TIL: the smoking age was raised to 21
(media.scored.co)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (29)
sorted by:
How is that supposed to work? We already tried the prohibition of alcohol. Just give the government more power next time?
Australia increases the taxation on cigarettes regularly. It is about AU$40 a packet or so, depending on the brand. That works out to about $1 a cigarette.
All cigarettes are in the same coloured brown packets with regulations on the markings and font on the outside. All the packets and all the cigarettes look the same.
The Australian Taxpayer has to pay for end of life medical care. The government just keeps raising the tax to pay for the two years of cancer treatment and/or heart failure treatment for smokers. The high taxes on cigarettes just about covers the direct costs now.
The opportunity cost of smoking is really high. People roll their own tobacco (which is slightly cheaper, especially if they roll them very thin) or they quit.
I can imagine that it would be a lot harder to enact this strategy in countries that did not have such effective border control.
I have yet to see data that supports a net cost to the government/society for treating smoking related illnesses.
The Google says that smokers live 13 years less on average, which is 13 years less pension, Social Security, etc. Even assuming several years of end of life treatment, had these individuals not smoked, they likely also would have developed one of the numerous old age illnesses a few years later that are also expensive to treat.
Excessive taxation on tobacco is more the government's response to a price inelastic item. Simply put, they know they can tax the shit out of it and people will still buy it. In fact, if everyone stoped smoking it would jack up the government's budget pretty badly. Just look at places that have high gas taxes to fund roads- now that people are switching to electrics and hybrids they're buying a lot less gas and so the government is scrambling to find new ways to pay for it.
You are correct that exact figures are not available. You are right, taxes don't work that way. They are not directly earmarked for use on collection, rather they go into general revenue.
However efforts have been made to study the population wide effects of smoking. Smoking remains the #1 cause of preventable major illness.
From a public health perspective, it is cut and dried. Non smokers can work longer and be more productive, pay more tax and do more volunteer work. Raising taxes and preventing cheap imports forces smokers to pay closer to the actual costs of their addiction. In accounting terms they are required to internalize the costs of their decisions, rather than externalizing the costs to society as a whole.
Here is an article from 2019.
https://www1.racgp.org.au/newsgp/professional/smoking-costs-australia-close-to-137-billion
I'd rather the whole thing where the government pays for medical care just not be a thing. It's not my neighbor's fault if I smoke myself to death, it's my fault.
I remember there being something about how the US was gonna have some strict laws on packaging/labelling, but I have seen very little change over the years. But when I get my imports (from India..? don't recall), they're covered in gore pics. So, certainly other countries are making some attempt.
Even with paying for a neighbors health, Australia has a tax spend of less than 1/2 per citizen than the USA.
The USA has state funding for emergency life-saving care for everyone, even non-citizens. Hospitals are required to give care to emergency patients and then sort out the funding later.
What happens is that people who can't afford preventative care or even timely treatment wait until they are almost dead. Now it is an emergency. They present to hospital, and care is given. It is the most expensive care and the most serious interventions. The hospital provides just enough care that they won't die in the next day or so. They are discharged from hospital. They leave.
They come back. It is an emergency again. More of the most expensive treatment is provided. This continues until they literally die. The bills are sent to the state government.
Right now you are getting the worst of both worlds. Medical care is being provided to everyone, just in a way that is most profitable for hospitals and the worst way for taxpayers.
Canada has found a way around the treatment loop. They just euthanize people who present too often for emergency care.
The way Australia does it allows tax dollars to be spent on GP care, which is less than 1/4 of the cost of hospital care for the services that GPs provide. It allows public health programs, like vaccinations (actual vaccines, not Phizzer "therapeutics") contraception and dental care for grade school kids.
The Aussie system isn't perfect, but it (right now) gives a lot better value than the tax being taken from your wages.
Yes, I agree. That sounds more functional. Haha, but, I mean, it's government spending - of course there's better ways to go about it. I suppose it's strange the US is so bad about it. Can't say I know enough about other countries' histories to explore how they didn't end up with similar issues.
The Canada solution is awful, though. They've been a mess for a while. Terrible message to send their citizens.