Rewrite critical response essay
There has been some debate recently about whether smoking should be banned. Smoking has been considered a controversial issue recently due to many negative effects bring from it. Deborah Arnott, in her article “Legislation to ban tobacco will save thousands of lives” (Guardian, September 2009) suggest that smoking should be banned in all public places and in private as well. While David Hockney ‘s article, entitled “ The anti – smoking bigots should butt out “ (The Guardian Online, September 2008) takes the opposite view : smoking should not be banned . This essay will critically respond to both of these articles. Arnott argues that the cost of social problems from tobacco are “far to great”. In fact, the system of public health has to pay a big amount of money , “millions of pounds” to cover sickness result from the harmful effects of smoking. And the government is the person who must cover and save their burgher’s health in any unsafe situation. Moreover, she claims that the exorbitant money spend for covering cigarette’s victims is uncontrollable by government. In contrast, Hockney asserts that smokers have to pay a lot of high tariff, which belongs to government’s revenue. Thus, there is no evidence to show that smokers “cost” the NHS money from their smoking. In fact, if younger smokers die, the government will not spend anymore for them. Also, the government does not need to spend big amount of money to treat health problems from cigarette. While both authors present plausible arguments, those of Arnott are more convincing. It seems to be more reasonable that saving people health is the responsibility of government to develop society and economy. In fact, the standard of living in a...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document