According to Lloyd I. Sederer and Eric Goplerud of The Washington Post there should be a tax on alcohol because of the money it could raise for health reform. In this article entitled, "Pay for Health Reform with an Alcohol Tax" they lay down the statistics of how an alcohol tax would raise up to $60 billion dollars over the next 10 years. Even more so, they explain how these taxes could "pay for the health care for the uninsured and budget busting and state Medicaid expenditure; some portion of the tax could be directed to alcohol prevention and treatment programs." In my opinion, the majority of money should be directed towards prevention and treatment programs given the fact that alcoholism is a serious disease. Even more so, the money could be used to better educate the underage consumers of alcohol. Although, the tax on alcohol could have a negative impact because of the prices. Bars on campus here at the University of Illinois are always providing drink specials and special event nights promoting alcohol consumption. If taxes are raised then those drink specials go up and purchases go down which in turn helps decrease underage drinking and more importantly binge drinking in the long run. This is a issue that I think should be stressed more so than it's ability to raise money for health reform. It shouldn't be a tax on alcohol for health reform, but instead for alcoholism. Alcoholism is a deadly disease and binge drinking is something that occurs right here on campus. The real question is if prices go up is consumption going to go down?
I completely agree with Ryan, alcohol should not be taxed for the purpose of health care, but the tax should be going to education and awareness programs of alcoholism. Alcoholism is a disease and there is not enough education out there. If our nation is going to gain revenue due to a tax on alcohol, than that revenue should go towards prevention, research, and treatment on alcoholism. Also, I don't think raising taxes on alcohol will effect alcohol consumption. Like Ryan said, there are always drink deals at bars, kegs at frats, there are always going to be ways to get around the expenses of alcohol. Not to mention, alcohol can become an addiction, just like any other drug or cigarette. When cigarette companies raised their prices, consumers did not stop buying cigarettes because they needed them to get through the day. This is the same for alcoholics; they need their alcohol to function and a tax increase will not stand in the way.
ReplyDeleteRyan, I think you are headed in the right direction for Unit 2. You can definitely find enough research on this to create significant and meaningful arguments. You have a few options as well. You can focus on the tax itself implemented by the government for the public insurance, ranging from candy and junk food to alcohol. Or you can focuses solely on alcohol and addiction or junk food and America's obesity. Good Luck!
I defiantly agree that this tax on alcohol is not being enacted for the right reasons. Although, alcoholism does have something to do with the health care reform it is a much bigger deal to start educating children. The tax enacted in Champaign has significantly increased prices and while it may have an effect it is not stopping people from buying it. I feel as though the recent tax and junk food, sugary drinks, and alcohol are all creating a large revenue, but are not actually teaching America anything. It is apparent that people will not stop buying cigarettes just because they are taxed the same way people will continue to drink. It is essential that the revenues being created by this tax are put to good use. Instead of using this money to help insure people who have problems from consuming these products, it would be more effective to start educating America about decreasing the consumption of these products.
ReplyDelete