Governments should not discourage smoking other than making its risks widely known. Otherwise, they would interfere with consumers freedom of choice. First, many smokers are unaware of their risks, or they simply underestimate or minimize the personal relevance of those risks, even in high-income societies where the risks are relatively widely known. Third, smoking imposes costs on non-smokers. For these reasons, the choice to smoke may differ from the choice to buy other consumer goods and governments may consider interventions justified.
Smokers always bear the costs of their consumption choices.
Not necessarily so. They do impose certain costs on non-smokers. The evident costs include health damage, nuisance and irritation from exposure to environmental tobacco smoke. If healthcare is paid for to some extent by the public sector, smokers will thus impose their costs on others. Tobacco control will result in permanent job losses for an economy. .