🚀 go-pugleaf

  From: Graham Wilson <gawilson%watrose.waterloo.edu@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>

    Up here in Canada we are constantly being bombarded by
    government-sponsored commercials telling us to quit smoking.  What
    irks me is that (some of) the funds for this advertising comes
    from taxation on cigarettes.

    Put into general terms:
    Company X produces product Y.  The government taxes company X and
    product Y at very high rates (relative to other products).  The
    government then turns around and uses these funds to discourage
    people from purchasing product Y!

    Is that fair or ethical?

  I oppose all taxes, as I have said before.  However, judged in the
context of our current system, the cigarette tax is one of the fairer
taxes.  The costs of smoking are subsidized by non-smokers in several
ways:

1) Non-smokers often have to breathe smoke.  This is unpleasant,
   smells bad, irritates the eyes, and has medical consequences that
   smokers are not billed for.  
2) In airplanes, restraunts, etc, with seperate smoking and
   non-smoking sections, smokers are not billed any more than
   non-smokers.  Since the seperate sections cost the airlines,
   restraunts, etc, something, non-smokers have to pay more than they
   would if there were no smoking anywhere.  
3) Government subsidies for tobacco farmers.  
4) Careless smokers cause fires which kill non-smokers and destroy the
   property of non-smokers.  Taxes for fire departments are not made
   higher for smokers.
5) Federal laws now mandate that upholstery be made fireproof, since
   so many careless smokers managed to start major fires.  The fire-
   proofing makes upholstery more expensive, less comfortable, and
   more likely to cause cancer.
6) Much medical care is paid for by the taxpayers.  Smokers need much
   more medical care, but pay no higher taxes for it.
7) Most private medical insurance is paid for through one's employer.
   Federal and state laws discourage or prohibit seperate insurance
   rates for smokers and non-smokers in such a group policy.  Thus the
   non-smokers subsidize the smokers again.
8) Smokers are more likely to get contagious diseases.  They then
   often spread these diseases to non-smokers.

  This is true in the US.  I believe it is probably pretty much the
same in Canada.
  I think that adults have a right to smoke, but do not have a right
to force others to breathe their smoke, or to bear the costs and other
consequences of their habit.  I have the same opinion of all other
drugs.
                                                              ...Keith

-------