Junk science and booze tax - a study in spin

It really doesn't matter

They claim they want the alcohol consumption down, the people where alcohol is a real problem are people who are addicted to it, and these people would rather starve, live in the streets, freeze to death, than to miss out on their "Fix", and thus even if you were to raise the costs by 100pounds per unit, they'd still find a way to afford their fix.. It will have absolutely no effect, and all the policy makes know this.

But they also know if they raise the taxes there will be hell to pay, however, arguing that this "Tax" is for the health of the general public, is something that is impossible to argue against, and thus they have increased their funding for the state, without real opposition.

I am a staunch anti-alcohol and anti-smoking person, I do not drink nor smoke, mainly due to child hood traumer related to alcholic people trying to literally kill my mother, however, I do not support this kind of propeganda because like so much else, it is not based in fact. I believe in educating people about the effects, and letting people make informed choices, rather than trying to use politics and taxes to "force" people to do something, because it has zero effect. I also believe in there should be room for everyone, that is non-smoking areas where I can go in a pub, resturant, or what ever, and smoking areas for those that enjoy that. If someone wants lungcancer, who am I to argue? I can tell them what may happen, but they're a grown person, and thus their choice, however, I have a right to ask people not to smoke near me.

In Denmark they have such taxes, not as bad as in sweden, but what happens, Danish breweries export beer to Germany, just south of the border, Danes, drive up to 300km, with trailers, and buy the beer and import it, with a limit of about 108 cartons of beer, or around 324 pints, per person. Considering the climate debate, and androgenic climate changes claims, this is the most stupid arrangement that could be made, first we ship the beer 300km in trucks to Germany, then people drive up to 300km down to pick it up, and drive back again to consume it, which is up to 600km car transport and 300km in trucks, how environmentally sound. I buy soft drinks because of a sugar duty in denmark (interestingly enough I only drink sugar free drinks), and I have a saving, after fuel, etc of around 100-300 (1000-3000dkr) pounds for a single trip.

Studies like this is an example of what my old statistics professor proved to us in my university mathematics class, you can use statistics to prove ANYTHING, it just depends on your point of view, and interpretation of data, as well as selecting the correct base samples. If you want to find something, then you will, which is why sciencetists are supposed to be taught not to have presumptions about their work, to avoid mis-interpreting data, which is something, I personally believe is happening in the climate debate, I've yet to see data that really supports the case of androgenic climate change, other than something which very well could just be a co-incidence.

It seems that all countries want more money from their people, and they seem to invent things to increase duties, rather than taxes, because the general populace is not friendly towards taxes, but with the health, and climate hypes, these two things are clear and easy excuses for creating or increasing some duty.

@ AC 16:17 GMT

> ...the "Business Guru" who insists group hug-ins will improve office efficiency.

Only those with blanc mange in lieu of brains thinks this, even in the Excited Snakes (aka the Benighted States). However, simple logic has never stopped the management caste from pushing forward such inane ideas.

I used to be viewed as the office grinch because I opted out of the annual round of birthday celebrations. My reasoning? "Because I think it's inappropriate in the workplace, where we are thrown together out of necessity and some of us can fire and hire others of us."

As the most scathing condemnation management had was the accusation that one had done something "inappropriate" (without ever telling us where to find the list of appropriate and inappropriate actions), my use in the aforementioned context had an element of true piquancy.

This nonsense really has to stop. Where is the small boy to cry out loudly "the emperor has no clothes!"?