NJ should not impose a 'sin tax' on e-cigarettes:

[Kent C]

NJ should not impose a 'sin tax' on e-cigarettes: Editorial | NJ.com

"Studies show this is at least as effective as nicotine patches in helping people quit smoking — the single largest cause of preventable death in our country, killing about 480,000 people a year.

"So there’s a real, life-saving benefit to e-cigarettes, which may greatly outweigh any risks. If these gadgets are not known to be an enemy to public health, and may in fact be hugely beneficial, why tax them like cigarettes?"

 

[LDS714]

"Our main concern is public health,"

Let's run that through my truth detector©...

Our main concern [needs to appear as though it] is public health [and not actually the adverse impact on our ready cash to buy votes with].

There, see? They just forgot to include a couple of letters.

 

[Uma]

Wonderful article!!

 

[kenbu]

hehehe.... I lived in Hudson County for a short time and find it amusing that those criminals would even dare to judge the "sins" of their constituents.

 

[Little White Cloud]

You see, there is a BIG difference between vaping and patches and gum. One we can get for ourselves and the others are made by Big Pharma.

 

[rothenbj]

A very good editorial.

 

[Roger_Lafayette]

Star Ledger is probably one of the very few Amercan mainstream big city (well, relatively) papers that's been consistently fair to us. Although the Union-trib out in San Diego is not bad at all. Gotta watch the byline on that site NJ.com - because they also carry the horrid SJ Times which is one of the most anti-vaping papers around. Ironic that they both get posted to the same site and that Woodbury and Newark are just a short hour-and-change apart on the TPK.