There's a lot of extremely biased assumptions going on here. All of the numbers here are correlations only. No definition is given for what "consistency" mean

There's a lot of extremely biased assumptions going on here. All of the numbers here are correlations only. No definition is given for what "consistency" means. Taxing cigarettes but not alcohol because of health is not, in my opinion, even remotely inconsistent. Lastly, the article starts out asking a number of interesting questions and answers none of them, including the one in the title. If you go digging for statistical confirmation of your biases, you will find it.