Prop 86 perspective: Paying for other people's problems?

David of "The Good Human" blog has an interesting No on Proposition 86 perspective (hefty cigarette tax):

Sure, smoking is bad for you. But should a smoker have to subsidize helping people lose weight, the research of assorted other ailments, and help hospitals become exempt from antitrust laws? Thats just not right. And you that will vote yes on it because its about smoking, your vice might be next years proposition 86. Like fast food? That Big Mac might cost you $7.00 to fund Weight Watchers for others that cant stop eating.

I think lots of taxes (including gas) are already structured this way, but I could be wrong. Would I be willing to pay $7.00 for an extra-taxed Big Mac to help fund programs for out-of-control fast food eaters? I think maybe so, yeah - will have to chew on it (ha!) more.

Maybe I can swing him on Prop 87 in the meantime. ;-)

And GreenLAGirl disagrees - here's her "Yes on 86" perspective.