7 ms·

I think something important to note here is that most people who reduce or eliminate alcohol from their lives do it because THEY want to, not because the govern

I think something important to note here is that most people who reduce or eliminate alcohol from their lives do it because THEY want to, not because the government tells them to, or makes it harder/more expensive to consume. Taxes, no alcohol in supermarkets, etc...seems rather misguided...

ethanbond 3y ago
This is rather circular: government doesn’t step in to reduce consumption -> everyone who reduces consumption does so of their own volition -> therefore government shouldn’t step in to reduce consumption We know that taxes have a very strong positive effect on cigarette use, for example.
- TheIronMark 3y ago
  Don't taxes on things like cigarettes and sodas disproportionally affect lower-income folks? Intended or not, it comes off as a bit classist. I don't have a better solution, tbh.
  - ethanbond 3y ago
    Virtually anything will affect people of different wealth levels differently. Are we to accept that we just shouldn't mitigate literally any problem on the planet until we first equalize wealth across the board?
  - lrvick 3y ago
    Low income is heavily linked with depression, and alcohol tends to amplify and prolong depression, which makes it that much harder to increase income. It is a vicious cycle I have known many people unable to escape. There is an argument to be made for making alcohol harder to access for younger or lower income people. This logic is a big reason why I personally avoided all recreational substances including alcohol until I felt very happy and stable in my career and trajectory in life, at 25. I advise everyone to abstain from any recreational substances at least until they are at cruising altitude in life, whenever and whatever that means for them. Occasional recreational substances are for happy and stable times, if at all.
  - darkr 3y ago
    It does; but (at least in the UK) smoking and obesity are not only the two largest contributors to early deaths, but also by far the largest contributors to inequality of life expectancy between socioeconomic groups.
adasdasdas 3y ago
It works for cigarettes. [0]: https://web.stanford.edu/~jhain/Paper/JASA2010.pdf https://web.stanford.edu/~jhain/Paper/JASA2010.pdf
voz_ 3y ago
A gentle but firm regulatory hand does wonders. Seatbelts, safety standards, they save lives. One only needs to look at the stigma created around cigarettes, often through strong policy, to see that it can be wholly effective. A government isn’t some faceless monster entity like the banks in The Grapes of Wrath. They are you and I, and it seems more than okay to come together to write laws for the greater good of all.
mhardcastle 3y ago
People respond to incentives, why wouldn't they respond to taxes on alcohol? "Public policies affecting the price of alcoholic beverages have significant effects on alcohol-related disease and injury rates. Our results suggest that doubling the alcohol tax would reduce alcohol-related mortality by an average of 35%, traffic crash deaths by 11%, sexually transmitted disease by 6%, violence by 2%, and crime by 1.4%." From https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2951962/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2951962/

ethanbond 3y ago

This is rather circular: government doesn’t step in to reduce consumption -> everyone who reduces consumption does so of their own volition -> therefore government shouldn’t step in to reduce consumption We know that taxes have a very strong positive effect on cigarette use, for example.

TheIronMark 3y ago
Don't taxes on things like cigarettes and sodas disproportionally affect lower-income folks? Intended or not, it comes off as a bit classist. I don't have a better solution, tbh.
- ethanbond 3y ago
  Virtually anything will affect people of different wealth levels differently. Are we to accept that we just shouldn't mitigate literally any problem on the planet until we first equalize wealth across the board?
- lrvick 3y ago
  Low income is heavily linked with depression, and alcohol tends to amplify and prolong depression, which makes it that much harder to increase income. It is a vicious cycle I have known many people unable to escape. There is an argument to be made for making alcohol harder to access for younger or lower income people. This logic is a big reason why I personally avoided all recreational substances including alcohol until I felt very happy and stable in my career and trajectory in life, at 25. I advise everyone to abstain from any recreational substances at least until they are at cruising altitude in life, whenever and whatever that means for them. Occasional recreational substances are for happy and stable times, if at all.
- darkr 3y ago
  It does; but (at least in the UK) smoking and obesity are not only the two largest contributors to early deaths, but also by far the largest contributors to inequality of life expectancy between socioeconomic groups.

adasdasdas 3y ago

It works for cigarettes. [0]: https://web.stanford.edu/~jhain/Paper/JASA2010.pdf https://web.stanford.edu/~jhain/Paper/JASA2010.pdf

voz_ 3y ago

A gentle but firm regulatory hand does wonders. Seatbelts, safety standards, they save lives. One only needs to look at the stigma created around cigarettes, often through strong policy, to see that it can be wholly effective. A government isn’t some faceless monster entity like the banks in The Grapes of Wrath. They are you and I, and it seems more than okay to come together to write laws for the greater good of all.

mhardcastle 3y ago

People respond to incentives, why wouldn't they respond to taxes on alcohol? "Public policies affecting the price of alcoholic beverages have significant effects on alcohol-related disease and injury rates. Our results suggest that doubling the alcohol tax would reduce alcohol-related mortality by an average of 35%, traffic crash deaths by 11%, sexually transmitted disease by 6%, violence by 2%, and crime by 1.4%." From https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2951962/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2951962/