Why would public health practitioners like Dr. Glantz and his colleagues support an action that will end the great electronic cigarette experiment and permanently hand the entire cigarette market over to Big Tobacco?

Sin taxes are normally applied to a product or service that society feels that it sets back the population as a whole. Some examples of sin taxes include gambling, alcohol, tobacco cigarettes, soft drinks, fast food, and etc. The logic behind sin taxes is these product and services are causing more harm to the general public than good and one of the arguments are the tax is to levy/off set health and medical costs generated by these sin products. Do they actually Not really. Generally speaking sin taxes are applied to a product that is much greater than your average sales tax. Sin taxes differ by state by some states do have a much higher than others. For example a pack of cigarettes in South Carolina is less than $5 a pack, in Arizona however you’re looking at more than $10 per pack.

Sure, I understand that it is a lot more politically advantageous to go after smokers than it is to go after corporations and the wealthiest citizens. But it is also uncourageous. And it is certainly not leadership. Nor does it show vision.

LAST：hot sale SGL electronic cigarette high quality product electronic cigarette |NEXT：ce5 clean atomizer for ego ce5 starter kit ego ce5 kit