▶ Your Answer :
The reading passage and the lecture both
talk about raising a tax on cigarettes. The author of reading believes that there
are three kinds of advantage of raising the tax. However, the lecturer rebuffs
the reading passage’s arguments by giving three convincing evidences.
To start with, the lecturer claims that
raising the tax cannot deter young people to smoke. Actually, most young
smokers buy their cigarettes from black markets. If the government raises the tax
on the cigarettes, more smugglers will sell cigarettes to the young people with
cheap prices. Therefore, it is impossible for raising the tax to prevent young
people to smoke. This view is in direct opposition to the reading that says
young people will hardly smoke because they do not afford expensive cigarettes.
On top of that, the lecturer asserts that
raising the tax cannot benefit to the environment. She supports her idea by
suggesting that sales of tobacco will decrease because less people will be likely
to buy it. Consequently, farmers may not be willing to put additional effort to
preserve the environment. However, it is contrary to the reading that suggests
that pollutions from cultivation of tobacco can be repaired by raising the tax.
Finally, the lecturer mentions that more
jobs will disappear if the government increases the tax. Therefore, she argues
that increasing tax cannot relieve poverty. Furthermore, she says it will make
situation worse because many people will lose their jobs. On the other hand,
the author of the reading claims that the poverty will be refined by using
money from the higher tax.
|