Taxes are tools of social engineering!!!

Marcus's picture
Submitted by Marcus on Thu, 2006-08-17 21:04

Gone are the days when taxes were thought of as mainly a way of raising revenue. Now, taxes are used to discourage everything from smoking and drinking to being un-green to eating unhealthily. If you enjoy it too much, the new state pomo's can't wait to tax it!!!

These ideas always start slowly, now some pomo academics want to tax people healthy. Like smoking bans, what seems far-fetched at first is surely on it's way to you soon.

From the new scientist...

Can taxation curb obesity?
http://www.newscientist.com/ar...


( categories: )

Pomo academics are thick

Marcus's picture

"That's exactly what I mean."

I agree, but I have been thinking that the "tax" argument, rather than criminalization, is perhaps less of a worry.

The economists in the article are as "thick" as shit. They don't understand the first thing about achieving their proposed goals through economics.

Consider how ineffective taxes are at curbing most peoples behaviour. It just becomes a cat and mouse game between producers -consumers and the Government. Government needs to control their borders and to define exactly what good or service it is that they are trying to restrict.

Most people that want to continue to consume, will, as they have in the past - either by 1) paying if they can afford to 2) evade taxes 3) go overseas or operate through the black market or 4) change the distinction of the product so it is no longer restricted through taxation.

That's exactly what I mean.

Ross Elliot's picture

That's exactly what I mean. The social engineering advocates are certainly the impetus for state action, but it's obvious, for instance, that smoking isn't outlawed because of the enormous amounts of revenue tobacco tax brings in.

I'd even surmise that the bureauRats know that a certain increase in tax will result in only a small number of smokers quitting while significantly raising the revenue. Essentially, they're using the addiction as a guarantee of future revenue growth.

Indeed

Marcus's picture

It is dangerous to deprive a girl of her twinkie!

Related note

JoeM's picture

On a related note, the news stations here did a followup on the recent smoking ban in Philadelpia restaurants and public buildings, favorably citing the conclusion that people are quitting the habit because it's not only too expensive (taxes) but now too inconvenient. Never mind the issue of rights or anything...Nazi's stamped out smoking, too.

Then there's the new laws regulating pseudoephrine sales, since it's used in making crystal meth. One has to go to the pharmicist now to buy Advil cold and sinus, and give your name and address and show I.D. I made a comment about the "fascist rules", the pharmacist sympathised (not that I blamed HIM), but he replied that if meth started to hit Philly, at least we'd be able to track and fight it. To which I replied that if government would simply get out of the drug war, we wouldn't have this problem, to which he angrily replied "that will never happen." THEN I blamed him.

Kill the Twinkies!

Prima Donna's picture

Ah yes, this is much like the infamous Twinkie Tax proposed by a bunch of pomo food academics in the US. "We shall tax those fat people into submission! They don't know what's best for them!"

It makes me violent.

Jennifer

-- Food Philosophy. Sensuality. Sass.

I think I have a better

I think I have a better explanation for governments seeking out ‘bad’ behavior and taxing it. Terrorists try to invert values by morally condemning virtuous behavior (self defense). Governments, by bringing force into the realm of personal behavior undercut the base of morality and ethics – they are attacking Man’s judgment i.e. his volition. It is freedom from force that is being attacked under the guise of moral behavior.

Eh, Ross? I don't get your point.

Marcus's picture

"It ain't always social engineering. Sometimes it's just corruption & state avarice."

What has the criminalization of marijuana got to do with using taxes for purposes of discouraging "undesirable" behaviour?

Or do you mean the State could make more money by taxing marijuana users or fining smokers in public areas?

Witness the move to make

Ross Elliot's picture

Witness the move to make marijuana possession an instant fine, just like a speeding ticket, instead of a criminal offence.

The blinkered, single-issue advocates of marijuana decriminalisation *don't get it*.

If decriminialised there will be *more* police time devoted to sniffing out smokers. It'll be a cinch for the cops and it'll bring in lots of M-O-N-E-Y. Just like speed cameras do. Ka-ching!

Instead of being left alone because it's too much trouble for too little reward, dope smokers would be sought out and nailed in their thousands.

It ain't always social engineering. Sometimes it's just corruption & state avarice.

I once worked with a Catholic who told me that it wasn't any longer important for the faithful to eat fish on Fridays. Then he'd wink at me and say: At least not since the Vatican sold their fishing fleet...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.