The Instigator
Motab
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
PrixieAnneRiddle
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Would banning smoking in public places lower healthcare costs in a positive way ?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/7/2013 Category: Health
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,262 times Debate No: 32195
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

Motab

Con

If the government wants to save money, they should not be trying to reduce smoking levels, since smokers are the source of a great deal of tax income. While the NHS might spend some of their money on smokers (whose health issues may or may not be directly to their smoking habit), the government receives much more money from the taxes paid on cigarettes.
PrixieAnneRiddle

Pro

Since the topic did not specify a country, my argument shall be based on the United States.

24% of the Fiscal Year Budget of the US is dedicated to Health care and of that 24%, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said that smokers cost the country $96 billion a year in direct health care costs, and an additional $97 billion a year in lost productivity. Also, a White House statement echoed the argument by contending that tobacco use "accounts for over a $100 billion annually in financial costs to the economy." By banning smoking in public places will not only help lower the health care cost of those who smoke and those who accidentally inhale the smoke.

In fact, smokers die some 10 years earlier than non smokers, according to the CDC, and those premature deaths provide a savings to Medicare, Social Security, private pensions and other programs. Vanderbilt University economist Kip Viscusi studied the net costs of smoking-related spending and savings and found that for every pack of cigarettes smoked, the country reaps a net cost savings of 32 cents. Although it is not a good thing that smoking kills, we must always take into account all effects, may they be good or bad.

In line with banning smoking in public places, a bill has been passed that increases the cost of cigarettes and tobacco. The added tax can then possibly be added to the health care budget thereby lowering the health care costs.
Debate Round No. 1
Motab

Con

Motab forfeited this round.
PrixieAnneRiddle

Pro

Any lowering in the health care costs can be constituted in a positive way. Lower health care cost means lowering in the health care budget meaning additional money to spend on other things that will benefit the country and its people in other ways.

Also if public smoking was banned, not only will it help the smokers and non smokers alike but will also help the environment.
Debate Round No. 2
Motab

Con

Motab forfeited this round.
PrixieAnneRiddle

Pro

There are other ways for the government to receive money. Taxes paid on cigarettes are not really that much. It is better to be safe than to be sorry. It is better to stop the cause rather than wait for the effect. If smoking was banned in public places, health care costs would lower because there would be less cases to distribute the budget.

In conclusion, banning smoking in public places would in fact lower health care costs in a positive way.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.