5 ms·

The alcohol industry is very comfortable with age limits. The more the better (e.g. beer and wine at 18 but liquor at 21). The reason is that they understand t

The alcohol industry is very comfortable with age limits. The more the better (e.g. beer and wine at 18 but liquor at 21). The reason is that they understand that this enshrines alcohol as a maturity symbol. It ensures that you're seen as immature for not drinking. An alcohol lobbying group around here made posters with a huge foaming glass of beer and the text "over 18? Prove it!". Nominally it was about showing ID, but I think youth got the intended message, and it wasn't about showing ID. Alcohol advertising is forbidden, but profit finds a way. I see no reason to think energy drink restrictions will be different.

fluoridation 1y ago
So what are you saying? That there should be no marketing, no alcohol, or no age restrictions?
- vintermann 1y ago
  I think there should be as few different age limits as possible. Put everything at 18, or possibly 16. If there's something you really think there's good reason to have different age limits on, implement it differently (e.g, say that you can only take a driver's license two years after you started driving lessons, and let the limit for taking driving lessons be at the one age limit.) The exact age of majority is largely arbitrary. Fine-masked age limits suggests it's not. Also, one of the reasons we have an age of majority is that kids are easy to manipulate. Age limits and the carrot of "maturity" can be abused to do just that, manipulate kids. I think we should discourage it. Things which have no possible cachet as a maturity symbol can still have other age limits if they really must (e.g, the age at which you can be decide which of your parents to live with if they're divorced is usually well below the age of majority, and that's fine). As for alcohol, I think there should be harsh limits on private profit. I'd let you drink whatever you want, but not profit from whatever you want. Redistribute profits from alcohol sales (and also gambling, tobacco and other things where most of the profit comes from self-destructive use) in such a way that no one has an incentive to sell one more unit. Then the problems will take care of themselves, is my belief. Also, I think profit restrictions are much more palatable to the actual public than restrictions on alcohol itself, which people often chafe at. This makes profit restrictions more democratically sustainable.

fluoridation 1y ago

So what are you saying? That there should be no marketing, no alcohol, or no age restrictions?

vintermann 1y ago
I think there should be as few different age limits as possible. Put everything at 18, or possibly 16. If there's something you really think there's good reason to have different age limits on, implement it differently (e.g, say that you can only take a driver's license two years after you started driving lessons, and let the limit for taking driving lessons be at the one age limit.) The exact age of majority is largely arbitrary. Fine-masked age limits suggests it's not. Also, one of the reasons we have an age of majority is that kids are easy to manipulate. Age limits and the carrot of "maturity" can be abused to do just that, manipulate kids. I think we should discourage it. Things which have no possible cachet as a maturity symbol can still have other age limits if they really must (e.g, the age at which you can be decide which of your parents to live with if they're divorced is usually well below the age of majority, and that's fine). As for alcohol, I think there should be harsh limits on private profit. I'd let you drink whatever you want, but not profit from whatever you want. Redistribute profits from alcohol sales (and also gambling, tobacco and other things where most of the profit comes from self-destructive use) in such a way that no one has an incentive to sell one more unit. Then the problems will take care of themselves, is my belief. Also, I think profit restrictions are much more palatable to the actual public than restrictions on alcohol itself, which people often chafe at. This makes profit restrictions more democratically sustainable.