Using your phone's internet browser
go to:  qna.rediff.com
Click and drag this link to
the Home icon in your browser.
Q.

Any economist here ? what does economics say for taxing Boozers and smokers ? If its Bad, Ban it , If dont Ban, why Taxing so Much unequally ?

Tags: money, education, politics & government
Asked by Indian Ocean, 04 Apr 11:01 am
  Invite a friend  |  
  Save  |  
 Earn 10 points for answering
Answer this question  Earn 10 points for answering    
4000 characters remaining  
  
    
Keep me signed inNew User? Sign up

Answers (7)

1.

I join you, Sir.
Taxing smokers and boozers is not only unethical but unholy too.
Shame Shame.
Answered by Prakash Chandra, 04 Apr 09:47 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
2.

Banning it will not help as people have got a habit of taking risk of indulgence in non essential luxury which they consider as status symbol, and pay for it anything in the gray market just like banned drugs. So why to loose revenue on banning something which they can not control, and which is not as risky but only injurious to health. It may be derived that in this case, taking care of your health is your problem after they have issued statutory warning, and pay for your deliberately adapted non essential luxury.
Answered by Shamim Shaikh, 04 Apr 11:41 am

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
3.

I am not an economist. But we see or have been seing since the time inThirties when USA experimented with Prohibtion in their country, that its an utter failure. Prohibition threw pgangsters like Al Capone in USA and many Al Capones in Indian states which experimented with prohibition.
The hooch, which people are forced to drink, brings about much misery in their personal lives and many a times when the dragon of hooch turns killer, in the lives of their families. Drinking can not be curbed as the lure of Bacchus is irrestible and human frailties cannot be strengthened by Law.
So, it is better to let people have something whose quality is controlled properly and their is a mechanism in place which sees to it that people do not go for any \'Piosonous\' stuff ... even though this gets negated by ever increasing taxes on the \'branded\' booze, making it too expensive and thus driving people again back to hooch.
No way out of this dilemma.
Smoking is a purely man made evil ...more
Answered by QueSera Sera, 04 Apr 11:18 am

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
4.

It may or may not be bad, but is an excellent source of revenue for governments all over the world thats why no govt will ban it
Answered by iqbal seth, 04 Apr 11:11 am

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
5.

A govt. of own people would not behave step-motherly with the subjects; but our govt. is licencing production of narcotics and tobacco but asking people, without sincere intent, to warn against their hazardous consequences. Even the british rulers might not do so with the public.
Answered by Om Shrivastava, 04 Apr 11:08 am

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
6.

Ciggerate smoking is injurious to health smoking leads to infertality in mens
Answered by Robert Allen, 04 Apr 11:03 am

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
7.

They dont have that guts, this is another source of their income
Answered by jameel ahmed, 04 Apr 11:03 am

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received

Ask a Question

Get answers from the community

600 characters remaining