More Huebscher

See below for the first example of Huebscher. This is the second. In this editorial, he goes after state politician's who want to impose a beer "user fee" of a dollar to pay for alcoholism treatment programs. He effectively shows why this is such a stupid concept. Again, I will excerpt a small portion, since I believe these disappear after a week or so.

What analogies can we come up with to equate people who legally and responsibly drink beer paying a user fee to subsidize the treatment of alcohol abusers? Here are a few:

n Have people who legally hunt and fish pay a small surcharge to subsidize counseling for poachers.

n Ask people who obey traffic laws to pay an additional “user fee” on their car registration to subsidize speeders strapped for cash.

n Impose a slight fee on doughnuts and other goodies at the grocery store to help pay for overeaters to get treatment.

Sure, there are reasons we want to help alcoholics clean up their act. Mainly, because they drain society if we don’t. They end up in prison. They leave dependents impoverished. They cause accidents, commit crimes and otherwise cause havoc in many other ways that end up increasing corrections and human services budgets.

But there’s something aggravating about a politician telling law-abiding people who like to have a beer or two now and then to bear responsibility for alcohol abusers. The same goes for blaming breweries, unless it can be proved brewery officials grab unsuspecting victims, hold them down and pour beer down their throats.

Don, I'd buy you a Walter's if I could.