the detrimental side effects of prohibition-by-taxation legislation are obvious, while the effectiveness of these polices remain dubious at best. Anti-tobacco policies come about due to misconceptions of the market’s ability to solve social problems (although rent seeking is typically required for prohibitions to be enacted). Bureaucracies established by prohibition are inherently inefficient and unable to discover the knowledge required to solve social problems. Prohibition also suppresses the market’s ability to solve social problems, so that little or no progress is made while prohibitions are in effect. And finally, prohibitions create profit opportunities which add to the problems prohibition is intended to solve (Thornton 83).As already noted, prohibition is an example of government interventionism, which is in itself the antithesis of a free market. The market allows consumers to decide how to spend their incomes. Anti-tobacco advocates neglect the fact that not all individuals have the same wants and goals in life. Tobacco products have been accepted to be detrimental to human health since the 1960s, yet remain among the most popular goods on any market. This must mean that consumers value the immediate pleasure of a cigarette far more than their long term health.
This is from a study of DuĊĦan Petrovski at the Mises Institute Canada on the Effects of Prohibition by Excessive Taxation or "Sin Taxes" against Tobacco (hat tip Bob Wenzel)
What about the American Indians who invented tobacco smoking long ago? Who will sue them. Who will free them from communism imposed by the Indian Reorganization
ReplyDeleteAct of 1934? What about when tobacco and fumigation were considered antidotes to tuberculosis?