Christine Smith’s Blog

“Tax The Hell Out Of It.” Why?

Whatever line keeping government out of our private activities (that once existed) has been erased so that any number of behaviors are coming under government control. As for the drug war arguments: Seems that same old conversation about legalization as opposed to decriminalization pops up time and again in random conversations with people.

In recent days, I’ve had three such conversations with strangers all of whom condemned the drug war, and all of whom simultaneously espoused the “benefit” the federal and state governments could derive from it in the oft repeated “The government could tax the hell out of it,” in reference to marijuana.

To this “progressive” thought, I simply ask “Why?”

“Why what?”

“Why have it taxed at all? Why not simply legalize it, and keep it free from regulation and taxation whatsoever?”

To this, the most intelligent answer I’ve received is “I hadn’t thought of that,” while others simply begin to explain to me how, of course, the government has to regulate it because of its “danger” or they tell me the government “ought” to be able to make money off of it. Such dialogue perplexes me, since when do people want to give the government more money? Perhaps it simply appeals to them since they’re not in said group being taxed.

Save for the one individual with whom I had a most interesting conversation on the matter and whom seemed far more knowledgeable, thoughtful and liberty minded than many, the others simply couldn’t get past the idea that it, as with other substances now taxed, should also be “controlled.” They seemed unable to even question taxation, rather acting as if taxation of it would be the answer.

Also irrationally, in these random conversations most every person assumes that one who opposes the drug war must be one who partakes in drug usage; after I dispel them of this irrational false assumption as one who opposes the drug war but who has had no interest in any illegal drugs, I go on to cite examples of so many substances regulated by the federal government and the oh so many victimless “crimes” which are prosecuted all of which merely result in vast expenditures of money to attempt to control behavior which harms no other. (Simply enforce existing laws which draw the line at behavior - exacerbated or not by drug usage - which harms another.) Like a gun, a bottle of liquor or a smoke, any currently illegal substance harms none…and most human beings who use any of them do so relatively wisely or well with harm coming to none (other than perhaps themselves).

Regulation better than illegality?

But even libertarian or libertarian-leaning acquaintances argue that regulation of certain substances is to be preferred over illegality thus they battle for causes such as “medical marijuana”…but I don’t see it that way. It perhaps might be better, but still utterly wrong and I’m not about to spend my time lobbying for something which is still oppressive. Such legislation enforces the idea that it’s government’s place at all to be involved in these matters (as if we must beg or bargain for what should be and really is ours free and clear to begin with). Thus, I think there’s quite an argument, too, such regulation decreases liberty overall since the root of government intrusion isn’t challenged but reinforced.

But such what I call ‘behavior taxes’ are gaining enormous support even from the people themselves. Food and beverage taxes are becoming ludicrous. I couldn’t care less about the obesity rate in the United States - sad as it is - it’s still not something I want to have my money directed toward and I certainly should not be forced to pay more for an occasional soft drink or any other item to supposedly fight obesity, no more than cigarettes should be taxed to fund healthcare for children. Sure, there’s any number of social concerns out there, but it’s not the business of government to force me or anyone else to pay for other people’s problems, nor is it the role of government to try and change people’s habits and wants.

Thus, I do not want to see marijuana taxed any more than I want to see the stupid taxation of soft drinks or high caloric foods. Same goes for the taxes on cigarettes and any other item people enjoy. It’s simply none of the government’s business. Same goes for pharmaceuticals.

What’s “public” about health?

The cause used of “public health” isn’t even questioned…what’s “public” about health? Health is an area of solely personal concern and responsibility, but nowadays the term “public health” is thrown around indiscriminately to justify intrusions into so many behaviors and even advertising itself. We’re all different, some do risky things (and isn’t that relative?), just don’t force other people to pay for what other people do when they get into trouble - “problem” solved.

Why not as is said, let all be free to eat, drink, and be merry - self-medicating as we choose? Wouldn’t that be freedom?

People enjoy food, drink, and the human animal has always and will always seek drugs - alcohol or otherwise - to release stress. Why should the most natural aspects of living be exploited by government bureaucrats…and why do so many Americans not care? Why do so many agree with government regulating people’s behavior? And how in the world can anyone be excited and in favor of more taxation? Maybe they’ll draw the line when the behavior the government deems “unhealthy” affects them…maybe they’ll be indignant then…maybe when it’s too late and our society has devolved to the point where government assumes the right to dictate, regulate and tax most all of our behaviors from what we eat, how we exercise or don’t, and even the sports (evaluating the danger/risk factor) we engage in - all in the name of “public health.”