Sure, but the argument of the post is “alcohol bad for other people so stop drinking”, not “alcohol bad for other people so drink marginally less or make drinking marginally harder”.
Well, highly taxed things can lead to a black market to bypass the tax (I think this happens with cigarettes already), and I’m sure if the tax went sufficiently high we would see a rise in moonshine production, organized crime would get back into it, etc.
But I could also interpret this post to be primarily advocating for individuals to develop voluntary social practices of avoiding alcohol. That seems the better option.
This is an argument against total prohibition. I don’t see an argument against making alcohol 20% more expensive or 20% harder to buy.
Sure, but the argument of the post is “alcohol bad for other people so stop drinking”, not “alcohol bad for other people so drink marginally less or make drinking marginally harder”.
The argument is to change your personal behaviour in order to modify the global multiagent equilibrium at least to some degree.
Well, highly taxed things can lead to a black market to bypass the tax (I think this happens with cigarettes already), and I’m sure if the tax went sufficiently high we would see a rise in moonshine production, organized crime would get back into it, etc.
But I could also interpret this post to be primarily advocating for individuals to develop voluntary social practices of avoiding alcohol. That seems the better option.