I was a smoker for 13 years. I stopped 13 years ago and never looked back. I started late in third year of college. I remember my peers as early as first and second year high school lighting up a stick after stepping out of the school gates as a manifestation of freedom and peer practice.

That is exactly where the cigarette manufacturers want them—to start the habit and vice early, which means a steady stream of revenues from young consumers all through their adulthood and middle age.

Smoking has no redeeming value to me and my fellow smokers. So who benefits from it? Several society segments derive livelihood and income from the production, distribution, sales and marketing of cigarettes. The tobacco farmers, the middlemen traders, the manufacturers, the distributors, advertising and promotion agencies, ultimately the stores, event itinerant vendors who make cigarettes quite easy to buy in our country. The government benefits in terms of substantial taxes paid, especially from the manufacturers.

Hospitals, medical practitioners, drug companies benefit by treating cigarette-related illnesses and medical conditions. Several forms of cancer (lung, throat, mouth), emphysema, heart ailments, among others, are directly caused or is contributed by incessant smoking. Even second-hand smoke affects our health. Memorial services benefit as well for ultimately, severe smokers end up dying earlier than the general population.

What about the costs of smoking? Quantifying health issues amount to a substantial level in terms of loss of health and life among smokers as well as people who are exposed to second-hand smoke. Treatment costs can run to billions of pesos yearly. The emotional and economic dislocation of families of affected smokers also have major impacts, since most smokers are males who are primary breadwinners of their families.

Smoking is not only dangerous to your health, it kills! If you buy life or health insurance coverage and you are a smoker, you will be charged a higher rate in recognition of the higher morbidity and mortality exposures of smokers. This has been established in scientific studies showing direct contribution of smoking to ill health.

We cannot eradicate smoking as a vice but several measures have been adopted through the years to reduce cigarette use. Most buildings and a lot of eating places now are non-smoking. Public utility vehicles as well as airlines do not allow smoking anymore during their trips. Advertisement in the tri-media is no longer allowed to limit capacity of manufacturers to entice the public from starting and maintaining the vice.

The proposed sin tax is also a means to contain consumption by increasing the price so customers will consume less. When I was still smoking, a pack costs around P20, which now costs only about P30, a very minimal increase over a 13-year period. Manufacturers do not mind the lower price since they can recover through sales volume. When I was in Singapore last March, I noticed a pack of cigarettes cost around P175; easily five times the cost here.

The government stands to gain higher income tax levels, which it plans to use primarily for enhancing hospital and health services as well as for helping tobacco farmers look for alternative crops to plant.

The common good perspective shows the way for us to go ahead with higher sin taxes not only for cigarettes but also for alcohol products and gambling, to help contain their consumption and their negative impact on the general population. This will also address concerns of other stakeholders regarding this issue.

The author teaches at the De La Salle University Ramon del Rosario College of Business. He welcomes comments at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .