4 ms·

I support vice taxes, at least insofar as their good intention is concerned - making it hard(er) to engage in the vice, while not prohibiting it. However, cons

by aksss 5y ago

I support vice taxes, at least insofar as their good intention is concerned - making it hard(er) to engage in the vice, while not prohibiting it. However, consumption based taxes (direct or indirect) also disproportionately proscribe lower income people from engaging in such activities. Tax a carton of cigarettes? Worthless if I can just hit the Rez or hop to another town that doesn’t tax. Screwed if you don’t have that kind of mobility. There’s a disturbingly classist nature to them, which gets all the more concerning when it involves fundamental rights - if only the rich can afford to own a gun, get an abortion, speak freely, for example. Additionally, vice taxes at some high point are effectively prohibition. Make alcohol too expensive (directly/indirectly) and bootlegging becomes more popular, with its attendant health risks, crime, etc. Make cocaine too expensive and meth gets more popular. Sell untaxed cigarettes and witness how laws are only enforced with an implicit threat of violence that may become explicit (ask Eric Garner). Tough job, controlling societies.

kennywinker 5y ago
Yup, agree with everything you said. Just want to add that all of those problems are also present with the “byzantine monopolistic middlemen” model.
smegger001 5y ago
all laws are enforced with threat of violence. dont beleive me try not filing your taxes. first you will get nasty letters from the IRS, fallowed by a court summons where you may end up evicted from you home by the sheriff/police try to resist and see what happens ultimately all laws are enforced with the threat of violence its only a matter of how polite the system is to you first
- kennywinker 5y ago
  Yes, but it's vanishingly rare to see crimes like securities fraud enforced with ACTUAL violence. "Vice" laws disproportionately effect marginalized communities, down to the amount of violence used to enforce them.
  - aksss 5y ago
    That's probably because it's vanishingly rare that people physically arrested for securities fraud resist. That doesn't mean the threat's not there.
    - kennywinker 5y ago
      That's probably because it's vanishingly rare for people to be physically arrested for securities fraud.

by aksss 5y ago

kennywinker 5y ago

Yup, agree with everything you said. Just want to add that all of those problems are also present with the “byzantine monopolistic middlemen” model.

smegger001 5y ago

all laws are enforced with threat of violence. dont beleive me try not filing your taxes. first you will get nasty letters from the IRS, fallowed by a court summons where you may end up evicted from you home by the sheriff/police try to resist and see what happens ultimately all laws are enforced with the threat of violence its only a matter of how polite the system is to you first

kennywinker 5y ago
Yes, but it's vanishingly rare to see crimes like securities fraud enforced with ACTUAL violence. "Vice" laws disproportionately effect marginalized communities, down to the amount of violence used to enforce them.
- aksss 5y ago
  That's probably because it's vanishingly rare that people physically arrested for securities fraud resist. That doesn't mean the threat's not there.
  - kennywinker 5y ago
    That's probably because it's vanishingly rare for people to be physically arrested for securities fraud.