Laughable alcohol policy reported by the CBC. According to Toronto's Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, taxing alcohol more and toughening drinking-age legislation will somehow reduce alcohol abuse and reduce healthcare costs associated with it.
What the Centre fails to realize is that we're dealing with the cost of abuse, not ordinary use like yours or mine. Therefore hitting normal law-abiding and commonsensical drinkers will not solve the problem and will definitely not help reduce healthcare costs. Why?
A higher tax on alcohol will mean certain risk categories (such as poorer individuals) will not be able to afford quality, controlled alcoholic drinks and will likely resort to homemade moonshine. The health costs associated with treating moonshine intoxication is much higher, especially if it destroys the liver causing a chronic condition. Had the person bought cheaper vodka at the LCBO or the SAQ this could have been averted.
Increasing the drinking age to 21 will affect both business and healthcare. Firstly it will drive away all the under-21 drinkers who cross the border from the US into Canada to have a good pint and party in peace, thus harming business. Secondly, it will spur a growth in alcohol abuse within private confines (eg fraternities and house parties), ergo outside of the reach of police and society. Aside from being a more dangerous and non-monitorable abuse, it could also act as a catalyst for irresponsible sexual behavior, brawls and general misdemanor. Healthcare costs associated with THAT would be sky-high.
Good proposals include policing drunken behavior, getting tough on drunk-driving and especially under-21 DUI, as well as counselling for problem drinkers. All this is compatible with tackling the problem of abuse.
Stalin himself is reputed to have said Russians need good cheap vodka and good cheap wine to eradicate the plague of homemade alcohol poisoning. Advocating against privatization as the Centre's report does is unreasonable. Firstly it keeps prices high, cutting the poorest off a supply of safe alcohol. Secondly, it keeps behemothic and inefficient monopolies alive. Thirdly, it completely denies the virtue of a taste in spirits. When you look at alcohol just in terms of its boozing potential you deny everyone the chance to appreciate the beauties and enjoyment of high-quality liquors enjoyed responsibly.
I would never chug a Matusalem or a Brugal. Polar vodka, instead, is so disgusting I can't wait for the bottle to be done with. Guess which one the SAQ carries and promotes.
1 comment:
It would be a good idea if the government-run booze monopolies would at least stop advertising the stuff and promoting its increased consumption as though it were a delightful and healthful lifestyle product.
Here in Ontario I received FIVE full-colour brochures on the glories of the LCBO booze lineup in the newspaper in the run-up to Christmas, including their comprehensive 62-page booze 2007 Christmas catalogue.
Outside the local 'flagship' liquor store here in Westboro, Ottawa, banners extolling us to "Just Add Liqueur", "Twist and Pour", "When You're Relaxing", "Wine 101" and "Whiskey Nights" are changed weekly. There are helpful inquiry banners asking us if we've "Bought Any Ontario Wine Lately?" Bottles of alcohol are arranged artistically and enticingly in the windows and there's nary a health warning in sight. Correction--one time I looked there was one, it was tiny, moss-coloured, in french only and upside down. It was removed and nothing has been put up in its place.
Meanwhile, across the street, the smokeshop has been forced to shutter all it's stock up tighter than a drum.
Post a Comment