Under a bill introduced by San Francisco Supervisor John Avalos, the city would charge alcohol wholesalers a fee -- 0.076-cents for every ounce of alcohol sold -- to defray the costs linked to alcohol consumption in the city."Big Alcohol".
If passed, it would be the nation's first local charge for the “harm” attributed to alcohol.
Supporters of the bill say there is a direct correlation between wholesale alcohol sales/ alcohol consumption and health care, human services, and public safety.
“San Francisco government agencies cannot continue to subsidize the alcohol industry,” said the Marin Institute, a group that “envisions communities free of the alcohol industry’s negative influence.”
"It's time for Big Alcohol, including wholesalers, to pay its fair share. A local alcohol charge-for-harm fee is long overdue," said Bruce Lee Livingston, executive director of Marin Institute.
Soon it will be "Big Cotton" and "Big Linen" for being "wrinkly, and requiring the use of steamers and irons, which use electricity - thereby depleting the resources of our poor feeble planet.
Or "Big Plastic" for being creating all that stuff that will not break down in landfills....
Or "Big Glass" for creating all those items that regularly break, and must be replaced over and over again...using precious resources both in their creation and disposal.
Or "Big Toilet Paper" for destroying all those trees just for a decadent culture's selfish convenience.
Or "Big Metal" for creating ugly, sharp things and the perfect material for making weapons.
Or "Big Food" for making so much nourishment for so many people that the precious, poor world is overcrowded.
I'm running out of outrage.
I begin to understand how people get nihilistic and fatalistic.
Is there really an option remaining? Is there really time left to save America short of...
WAR?
The Gunslinger
So, we are to believe that absolutely none of the federal and state taxes collected on alcohol find their way to any San Francisco agencies?
ReplyDeleteIt's the same argument they used on tobacco - complaining that they have to recoup the costs of some harm, while already collecting a much greater amount from the same "sin". And people still fall for it.
I've always been astounded by the in-your-face hypocrisy of state lotteries in vogue for the last 20 years or so..."Gambling is Evil,our agencies will raid bookie joints,but we'll have Lotto.The proceeds will go to 'finance' the education system (i.e.,a slush fund for useless educrats).It's for The Children!". A loser's game mostly fallen for by the very segment of society who can least afford it. The should-be-obvious irony is that the historical record shows that the "Left" hates the "little people" more than the most "Gordon Gecko-type" broker asshole...
ReplyDeleteNo surprise here. The issue is the freedom to make choices for yourself, even bad choices. The control freak elitists can't stand that. This "alcohol harm" tax, like any other tax is always paid by the consumer, so the target is big alcohol only to the extent the tax will discourage consumption with artificially higher prices. Big alcohol isn't paying anything except what it passes on to the consumer. What such taxes accomplish is far more insidious than collecting money to fix some "harm".
ReplyDeleteFirst, and perhaps foremost, it puts more money in the hands of the elitist politician to expand their bureaucratic fiefdoms of loyal vassals and dependent government employees.
Secondly, and not to be underestimated, is the devious notion that these elitists should be empowered to regulate choices they deem need regulation because of harmful consequences. Choices will be restricted by higher prices.
Thirdly, it conditions the public to believe it is the role of the government elitists to rule to insulate people from the consequences of their bad choices, and if it makes sense for tobacco and alcohol, why not any choice that might cause harm, individual or societal. Why not food, clothing, shelter, guns, what you read, what you do with your leisure time, where you vacation, and so on until they have a say over every choice you are allowed to make.
Hey, they Have to have someone to vilify, so as to direct the anger of the peepul and keep them occupied, or the peepul will start to have time to think for themselves and that would lead to questioning what they're told.
ReplyDeleteLiberals claim to be tolerant and openminded, decrying conservative folks as racists, bigots, closedminded, thugish, pushy and otherwise nogoodnicks. However, when you actually get down to it, liberals are the most closedminded, not to mention hard headed, people around. Conservative people tend to be tolerant of listening to other peoples' ideas and views and we want to discuss those views and what leads to them. When called on our views we will often give a reasoned and intellectual answer as to why we hold them. If you question a liberal on their views you get a violent reaction, you are a hatemonger or racist or bigotted, homophobic or any of a few dozen other epithets and it all devolves into a shouting match.
Remember the elitist/socialist wants to control what you do... everything you do. You cannot make good choices for yourself. You'll eat the wrong food, drink the wrong fluids, use too much energy, think too much, read the wrong books, have sex with the wrong person, use the wrong drugs and even the wrong medications, drive to the wrong places, go to the wrong doctors, move to the wrong cities, buy the wrong cars, support the wrong causes and otherwise screw up your life and everyone else's while you're at it. They must make us all perfectly equal with everyone else and if that means taking it away from you to give it to some poor bugger in Ghanna, you'll just waste it anyway on something frivolous, like that eye surgery when your sight starts to go when you get older.