5 ms·
I feel the article was really complaining about the tax being inefficient than ineffective. The article answers with: yes, they are effective but inefficient be
by esturk 8y ago
I feel the article was really complaining about the tax being inefficient than ineffective. The article answers with: yes, they are effective but inefficient because it's a blunt policy that impacts everyone including people that occasionally travel and drink alcohol.
Often, economic policies don't take into consideration the complexity in a patchwork approach in implementation. Yes, it's more efficient result wise, but it carries over a lot of overhead. An across the board implementation is easier to carry out.
- jopsen 8y agoAnd the claim of low efficiency also seemed to lack some numbers. While an alcohol tax certain hits the occasional drinker, it hits the alcoholic far harder because the alcoholic buys and consumers far more alcohol. That's said, probably still an inefficient and blunt instrument. And yeah, it carries a lot of overhead.