DerbyX wrote:
You propose the reverse and with a proposal that won't eliminate the problem. Harsh taxes and punitive regulations will only cause undue harm to the social drinker or occassional drinker but the problems drinkers won't be deterred. We do have taxes on alcohol and they are pretty high. We also have regulations on production and sale. Hell here in Ontario one of the arguments for privatization is that it will drastically lower prices (some say). Establishments that serve alcohol are regulated & monitored. Increasing taxes & regulation won't diminish the alcohol related problems we already have.
Nope, I think our taxes on alcohol are about right. It's Zipper than thinks they should be lower. As for regulations, I'm sure they can be tightened up. As I say, bars doing a much better job of not serving drunks would be one, treating a death caused by a drunk driver as murder would be another.
DerbyX wrote:
Many who argue for stricter regulations say the opposite in that hours should be reduced to prevent drunkeness. The problems associated with alcohol are better tackled through education & treatment rather then punitive measures. Those are the lessons being learned in Portugal in dealing with drugs.
I see off sales and liquor store hours differently than bar sales.
Education and treatment should definitely be increased - and booze taxes should pay for it.
Portugal is about pot. I see pot as quite a bit less harmful than ETOH, as long as we try hard as we can to keep it away from kids. Not that I kept away from it as a kid, but pot can just mess around too much with developing endocrine and nervous systems. Quite frankly I have no idea how we would do that tho, since kids find weed easier to get than alcohol.
CKA Super Elite 
