DR. YONCA BURSALI
Article Critique of “Arguments for a Harmfullness Tax”
In the article, “Arguments for a Harmfulness Tax” Lester Grinspoon and James B.Bakalar argue that using drugs is similar like tobacco and alcohol. Using drugs would be taxed with respect to communal cost. Varieties of causing addiction drugs are detrimental and have bad effects. They portray the act that using drugs should be allowed and insurance service is necessary for drug users.
Grinspoon and Bakalar claim three arguments offered by police and moralists. To the claim that drug issue is related to criminal law. They counters that “freedom should not be restricted by government”. Thanks to legalization of drugs, we can control drug traffic. In addition, to decrease social cost of drugs abuse, the taxes should be used.
They make several persuasive points showing that to allow using drugs getting some taxes in order to prevent illegal using. However, in his zeal to prove their case, they gloss over the seriousness of the its harmfulness and abuse.
They begin their argument with black market examples to refute moralists. For example; in the 1920s because of black market law breaking and strength had increased for using alcohol. Same situation experiences for drugs now. Also if drugs legalized arising from big profit chaos and terror should prevent between narcotics agents and drug traffickers. They are also correct about inelasticity of demand for tobacco. Due to fact that there are nicotine inside the tobacco and it causes more addiction then other substances. For example; in Turkey when there was an increase on cigarette taxation and it didn’t effect so much the cigarette consumption. It is observed that there is no difference about rates of smoking between past and now among the youths.
When it comes to importance of public liberty and privacy it must be easily said that they are right that using drugs have relations our desires and human...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document