▶ Topic : The lecturer contends that campaign raising a tax on tabacco will be ineffective. This contradicts the reading passage's claim that there are several benefits to increasing tax.
First, the lecturer maintains that higher cigarette tax would not be deterrent to young people. The ability of black market are so strong that increased tax can not prevent young people from starting cigarettes. According to a study, young people are more likely to buy some cigarettes from the illegal market, which means that the frequency of smuggling will probably upsurge. They even never try to check buyer's ID card and this makes young people obtain cigarettes more easily. This casts doubt on the reading passage's claim that raising the tax on cigarettes will reduce the number of young people who start to smoke. Next, the lecturer asserts that it is doubtful that increased tax on cigarettes would benefit the environment. This is because the higher price of cigarettes discourages people to buy them and overall tax revenue will decline. Therefore, the government can not make any capital to recover the farmland damaged by harsh cultivation. As a result, it would not provide additional revenue for restoring the environment. This disagrees with the reading passages's claim that a higher tax will help undo the environmental harm by growing tabacco. Finally, the lecturer insists that a higher tax on cigarette will not alleviate poverty. In fact, There are already a number of jobs related to tabacco industry, such as agriculture, manufacture and retail. If the tax on cigarettes were raised, these would disappear and people would be also out of their work. Consequentially, the situation will be worse than before. This refutes the reading passage's claim that revenue made by increased tax on tabacco can be used to mitigate poverty.
lecturer from reading인지 listening인지 쓰지 않으면 읽는 사람은 모릅니다. 통합형은 두 주장을 비교하는 것이 가장 큰 주인만큼, 누가 무슨 말을 했는지 더 정확하게 쓸 수 있도록 해주세요. 어휘는 약간 기본적입니다. 조금 더 paraphrase해서 다양한 표현 쓸 수 있도록 했다면 주장을 이해할 때 더 좋았을 것 같아요. |