Well that’s not true, actually, but those of you who applauded the recent tax hike on cigarettes might not like this latest extension of the concept: raise taxes on alcohol to make it unaffordable. The New Scientist thinks it’s a fine idea. I understand the thinking behind taxing cigarettes out of existence: it’s a cash cow milked from older smokers who can’t quit while simultaneously discouraging kids from starting the filthy habit. Write off one generation, collect more loot, and snuff out smoking (you should pardon the expression) in the next. Of course, states get hooked on revenue just as badly as people get hooked on nicotine so we’ll probably see “start smoking” campaigns in the future, just as we now see adds for the state lottery.
But do the politicos really want to take on drinkers? Everyone seems to despise smoking, even smokers, but most drinkers I know don’t consider themselves social pariahs and probably won’t go along with a movement that characterizes them as such. Personally, I’m all for this kind of punitive taxation because, like the coming ban on incandescent light bulbs, it will bring home to people how oppressive their government has become.