Yes that’s right.
Further proof is the anti-smoking ads the government makes the tobacco people run.

No, The costs to the health care system from alcohol and tobacco use are huge. The idea is if you’re using tobacco and/or alcohol, a tax is levied which will contribute to offsetting the costs. That a tax may also deter use is productive as well.

Does the government want people smoking more and drinking more so revenue goes up? Why not? Why don’t we see billboards advertising Marlboro and Jack Daniels paid for by government? Because revenue is secondary to the fact that they want to punish people for using those products. Otherwise they’d push those products to increase revenue.

Therefore it’s a fine.

Wrong. The costs to the health care system from alcohol and tobacco use are huge – also one of the most important reasons for having taxes on the product.

“Those who choose to smoke and drink liquor pay a lot of extra tax, for instance. The logic behind that tax is those users incur more expense for the rest of us through higher medical bills for themselves and innocent victims of second hand smoke, drunk driving issues, drunken violence involving the police, etc.”

The examples of alcohol and cigarette taxes are flawed because the use of taxes on those products isn’t to pay for additional costs so much as to deter their use. A financial penalty to deter someone from doing something is better described as a fine instead of a tax. People who smoke or drink aren’t being taxed, but being fined for smoking and drinking.

Another example is the speeding ticket. A speeding ticket is called a fine, but we all know that speed traps have evolved into revenue generators for localities. In this case the ticket has ceased to be a fine and is now a tax.

When government wants to deter you from doing something through a financial penalty it should be called a fine, and when it uses a charge to balance the books it should be called a tax.

Yeah, but four years ago was all political pandering.
Obama didn’t believe the things he was saying, he just said it to get elected.
Barry has nothing and had nothing.
It was a mistake electing him President.

“The high court’s ruling leaves in place 21 tax increases in the health care law costing more than $675 billion over the next 10 years, according to the House Ways and Means Committee. Of those, 12 tax hikes would affect families earning less than $250,000 per year, the panel said, including a “Cadillac tax” on high-cost insurance plans, a tax on insurance providers and an excise tax on medical-device manufacturers.

“This is a clear violation of the president’s pledge to avoid tax hikes on low- and middle-income taxpayers,” said a statement from the panel . . . On the campaign trail four years ago and since taking office, Mr. Obama has been fond of saying that middle-class families will not see their taxes rise “a single dime” under his leadership.”

And that’s where we’ve come off the rails. This isn’t about tax deductions, this is about people being subjected to jail time for NOT doing something the government wants them to do. As soon as government decides that NOT doing something affects someone else, then they’ve gone from taxing activity to taxing inactivity, and if you don’t participate and don’t pay the tax/fee then it’s off to jail you go.

That’s a world of difference from a tax deduction