undefined | Better HN

0 pointsbroptimist3y ago0 comments

So you wouldn't be in favor of a carbon tax? What about a tax on tobacco sales in a universal healthcare system? (to offset tobacco users' additional healthcare costs)

0 comments

Rebelgecko3y ago

I believe that tobacco use is actually beneficial under a universal healthcare system. Dying early from cancer is a bummer at an individual level, but much cheaper than getting old and the additional care needs that come with that. So you'll be paying almost as much in taxes as someone who doesn't partake,while getting a smaller amount of retiree benefits in return.

Maybe there should be a tax rebate for smokers, so they can buy more cigarettes?

pm903y ago

You don’t just drop dead of cancer. There is an extensive treatment process involved which is rather expensive and not guaranteed to work. So this argument doesn’t really hold.

sgjohnson3y ago

I wouldn’t.

And “sin taxes”, i.e. tobbaco taxes and carbon taxes are a logical fallacy.

Tobacco tax won’t offset the additional healthcare costs for smokers on average, so it ends up just being a penalty for having a bad habit, and carbon tax will simply put a price tag on high carbon emissions.

SOLAR_FIELDS3y ago

Kind of tangential - the tobacco tax is a fallacy in another way: without taking into account quality of life adjustments, smokers are actually a net benefit for society in healthcare costs [1]. The simple reason is because they die earlier and most healthcare costs are incurred near the tail end of life, so by shortening those final years it becomes much cheaper for society to pay out.

1: https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/2/6/e001678

tmp_anon_223y ago

How many people die per year of second hand smoke? Smokers impact non-smokers significantly.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse