Thanks to anti-tobacco, all sorts of tax hikers cloak their greed under the aura of tough love. Beer tax to save the youth is proposed in California. The Sacramento law maker who proposes a hefty new tax on beer summons up all sorts of high-sounding arguments to bolster his case to combat drinking by making it expensive and educational. Each, along with anti-drinking talking points, is presented in the article from the prohibitionist loving San Francisco Chronicle along with a denigrating portrayal of those who oppose the tax. A token opposition must always be included so that the veneer of fairness is preserved while simultaneously implying that any opposition to social engineering has at worst a conflict of interest or at best is childishly naive.
First the benefits of the nearly $2 per six pack tax hike. Up to $2-billion would be generated to defray the high costs of crime prevention, health services and programs that prevent addiction and underage drinking. College age drinking is a real health problem, according to the assemblyman who wants to raise the price of a can of beer. An unacceptably high percentage of them "binge" regularly while the ensuing debauchery leads to sexual violence and date rape. The country as a whole, so say the neoprohibitionists, lays out $52-billion to pay for the mayhem caused by underage drinkers.
Obviously no rational person could possible oppose a health initiative to diminish the havoc beer-drinking inflicts on society. Only those wacky, boozed-up Republicans, a realiabe bête noire for the anemic "progressives" running the San Francisco Chronicle, could possibly oppose the beer tax. "Don’t tax my beer," is the petulant cry highlighted in this story. While the anti-tax protesters are callow college students one is quoted as saying that the beer tax is being justified by "a bunch of studies."
Amen to that and a reputable newspaper would zero in on the "scientific" means, through studies and surveys, special interests influence policy makers to enact particular agendas. An examination of the studies would reveal that they are epidemiological trash where conclusions are based not on facts but upon predetermined results. The San Francisco Chronicle is not a reputable news outlet so its focus is on those crazy college boys instead of the behavior engineers who wish to enrich their bank accounts with taxes ripped off from the beer-drinking middle class.