Will raising cigarette prices make teenagers smoke less?

Not supported! And insist on opposing it!

After carefully reading the representatives’ proposals several times, I will first look at the following points in the motions:

The first reason for price increase: The starting point is to protect the physical and mental health of young people.

As far as I know, the first way for children to obtain cigarettes is to steal from their parents, and the second is to buy "zero cigarettes" (unscrupulous merchants will open a box of cigarettes and sell them "zero" to students)! In addition, most of today’s children have enough extra money to buy a pack of cigarettes for one or several people!

In this way, it seems that the purpose of protecting young people has nothing to do with the price of tobacco!

So, this proposal either has other ulterior motives, or there is no investigation and research at all, and there is no case, and it is just a random discussion!

The second reason for price increase: taxation practices and PK foreign experience.

First of all, I question where the so-called "special funds" are used! It is not clearly stated! If the public can accept it, we will raise all hands to support it!

Secondly, as I said before, our country’s national conditions are no better than those abroad. Students can obtain cigarettes “easily” and it has nothing to do with the price of tobacco.

Thirdly, it seems that there are many contradictions in whether the special tax on tobacco is to collect a "heavy tax" on household management and consumption, or to protect young people!

Finally, our country’s tobacco tax is far from being competitive with foreign countries. We must catch up and surpass it. Is it suitable for our country’s national conditions?

If nothing else, how much everyone can take in and let go, how much can we do! This doesn't count. I'm wondering, this means, have you graduated from elementary school? Was your math taught by a physical education teacher? !

The third reason for price increase: More representatives talk about their experience and support plans.

To borrow the words of Teacher Li: The price of tobacco has increased to the same level as drugs! Do teenagers try drugs? Although the views are extreme, it shows that our feelings towards the representatives and their proposals should be to the point of "outraging"!

As mentioned earlier, the "possible ulterior nature" of the reasons for raising tobacco "high prices", the "childishness of the algorithm", and the "numerous supports" of this third one have always made me doubt: the representatives have Have you ever seen our country’s teenagers? Do you know whether they don’t live on “Mars”, or are the representatives living on “Mars”? !

The following is a personal speculation (whether correct or not, it can be deduced anyway):

1. The high "price" of tobacco is suspected of being selfish by the main industry!

There is a swarm of suggestions and support, and they don’t mention our country’s national conditions at all. It is outrageous to point to the first excuse: to protect the health of young people!

2. The algorithm is so naive that it makes people laugh!

The per capita income in developed countries is 10,000, while ours may be 5,000. The minuends are very different, but the final difference must be close to the same!

Finally, make an inappropriate assumption! ! ! ! ! ! If these people made a smog proposal, would it be like this:

1. In order to protect young people, increase various taxes on manufacturers that may emit pollution, so that if they produce less, there will be less natural pollution?

2. Regardless of national conditions, unscrupulously PK the experience of developed countries in controlling smog!

For example, in the United Kingdom in the 1970s, due to serious industrial pollution in London, the smog could not be cleared for a long time. In the end, many lives, including animals, plants, and people, were ruthlessly taken away. So does it also need to be calculated as a proportion, how many people will die in our country?

Hey, but in short, we all have good hopes and wishes that the discussion will ultimately belong. I hope that when representatives prepare plans and participate in discussions, although different groups focus on different people's livelihood issues, it is best to be close to reality, whether right or wrong. Otherwise, what do you think of our sacred Two Sessions and the sacred rights of representatives of the Two Sessions? Already? ! !