Governments exist to take care of the people right? The actions they take are in the interests of the citizens aren't they? If a government identified that citizens were being self destructive then surely they would take the best course of action to cease this activity and not attempt to profit from it.
There's large scale evidence that this isn't the case. First case in point is smoking. Science has proven, for over half a century, that smoking tobacco products leads to a raft of health issues including but not limited to a variety of cancers as well as heart and respiratory afflictions. There also appears to be no notable positives to offset these risks. Despite this damning result the only countries in the world (that i was able to find) which has banned smoking for the protection of it's citizens are Bhutan and Turkmenistan. Many other countries have various restrictions on where smoking is permitted and impose a tax on tobacco products sold. Does this tax actually do anything to discourage the action or does it simply serve to fill government funds? All a public spaces restriction and tax says to smokers is "Don't force the toxins on non-smokers and ensure you pay us as you harm yourself"
Alcohol has taken a similar path in some ways. While the only national bans that exist currently are for religious reasons the cultural links to drinking in many places cause the reports of alcohol related illness to fall on deaf ears. Alcohol related health impacts such as organ damage and obeseity combined with the impacts of drink driving have taken a horrendous toll the world over but still governments line their pockets while the population sip at their toxic beverages.
In many countries it seems as though we are set to take on board these same mistakes with both hard drugs and sugar taxes. It is currently being hotly debated, and in some instances is already law, that drugs be legalised and regulated, of course a contribution made to the government. It is said that the war on drugs failed but what good is it to the people if their leaders simply decide to give up and make some money from it?
In recent years the dangerous health impacts of added sugars in our food and drinks has become apparent and what is the knee-jerk reaction we are seeing? You guessed it, put a tax on it. This has already passed in Britain with several other nations set to follow. If this approach hasn't worked with any other substance of self destruction then what hope does it have of making a difference this time around?
The story is sold to the masses that a tax will be of great benefit and guide the population towards healthier habits but it's time to look beyond this flawed approach and wonder what the motives really are.
Please comment below to let me know your thoughts.