The reading passage argues that increasing tax on tobacco has many
advantages. On the other hand, the speaker contradicts this argument with three
reasons.
First, the speaker argues that increasing the tax won’t help young
people to smoke less. Speaker admits that if the tax is raised the price of
tobacco will raised too. However, there is a study that when the tobacco’s
price is raised, smugglers who sell tobacco cheaply become active. So even
though teens have less money, they will buy tobacco cheaply through a black
market. This casts doubt on reading passage’s argument that the young people,
who relatively have less money than the older, will smoke lesser due to the
high tobacco price.
Also, the speaker contends that government’s fund for environment can’t
be added through increasing tobacco tax. The price of tobacco will get higher
if the tax is raised, then fewer people will buy tobacco than before. As a
result, overall tax might be less than before. This refutes the reading
passage’s claim that government can build a fund for repairing damaged environment
due to tobacco industry through revenue from the increased tobacco tax.
The final point made by the lecturer is that high tobacco tax will lead
the poverty problem severe. Tobacco industry creates job in various fields,
such as agricultural field and manufacturing field. If government impose high
tax, the job will cut down than before. Overall, the number of unemployed and
the poor will increase. This contradicts the reading passage’s argument that
government can support the poor with the increased tobacco tax.
|