
cigarettes-bw
Mr. Snider writes that progressives turn good intentions into bad policies when advocating for the elimination of tobacco sales to the next generation of people here in Newton.
Mr. Snider fails to address the larger issues of nicotine addiction and health insurance costs in his diatribe against petty tyrants.
Would he agree that tobacco users pay higher premiums to cover the additional costs of their health care that the real petty tyrants (health insurance CEOs) already pass to the rest of us?
Would Mr. Snider agree that nicotine users are ineligible for coverage for related illnesses given their individual liberty to choose to use tobacco?
What about the children of smokers, who, like myself, had no choice but to be exposed to secondhand smoke and to develop our own addictions? Is that a personal choice the “petty tyrants” should blame a child for? Given that nicotine is among the most addictive substances on the planet, where does Mr. Snider suggest the intersection of individual liberty and public good meet, especially for those who had no choice?
Reactionary diatribes don’t solve problems durably. I hope Newton residents consider the complexities necessary to craft policy that works.
Fran Kuehn
Newtonville