Fiscal Death

From Harridanic
Jump to navigation Jump to search

The subsequent deaths caused by taxing safer nicotine products, thus encouraging smokers to either carry on using traditional tobacco products, or encouraging those who were using e-cigarettes back to normal cigarettes since there'd be little economic benefit to continuing to use e-cigs.

What if basic economics tells you that raising a tax on a newer, much safer, product will lead to more consumption of an older much more dangerous product than there would otherwise be? What if the consequence of that tax was to cause more cancer, heart disease and emphysema, and to cause more people to die prematurely? Would you raise that tax? Would you knowingly cause ‘fiscal deaths’?[1]