The reading passage contends that there are several advantages to increasing tax on tobacco products that can be fully explained by three theories. On the other hand, the lecturer brings up several points that contradict this argument.
To begin with, the lecturer argues that increasing tax on tobacco may not prevent teenagers from buying tobacco products. Since there are black markets, youth can buy illegally from smugglers with higher price than legal retails. Moreover, increasing tax may result in the increase of black markets and since smugglers do not check their IDs, teenagers can easily buy cigarettes. This casts doubt on the reading passage’s claim that increasing tax on tobacco may result in the decrease of young smokers.
Second, the lecturer rebuts that revenue from increased tax cannot provide aid to environment. Since there is no evidence that the government would help to repair environment with their revenue from increased tax, increasing tax may not result in the recovery of the environment. Moreover, if there is an increase in tax, there would be fewer smokers, which means, it will eventually result in the decrease in tax and the government is not able to offer help to the environment. This refutes the reading passage’s assertion that the increasing tax can help to recover the environment.
The last point made by the lecturer is that the revenue by higher tax may not be used to reduce poverty. There are several industries regarding cigarettes such as agriculture, manufacturing and retail. However, if the tax increases, these industries would disappear and there would be more poverty. This counters that the reading passage’s argument that the increase of tax would alleviate poverty.