3 ms·

Those evil robber barons, directly colluding to get me to drink IPAs with my friends after work! The evil! The horror!

moate 8y ago
Yes. Literally that. You can't advertise cigarettes on TV. You can't even have a business bank account if you run a medical marijuana dispensary. But somehow you can advertise alcohol on network television during prime time. Alcohol related deaths are the 3rd highest preventable form of death in the US. It's great that you can responsibly enjoy an IPA with your friends. Pretending it's only fun and good times on the larger scale is naive at best.
- microcolonel 8y ago
  > Alcohol related deaths are the 3rd highest preventable form of death in the US. It is not your right to choose what others do with their life. When it's abortion, some people are all "her body, her choice!", and when it's alcohol or cigarettes, it's "her body, our choice!". Why do you think the sanctity of somebody's own life is yours to weigh against the risks of alcoholism or a tobacco habit, or a taste for soda?
  - moate 8y ago
    And if they want to do that, they can. Nobody is removing your ability to drink. You're taxing it more heavily because this specific choice results in societal problems that everyone else has to clean up. You'll notice I'm not calling for a ban on alcohol sales. You still have the right to buy it. But it's being priced in a way that reflects the extra burden you put on the rest of us with your choices. This hypothetical tax is meant to represent my desire not to have to deal with the consequences of your choices.
    - microcolonel 8y ago
      > And if they want to do that, they can. Nobody is removing your ability to drink. You're taxing it more heavily because this specific choice results in societal problems that everyone else has to clean up. Apply the same argument to healthcare. The main difference is that you think that you have the right to tell people what's good for them. > This hypothetical tax is meant to represent my desire not to have to deal with the consequences of your choices. If a man and his son crack a couple beers by the fire in Wyoming, why should their private activities be any of your business? Why impose your will more on the poor than on the middle class or the rich? Your desires are not relevant to the right of ordinary Americans to buy and sell alcohol to and from the willing, just as they are irrelevant to the right of a single mother to raise her own son, or for teenagers to get pregnant; it's just none of your business what people do once you've said your piece, no matter what you think of the risk that they might tend to be more likely to behave in a way you dislike.

Yes. Literally that. You can't advertise cigarettes on TV. You can't even have a business bank account if you run a medical marijuana dispensary. But somehow you can advertise alcohol on network television during prime time. Alcohol related deaths are the 3rd highest preventable form of death in the US. It's great that you can responsibly enjoy an IPA with your friends. Pretending it's only fun and good times on the larger scale is naive at best.

microcolonel 8y ago
> Alcohol related deaths are the 3rd highest preventable form of death in the US. It is not your right to choose what others do with their life. When it's abortion, some people are all "her body, her choice!", and when it's alcohol or cigarettes, it's "her body, our choice!". Why do you think the sanctity of somebody's own life is yours to weigh against the risks of alcoholism or a tobacco habit, or a taste for soda?
- moate 8y ago
  And if they want to do that, they can. Nobody is removing your ability to drink. You're taxing it more heavily because this specific choice results in societal problems that everyone else has to clean up. You'll notice I'm not calling for a ban on alcohol sales. You still have the right to buy it. But it's being priced in a way that reflects the extra burden you put on the rest of us with your choices. This hypothetical tax is meant to represent my desire not to have to deal with the consequences of your choices.
  - microcolonel 8y ago
    > And if they want to do that, they can. Nobody is removing your ability to drink. You're taxing it more heavily because this specific choice results in societal problems that everyone else has to clean up. Apply the same argument to healthcare. The main difference is that you think that you have the right to tell people what's good for them. > This hypothetical tax is meant to represent my desire not to have to deal with the consequences of your choices. If a man and his son crack a couple beers by the fire in Wyoming, why should their private activities be any of your business? Why impose your will more on the poor than on the middle class or the rich? Your desires are not relevant to the right of ordinary Americans to buy and sell alcohol to and from the willing, just as they are irrelevant to the right of a single mother to raise her own son, or for teenagers to get pregnant; it's just none of your business what people do once you've said your piece, no matter what you think of the risk that they might tend to be more likely to behave in a way you dislike.