbid premarital sex. There is no passage of the Bible that references premarital sex as a sin against God. The association between sin and premarital sex is a new Christian idea. The only possible reference to premarital sex being a sin in the Bible is in the New Testament. This premise although, is generally dismissed by theologians because the Greek word pornei, or sexual immorality is commonly incorrectly translated into the English word fornication.
consequences of sin. Paul confirms this in Romans 3:10, “There is none righteous, no not one.”
Reiter, Jendi, “Citizens or Sinners? The Economic and Political Inequity of Sin Taxes on Tobacco and Alcohol Products.” Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems. 1996.
... can not present a legitimate argument, second alcoholism is not a disease and so each person must find it in themselves to stop, or they have family that really loves them and help them stop. Third it would cause more problems then it is solving, and finally it would cost the general public more money then it is worth.
Governments would just be continuing to cause problems because another huge problem in America is there are already way too many people without jobs. When going to the store to get a soda, is there really much to think about when drinking sweetened goods has become a part of an everyday lifestyle. Why would someone suddenly put a tax on something which so many have loved and became addicted to. If there was a tax put on everything people have come to love there would be a huge tax for everything. Bittman does not think that putting a tax on sugar sweetened beverages would affect the jobs of people because he believes it would get made up by the selling of their other products. However it is important to realize that most places would not be passing this until 2018. Although, people really do need to realize what these sweetened products are doing and the reason why taxing for these goods is not looking so
People find it bizarre that the tobacco age is 18, but the drinking age is 21? People care more about alcohol than they do tobacco products, but tobacco is one of the leading killers in the U.S. today. Allowing 18 year olds to start ingesting tobacco products, such as cigarettes or chewing tobacco, at the age of only 18 will give them an earlier start to becoming addicted, and in the long run, shorten their life span. Some think it is absurd letting people smoke, but they cannot go out with friends and drink. Smoking and drinking are both addictive and can have negative effects if used improperly, but smoking one cigarette is more harmful than drinking one beer.
Currently volume based taxes, a major component of the alcohol tax, has remained mostly stagnant since the 1950s. This is due to most states not increasing the tax with the inflation, to match the cost of living. Increasing these taxes could decrease the rate of binge drinking, but there is also evidence indicating that it could hurt responsible consumers. Many people that suffer from binge drinking also suffer from alcoholism. They are more willing to pay higher tax rates for alcohol than their more responsible counterparts. Creating new taxes could hurt many responsible drinkers, while barely affecting the binge drinking population.
There needs to be a policy to ban cigarettes, it kills the smoker, in addition, could kill the person exposed to the smoke from cigarettes. “The cigarette is also a defective product, meaning not just dangerous but unreasonably dangerous, killing half its long-term users” (Proctor), cigarettes are not healthy in any way making it a defective product, it mainly kills the smoker rather than helping them. It was produced to be inhalable smoke harming anyone who smokes them making it a defect because in the past the tobacco was too harsh to be inhaled. The policy would help cigarette smokers, especially since they don’t even like the habit of smoking cigarettes, knowing it harms them.
A more simplistic definition to define sin taxes would be a tax on goods that are not needed for everyday survival or goods that are deemed immoral to society. Sin taxes also know as excise taxes date back to the Post Revolutionary Era. A sin tax is a form of tax used to “raise revenue for the government and…curtail behaviors that are unsavory” (Class notes). Sin taxes where mostly popular in the prohibition era the government not only used sin taxes to raise revenue but also a “noble experiment” for the government to take a national stand in order to curtail alcohol use (Class notes). In their quest to wage war on the budget the government has passed sin taxes on everyday goods such as “tobacco, alcohol, gasoline and candy”, this also including taxes on “pole and gambling” (Class notes). In this essay I will examine two different articles “Hate the Sin, Tax the Sinner” and “Paying with our Sins” on their view points on the use of sin taxes to raise revenue for the government.
In the period of Obamacare, there is a sound argument that there is a need for greater restrictions on who has access to healthcare on the normal premium’s minimum premium model or through Medicare/Medicaid. The question that has to be asked is if those individuals, which assume a risk through an unhealthy lifestyle, should pay the same premiums as those individuals who live a healthy lifestyle. There is obviously a discussion of degrees in such a debate (i.e. the individual who eats unhealthily in a manner that has limited health impacts is different from the smoker or the obese person). Eating and obesity are a contentious subject when it comes to health care restrictions, because food is a necessity. However, tobacco is not a necessity and is known to be a significant detriment to the individual’s health. Inferentially, the case supporting a health tax for cigarettes, smoking and tobacco is different the debate over the tax for unhealthy eating and obesity. Thus, there should be a health tax in the case of tobacco consumption is necessary, because the individual who smokes is assuming risks that are detrimental to his or her health.
Sin has been defined as many things by many groups throughout the ages. In the Old Testament it was defined as a failure to hit a mark or an attitude of rebellion. In the New Testament it is defined as failing to conform to a standard or as a condition. However, we must decide for ourselves what it means in our own lives. The Holy Spirit will guide us in our definition. Without being taught right and wrong we still are able to decipher between the two.
However, it is our personal sins that cause such extreme needs for police and so on. Due to original sin, humans are tainted and are ethically and morally corrupted. It is Adam and Eve who were accountable for original sin and who directly felt its consequence of guilt. On the other hand, personal sin is the sin that commits where we t...
Every year tobacco is responsible for over 480,000 deaths. That includes people who have died from secondhand smoke. When statistics like this exist it is hard to understand why tobacco is still legal. This number increases every year that passes and most people believe it isn’t shrinking anytime soon. Tobacco should be banned because it’s deadly to not only the users, it’s highly addictive, and the tobacco industry is corrupting information promoting its harmful product. Society shouldn’t have to deal with anymore premature deaths due to a lethal legal product. We should work towards getting this useless product banned everywhere.
Manitoba, a place knew for adoring new and high taxes, refused to add junk food taxes because they knew that it was going to be a waste of time and there would not be any positive results (5). The many studies of junk food taxes have soon other countries that it is not going to work. People will find other alternative to get the sugary high they need. A study in a small city showed that soda intake decreased for a small amount of time and then it increased again, as well as the sales on beer increased (Luciani P.
...hat alcohol ban is to intervene in lifestyle and entertainment freedom. They also claim that if we carefully drink alcohol we can prevent from serious problems which damage people. However, they ignore some significant points. One of which is the fact that people who drink alcohol adversely set an example to children. If we can think in terms of the long term effect this may lead to bringing up alcoholic people in the future. Alcohol should be banned because alcohol is a really dangerous beverage which has brought a lot of sorrow and tragic stories to a lot of people’s lives and families, through driving, partying and making bad decisions.