[Vision2020] Illegal underage alcohol, anyone?

[Phil Nisbet]

Ted

Please, the reality is that cut and paste is hardly what dialogue is all 
about.  You obviously got ideas to comment on from my posting and that is 
what we are here to do.

I asked you if the reason you were so anti-alcohol was related to any other 
agenda or if you were simply bent on a society free of all chemical 
dependencies.  In 1919 we tried to deal with a total prohibition which 
turned out to be less than desirable in its consequences.  Surely that 
suggests that even without advertizing from 1919-1933 the consumption of 
very illegal alcohol did not fall.

And yes, Ted, there are pretty good studies which have taken a strong look 
at the reasons for the American cultural attitudes and compared them to 
European ones with respect to wine and beer.  Yes we have a problem that the 
people in Europe do not and its not related to how much beer and wine 
advertizing there is.  The festivals in Germany and France are large and 
well attended, but do not result in the kinds of behaviors that happen here 
in the states.  I lived 9 and a half years in Europe and from my own 
experiances have seen the differences.

You also seem to be focused on Tobbaco and seem to see it as a giant 
corporate conspiracy.  Since 40-60% of the price of a pack of smokes is 
owned by the government, why exactly is it that its not a government 
conspiracy?  As was said of the Nixon campaign funds, all you have to do is 
follow the money trail and for cigs, that trail leads right to the hands of 
the government, the entity that makes the bulk of the profits from each pack 
of smokes sold.  Smokers in Idaho, just for an example, put $150,000 a day 
into the hands of the general revenue.  Drinkers put a bunch more in sin 
taxes into the non-drinkers hands.  Every time there is a stop gap needed 
for budget shortfalls, bingo, the price of beer, wine, booze and smokes goes 
up.  Big Tobbaco makes some serious money, but government makes ten times 
what they do.

So Mr Wilson seems to hate the sin of Homosexuality.  You and some of the 
others seem to hate the sin of smoking and drinking.  Please let me know, 
but as a libertarian, who exactly is it that I am supposed to think is the 
ultimate evile?  Which civil liberty of mine am I supposed to be more 
concerned with?

Phil Nisbet

>From: Tbertruss at aol.com
>To: pcnisbet1 at hotmail.com
>CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Illegal underage alcohol, anyone?
>Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 23:20:33 EDT
>
>
>Phil et. al.
>
>If you really want to dialog on this subject, please quote a statement I 
>made
>word for word, then present your argument against or agreeing with the
>statement.
>
>I will not answer your fantasy assumptions about what you think I might 
>have
>been saying.
>
>However, I will comment on some statements of yours, quoted word for word:
>
>Phil wrote:
>
>"We bar kids from trying or having any liqour.  As a consequence its a
>substance that having been denied by authority, kids tend to binge on when
>they can snag some.  Those same kids then get free of mom and dad and head
>off to the nearest kegger where the try to drink the whole thing."
>
>In fact, as I indicated with references, we do not "bar kids from trying or
>having any liquor" in the real world of how we treat alcohol in our 
>society.
>We spend millions on advertising clearly aimed at the youth market to 
>encourage
>alcohol use.  Alcohol use is glamorized and popularized in film and media
>left and right.  The penalties for supplying alcohol to minors are not 
>enforced
>consistently and are not very severe to being with.  And many underage 
>drinkers
>do not drink "free of mom and dad" in the full sense of this phrase, but
>sometimes drink alcohol sourced from their parents alcohol stocks in their 
>own
>homes, though often not with their parents consent.  Parents, however, 
>often set
>an example of alcohol use as "acceptable."
>
>Far from a state of affairs where we truly "bar kids from trying or having
>any liquor," alcohol is easily acquired from a variety of sources by any
>underage person who wishes to use it, without having to "head off to the 
>nearest
>kegger."
>
>As far as a rational social/political/legal approach to lessening the high
>rate of alcohol abuse among youth in the USA, I question your statements:
>
>"If it did not have that right of passage standard, it would not be treated
>as it is in our society.  If it does not prove your adulthood, why get bent
>beyond recognition every other night?"
>
>And:
>
>"Europe has less of a problem than we do with wine and beer and other 
>alcohol
>
>related problems.  They have less of a problem because they do not deal 
>with
>it as we do.  The culture teaches children to deal with drink from an early
>age with things like a small amount of beer or wine in soda water to form a
>spritizer."
>
>This is a complex issue, and you present no data to support your claims 
>that
>if we adopted this "European" approach, and rejected the "right of passage"
>psychology in regard to alcohol, that here in the USA, with our differing
>economic and social conditions, the high rates of alcohol abuse among youth 
>would be
>radically impacted.
>
>One factor that some think contributes to alcohol abuse in the USA is the
>high pressure lifestyle of "fighting your way to the top" which is more
>characteristic of the USA than it is in certain European societies.  
>Alcohol is an
>accepted "medication" to unwind from the hard working stress filled lives 
>many in
>the USA face.  Of course it is hard to gather conclusive data on this 
>theory,
>just as you would be hard pressed to find hard data to support your 
>theories
>on why alcohol abuse among youth is so high in the USA.
>
>There are numerous factors influencing youth alcohol abuse.  Certainly, the
>millions spent on advertising alcohol to youth is considered by many who 
>study
>this subject to be a contributing factor to abuse.  To ban this advertising
>raises difficult economic and constitutional issues that are hard to 
>surmount,
>yet who really doubts that if youth saw no alcohol advertising in televised
>media once in their entire life, that this might reduce alcohol abuse among
>youth?
>
>The alcohol companies, just as the tobacco companies, know that if someone
>does not develop the habits of using their drugs before they are in their 
>20s,
>that the adult use of these drugs drops off dramatically.  In other words, 
>the
>customers must be snagged when they are young, or many will not become 
>heavy
>users in adulthood who would have otherwise.
>
>Who can doubt that this fact based logic of the marketplace influences
>corporate promotion of alcohol use among youth?  If the advertising to 
>promote
>alcohol use among youth did not result in increased consumption, would the
>corporations who have the best data gathering and advertising wonks in the 
>business
>continue with these sorts of ads?
>
>No.
>
>Ted Moffett
>
>

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/