Tax increases on alcohol about increasing public health
By Lethbridge Herald on September 2, 2022.
Editor:
The Aug. 6 edition of the Herald contained a misguided column from Robin Speer of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation complaining about automatic tax increases on liquor. Contrary to what the letter said about this being “cowardice,” this fiscal provision is about increasing public health.
All alcoholic beverages are carcinogenic. Just as we have seen heart disease and cancer rates decline worldwide from countries making tobacco industry products less affordable through tax increases, we will have less chronic disease here at home if liquor taxes are hiked.
Clearly the Taxpayers Federation is shamefully more interested in the increasing the amount of the almighty dollar for store owners than reducing the horrible anguish among Canadians suffering harm from disease.
Let’s put pressure on our politicians to do the right things and hike taxes even more on harmful products.
Ken Kyle
Lethbridge
8-7
Generally agree….then there’s the Queen Mother who imbibed several times/day and lived to be 102, something like those who puff on cigarettes all their life and never get cancer or COPD.
yes, let us continue to place prohibitive financial costs on all choices. rather than ban what are personal choices, we can simply render them less affordable to not at all affordable. thus, we can still pretend to honour free choice around one’s body and what consenting adults choose to do, but then, if only in the context of affordability (the wealthiest always will be the most “free”) and under the guise that one is still free to choose.
the discussion here is not about what is healthy or not. the discussion must be about one’s right to their being. moderation is a good baseline for all choices, as is having to respect the rights of others. if one can drink and not be a jerk toward others, then one should be able to drink without being taxed to the hilt.
we are all entitled to good, honest information. but, should we not be free to determine for ourselves? if the public health system is going to be used to foment the ongoing creep of totalitarian and autocratic society, i will prefer we jetison public health rather than be owned by it. however, i would much prefer to have public health and be free to choose. it was woody allen that noted, if we want to live to be 100, we will have to give up everything that makes it fun to live to 100.