The link between tobacco consumption and the prevalence of cancers like lung, esophageal, and mouth cancer are definite; however, if it fair for tobacco-users to put such a burden onto the healthcare system?
Tobacco products in Canada are taxed at very high levels. The governing philosophy is that the health complications due to consumption will be paid for by the taxes that a smoker pays over his lifetime.
But is this the correct approach? And how do the numbers measure up? A diagnosis of cancer is not guaranteed merely because someone smokes, but paying taxes on cigarettes is.
We must first establish what the purpose of the tobacco tax is. Does it serve to discourage use because of cost, or is it designed to recoup the cost of providing healthcare to individuals who develop health complications from consumming the product?
While people will disagree on what purpose the tax serves, what remains clear is that it is expensive to smoke and expensive to treat someone for lung cancer.
Allow me to submit a topic for debate: Would it be better to keep tobacco taxes as they are, raise them even more to help offset the rising costs of healthcare, or abolish the taxes completely and subsequently charge people out of their own pockets for cancer treatment if they were smokers?
The issue at stake revolves around one's view on individual rights in a society. Do you possess the right to engage in harmful behaviour that will cost the state many dollars to treat? What happens if the state decided that it no longer wanted you to ahve that right because it could not afford the consequences of your actions.
If you have a comment or opinion on this issue (I'm certain everyone has opinions on this issue), then please feel free to either post it or e-mail me at 'gregory.sawisky(at)gmail.com.
UPDATE: Here is an interesting article in the New York Times that comments on this issue.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment