If smoking generates external costs, should smoking simply be outlawed? how about cars that pollute?

Despite the economic loss, the government charges high tobacco taxes, which ultimately generates a certain profit. In addition, tobacco is a drug that does not impede the productivity of the individual.

The auto industry has created devices and even cars that pollute less or pollute to a lesser extent. In addition, cars also generate profit for the government.

Explanation:

There are two types of drugs: those that allow the user a productive life and those that cause physical / psychological damage, reducing the individual to a state of social morbidity and rapid death. The cigarette represents the first group, and the addiction it generates does not immediately incapacitate the worker, taking years before the damage is lethal. But because the effect of addiction is strong and the smoke inhaled is highly carcinogenic, the taxes charged by the government are very high on the merchandise. That is, the government earns in the absurd taxes levied on the tobacco industry and continues to earn the taxes of the chemically dependent but still efficient worker. For this reason, tobacco will never be prohibited.

In addition, currently produced cars have devices to less pollute the environment. There are prototypes of cars that pollute in insignificant quantities and the tendency is that greener cars are designed. Like cigarettes, cars make a big profit for the government.

you would times this by how many days there are in a year 365*400=$146000