Authors of the binge-drinking study concluded that public health and law enforcement measures are needed to reverse current trends, including increasing alcohol excise taxes, enforcing the minimum drinking age and adding more community programs aimed at education
Yeah, punish the people that buy a bottle of wine for a dinner party. Punish those that have the sense (yours truly) that decide to drink too much and NOT drive, beat my wife, shoot my neighbor, etc. All the while smoking an overtaxed LEGAL product.
Other than the Rep from SD, who’s the last high income person you’ve seen hit for any offense due to alcohol?!? We’ve all seen “Cops”, we know the likely candidate of an alcohol induced crime is the “lower tiered” among us.
Yet, the same liberals (yeah I said it) that tell us the rich must pay and all tax cuts benefit them, don’t have to pay these taxes. Then they turn around and say it’s a “sin tax” and justify it that way. :rolleyes:
Look, face facts and realize that most whom smoke and drink don’t have enough money in the bank to vote Democrat (how ya doing Ms Streisand?)
Quit hammering these people! They have more to worry about than what a fucking (had to get that in) legislator has up his or her ass that day. These are legal products. Don’t like it? Ban it. You have the power to tax it and keep raising the rates, so don’t give me shit about how you can’t make it illegal.
I agree the poor are massively exploited for votes, but to say you’re trying to “help” them by raising taxes on their LEGAL escapism, and then turn around and say you want to help them escape the “rishest 2%” tax cut seems a little disingenuous(sp?)
Anyone who buys alcoholic beverages will have to pay the tax. How are “liberals” not paying it?
<hijack>They sure as hell don’t have money enough in the bank to vote Republican!
Funny how Republicans are so keen to roll back taxes on capital gains and dividends and reduce the percentage rates for the upper brackets of the Federal income tax, but never discuss cutting FICA or Social Security taxes. Guess which set of taxes disprooprtionately affects lower-income people?</hijack>
You WANT to go back to Prohibition? Banning alcohol has been tried; it doesn’t work. Taxing it to make it more expensive might reduce consumption a bit; at the least, it increases the revenues the government has available to deal with alcohol-related social problems and health problems.
Who said the proposed increase on the alcohol excise tax is intended to “help” the poor? It’s intended to reduce alcohol consumption by increasing the cost of a bottle of booze, that’s all.
Well, despite duffer’s gruff delivery, there is a real life correlation between the lower socio-economic strata and advanced substance consumption, 13 years in public safety cop/firefighter/paramedic are my cite for that.
It’s an odd dichotomy guys like duffer are in. It seems like, duff, and correct me if i’m wrong, that you’re a generally conservative individual, no?
The puritanical values upon which conservatism is based are causing part of this ‘sin tax’ phenomenon.
Still, the overly socially conscious liberal ideals are to blame for the other part.
Within those calcuations, there is left no room for personal responsiblity. That, is what we’re missing.
Well, despite duffer’s gruff delivery, there is a real life correlation between the lower socio-economic strata and advanced substance consumption, 13 years in public safety cop/firefighter/paramedic are my cite for that.
It’s an odd dichotomy guys like duffer are in. It seems like, duff, and correct me if i’m wrong, that you’re a generally conservative individual, no?
The puritanical values upon which conservatism is based are causing part of this ‘sin tax’ phenomenon.
Still, the overly socially conscious liberal ideals are to blame for the other part.
Within those calcuations, there is left no room for personal responsiblity. That, is what we’re missing.
Yeah, but why? It isn’t the job of the people I elect to tell me how much I can drink, it’s the old legislation of morality argument.
I knew this wasn’t going to go well. I tend to post while forgetting I don’t get the immediate response of debating a point. Therefore getting off to tangents that I usually have to explain.
First, the opening paragraph was supposed to be bolded, as it was the quote, but still not sure of the SDMB coding.
artemis , Yes, I know everyone pays the taxes. My point was that liberals always try to say they’re looking out for the “little guy”. What has Tom Daschle done to save me taxes on my case of beer? Are you willing to pay it?
And as far as the capital gains? My mom died in January 2003 and we sold her 2 houses. Mansions? Hardly. My 2 sisters and brother got hit for cap gains, though. And trust me, none of us are rich. So save the speech for the Dem Convention. Your anti-Bush spiel does nothing for my daily life.
As far as taxes helping the poor by raising the price of a bottle of booze? Yeah, we’re helping by making them pay more.
But… But… But… It’s GOOD for you! We’re only thinking of what’s good for you! We only want to control your life because we are only thinking of your best interests! Won’t somebody please think of the children?
Sin taxes suck, but they’re easy to raise. Who’s in favor of sin? What we need is a politician who stands foursquare in support of “a quart of scotch in every cupboard.”
A bigoted fuck and a poor reader, you’re a real one-two punch. I was calling you a bigoted fuck. Please feel free to ask if you have additional difficulty comprehending that.
Yes, conservative, but not neccessarily Republican. That’s just the party that is closest to my views. Hell, I probably would’ve voted for JFK if I was around then.
The personal responsibility part is exactly why I identify as a conservative. Trust me, I have lots of shit I could blame my failings on. But I live my life in a way that doesn’t harm any others (save for the DUI 2 years ago {full disclosure} )
Day to day, I do what I can to keep my family happy, and that’s all I really have to do.
Um, yeah, I saw that was what you were calling me. Thought you could catch that little sarcastic rebuke I posted. Sorry Otto , I’ll be sure to make the posts more clear. Maybe by typing r…e…a…l…s…l…o…w.
Some thoughts. First, I will admit that I have a strong impression that rates of smoking and issues surrounding alcohol (such as DUIs and the like) are more prevalent amongst those of lower socioeconomic status. I am not particularly attached to that notion, and will gladly discard it if someone can point me to the statistics that show otherwise (I have not had much luck finding any thus far). I ask you, Otto, as you seem to have information that proves this notion wrong (judging by your reply).
As far as the OP itself goes, I will note that I am in full agreement that these sin type taxes are regressive an lame.
You’re more concerned about reducing taxes on your case of beer than on seeing your overall tax burden (as a percentage of your total income) go down?
I’m betting you earn less than $87,000 a year. If I’m right, you’re paying Social Security tax on 100% of your income. I earn nearly a quarter-million a year - I pay Social Security taxes on - ready? - $87,000 of my income. The Social Security tax has an upper income cap; on all the rest of my income I pay NO Social Security taxes. The same thing is true for FICA.
Does that seem fair to you? How much could we lower the FICA and Social Security tax rates if folks like me paid those taxes on our ENTIRE taxable income, instead of on only a small percentage of it? That would put real money into your pocket, duffer - more than enough to offset any small “sin tax” on beer.
You paid capital gains on a one-time event: profit from a sale of a home. I’ll also end up paying those taxes when my own parents die and we liquidate their estate - but I also pay them now on my stock transactions. How many middle-class and working class people have stock market investments outside of tax-protected IRAs and 401k/403b retirement accounts? Not many. And the richer the person, the more income they’re likely to be investing in the market, and so the more they’re affected by the capital gains tax.
The Republicans are buying your vote by throwing you a few peanuts - and then turning around and looting your wallet when you’re not looking. Their tax policies are meant to benefit the Warren Buffets of the world, not the average middle-class American. (And ironically, Warren Buffet himself feels this administration’s tax policies are too lopsided in favor of the rich guys ! That ought to tell you something.)
Wow, this is the first time I’ve ever seen liberals and “sin tax” put in the same sentence. Duffer, why exactly do you think sin taxes stem from democrats? Every state legislature I’ve seen that attempts to raise consumption taxes on things like alcohol and tobacco have been republican dominated.
Not agreeing with duffer’s sentiment, but in the UK there has been very significant tax on alcohol and tobacco products, with very little effect on their consumption or dui. Drunk driving was far better controled by the creation (through advertising and news reporting) of a general feeling that drunk driving was socially unexceptable ever. In the early 90’s in UK it wouldn’t seem strange if someone talked about carefully driving home from the pub and being lucky to avoid being stopped by the police. By the late 90’s someone making such a claim would be seen as a social parriah, it was no longer cool or even exceptable to drive after drinking. What Tax hadn’t effected, social ‘engineering’ had.
