Why charging more for alcohol could save lives
Seattle – In recent years, more and more teenage kids have been exposed to drinking and driving under the influence, not to mention the fact that people die everyday from cirrhosis and cancer due to abusive alcoholism. In order to prevent this, many state legislatures have considered taking measures such as increasing the price and taxes on alcohol in order to deter the younger generation from buying so much of it.
In particular, a 1983 study in Alaska showed that after some measures were taken in order to raise the taxes on beer, wine and liquor, there was a 29% drop in alcohol related deaths and diseases. The state legislature did the same thing in 2002, resulting in an 11% lower rate of alcohol related deaths. With respect to taxes, the Alaskan legislature increased the tax on beer in 1983 from 0.46 to 0.63, and again to 1.20 in 2002. Finland has also conducted such a study recently, showing increased arrests and deaths relating to alcohol after they lowered their tax nearly 44%.
“The findings are quite astounding. A simple adjustment of the tax rate resulted in a substantial drop in the death rate,” said Alexander C. Wagenaar, PhD, with the University of Florida College of Medicine.
The reasons behind this is rather simple. Throughout history, if prices have increased on items such as alcoholic beverages or tobacco products, the number of people buying them will drop. This in effect, leads to a drop in cancer, cirrhosis, and other alcoholic or tobacco related disease. Studies also show that this method is much more effective than any campaigns or programs.
Even so, many people maintain that raising the alcohol tax levels are only ploys for the state and federal governments to earn more money. They claim that even if the price on alcohol was raised by such an incremental amount, an alcoholic who is soon to drink himself to death isn’t really going to care. This doesn’t really matter.
“The bottom line is that when we see an intervention that can reduce the death rate of any chronic disease such as cancer or heart disease by a few percent across the whole population, we consider it an important success. In this case, the death rate for alcohol-related diseases dropped suddenly by at least 11 percent and at minimal cost,” Wagenaar said.
“Historical evidence shows, raising the tax on alcohol would negatively impact the economy,” said Harry Wile, executive director of the American Beverage Licensees (ABL), which represents retailers of beer, wine and spirits. “Increasing the tax on alcohol could lead to diminishing returns for the government if responsible, moderate consumers slow down their consumption.”
The truth is, the government can’t really control what people do. They can only raise awareness by taking such measures so as to protect the general health of the public. And even if those few percentages of alcoholics keep drinking, many more people will refrain from buying so much alcohol, which could potentially save many more lives each year (such as teenagers).
I found your blog on google and read a few of your other posts. I just added you to my Google News Reader. Keep up the good work. Look forward to reading more from you in the future.
How stupid is this IDEA?
Why should LEGAL adults have to pay more?
IT IS ILLEGAL FOR TEENS TO POSSESS ALCOHOL, DRINK ALCOHOL OR BUY ALCOHOL.
It is also against the law to sell alcohol to anyone under the age of 21.
Why not just enforce the existing LAW?
Why allow the Government to take more money in taxes, when they have proven to be the worst stewards of our hard earned money?
And I bet if you raised the tax to 4000% people would brew their own. I am sick to death of people using studies to prove it is better to pay more in taxes!! In a brazen attempt to STEAL what normally sane citizens will refuse to pay, study after study is rolled out to dupe taxpayers into opening their wallets! Enough already!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
you know
It occurs to me that the world is filled with fools who think that imposing surcharges
somehow imposes a morality on the people who surround them. Let the State and federal authorities squeeze people on sin taxes. I know how to brew beer, and really, its not that much more difficult to make moonshine, so i will just avoid the sin taxes. The resources to make alcohol are readily available, so you would have to greatly increase the taxes on sugar, hops and yeast as well. Good luck with that
yeesh,,,
El-George-O clearly does not understand how taxes reflect public policy – for bad or for good. All taxpayers end up paying the tab for individuals’ poor choices.
For example, under Bush, those who owned gas guzzlers got tax breaks. A better policy would be just the opposite – give tax breaks to those who own environmentally responsible cars.
Similarly, those who want to drink and smoke – fine – be willing to pay more in taxes. Taxpayers pay for the results of drinking and smoking; those who drink and smoke should pay more in taxes.
I am a smoker, and am try ing (again) to quit. Why should taxpayers pay for medicare, for example, if I end up with lung cancer? Because we live in a civilized society. However, if I continue to smoke , I should pay more taxes .
Wish me luck…
Raising the taxes on any arbitrary item will reduce the purchased quantity of said arbitrary item.
That said, the reason teens are always getting into trouble is that the nanny state will not allow parents to raise their children. Saying “no” damages their self esteem. The nanny state will not allow educators to give a child a failing mark for failing to learn material, that might also damage their self esteem.
I have a question… won’t starving to death in the street also damage their self esteem? When they are 21 and homeless due to alcoholism and drug addiction, all stemming from an overall lack of discipline during their juvenile years, won’t that make them feel “bad” about themselves.
What’s next? Raise the prices of Fast Food to save lives? Like “Tax Economics” said, you raise the price on anything and you sell less of it….it’s simple math. This isn’t a solution to solve death by alcohol, they’re simply putting a band-aid on it.
Why not remove all sin taxes, increase consumption of alcohol and tobacco, increase the early death rate and save Social Security and Medicare all in one stroke, pun intended.
Buy Grandma a carton of Lucky Strikes, a bottle of Jack Daniels and a Big Mac for Christmas. Ho! Ho! Ho!