Last year Russian President Putin called for a state monopoly on vodka, writes Mihai Sarbu, to address what many consider a serious health crisis. He estimated that some 40,000 deaths annually can be attributed to various illegal products sold as vodka. Now, in late 2006, the situation is even grimmer. The local black market is alive and well. Authorities are constantly battling the illegal production of vodka, while the quality of this counterfeit product plummets ever lower. Illegal traders are putting additives in drinks to make them stronger and cheaper, but the result is often lethal. These additives may include cleaners, car-window deicers, and chemicals used for removing rust. FULL ARTICLE
Source link: http://archive.mises.org/5968/give-me-vodka-or-give-me-death/
Give Me Vodka or Give Me Death
Previous post: Copyright as a Killer of Creativity
Next post: To hear ol’ Jordan roll
{ 12 comments }
One more good reason to drink gin instead.
- Josh
I sometimes think that I am a slow learner. Well I am nothing compared to governments. They can not figure out that Government Monopoly is the only kind of monopoly and that prohibition in any form fails under black market pressure.
Excellent photo illustration. Let’s do shots of Putin, or ‘shoot putin.’ lol
It is certainly possible that Putin himself was drunk when HE issued the order to secure a State monopoly on the Production and Sale of Vodka. The idea of a State monopoly is an idea just stupid and reckless enough to be imagined by an inebriated politician!
Shouldn’t it be obvious that if you try to reform people by prohibiting a preferred activity, they will only respond by doing something worse?
Isn’t it obvious that the effort of a government to produce ANYTHING (except perhaps paperwork, bureaucracy, and idiotic regulations) will inevitably compromise the quality of the product in question, put its customers at additional risk and create a niche for “entrepreneurs” who are more skilled at circumventing the restrictions, bribing and intimidating officials, and swindling than their free-market counterparts would be at anticipating market conditions, improving the product, enhancing safety and reliability and expanding consumer demand.
Since there is a massive and thus far insoluble health problem involving excessive and self-destructive abuse of vodka (or any other alcoholic beverage) wouldn’t the rational answer be to completely deregulate and privatize the production, sale, advertising and transportation of such beverages, thereby allowing enterprising merchants to discover (or perhaps brew) new beverages which will imitate the taste, and perhaps some of the effects of alcoholic vodka, without the poisonous consequences of alcohol consumption? Wouldn’t there also be a substantial demand for an inexpensive, reliable treatment for alcohol-dependence much like the nicotine-withdrawal aids we have seen for tobacco addicts who wish to quit smoking in the past few years. Wouldn’t a free market also recognise a demand for supplements that could ameliorate the worst effects of alcoholism, and shouldn’t these discoveries be advertised to the widest possible audience.
No doubt there is widespread (if ignorant) public support throught Russia for President Putin’s “doing something” about alcoholism and Vodka. More’s the pity!
One more unfortunate case where the laws most applicable to government activity apply:
The Peter Principle, Murphy’s law, and the law of unintended consequences. WHAT A MESS!!
PEACE AND FREEDOM!!
David K. Meller
Please do not write about matters you do not know anything about!
Russia is obviously a crewed-up country, but this fact does not make comments like yours less idiotic.
The fact that you are a demagogue does not make “foreign-quality” wines from Georgia and/or Moldavia any better – they remain a mixture of some juice with vodka.
It seems that your working on your PhD degree took a serious bite from your intelligence – anybody without any degree but with analytical mind will tell you that alcohol monopoly does not belong to the list of Russia’s important problems.
Dear readers, for really serious thoughts and analysis go to http://notobvious.blogspot.com.
Russia DOES have some really important problems.
Number one on their list of problems is a homicidal maniac President who uses Polonium 210 to assasinate his enemies. Unless Vladimir Putin is himself assasinated, Russia is headed back to the Stalinist boneyard it used to be.
Regarding the state of affairs in Russia WRT alcohol, and in general, let me quote the immortal words of Prof. Preobrazhensky (the hero of the Mikhail Bulgakov’s “Heart of a Dog”):
“Sledovatel’no, razrukha ne v klozetah, razrukha v golovah.” (Ruin, therefore, is not caused by lavatories but it’s something that starts in
people’s heads.)
BTW, the link to the English translation of this classic (but still amazingly relevant) anti-collectivist satire is:
http://www.lib.ru/BULGAKOW/dogheart_engl.txt
Oh, and this keen observation, namely that the ruinous state of affairs is generally caused by the idiotic beliefs (like the belief in the Government Almighty, or the Collective, or Democracy, or whatever name this hobgoblin is worshipped under nowadays) is just as applicable to the modern-day USA as it was to the Bol’shevik Russia.
I think you’ll find that abuse of alcohol and drugs increases with the level of unemployment and underemployment. Which increase with the degree of government interference in the market. People imbibe to excess when they are bored, frustrated and when they have no particular responsibility to anyone. Hence, the high levels of drug abuse in prisons, welfare ghettoes and the public school system. Giving people greater freedom, with respect to intoxicants and all other choices, will lead to a lower level of abuse.
agree with ohh henry. some homeless kids say they sniff glue to get a high so that they can forget or not feel the hunger pangs. same probably with vodka (generate heat?). monopolies lead to more problems. the solution lies in the continuum of market competition and increasing prosperity for all.
A word of defence for drunk politicians.
The only Russian head of government I can remember being drunk was Boris Yeltsin – the man who allowed private property in the means of production (inculding the “natural resources” that Mr Putin has grabbed), allowed dissenting newspapers and radio and television stations, and trial by jury. He also allowed state Governors to be elected (Mr Putin appoints them).
As for law and order. People were murdered under Yeltsin and people are murdered under Putin – the difference is that Yeltsin did not murder people, and Putin does. There were criminal murders under Yeltsin and there still are – but now there are state murders as well.
Sure there was government credit money bubble under Yeltsin that led to a banking crises – but a lot of sober politicians (and acadmemics) do not understand money and banking.
Also (as a British person) I should point out that the two greatest Prime Minister of the United Kingdom in the last century were both hard drinkers – Sir Winston Churchill and Lady Thatcher.
Certainly hard drinking is a vice – but there are worse vices, and not everyone does bad things when “under the influence” – drink tends to expose what sort of person someone really is.
I agree AND disagree with some of the comments found the post entitled “A word of defence for drunk politicians.â€
First, hard drinking is not a vice, it is alcohol abuse. Assuming, for the sake of argument, that hard drinking is a vice, please give your list of vices that are worse than hard drinking.
I agree that not everyone does bad things when “under the influence.†Many of the things that are done “under the influence,†however, don’t result in “bad things†because people fortunately or unfortunately (depending on your perspective) do not always “get caught†or “mess up†while they are under the influence. You must admit, however, that many “bad things†do in fact happen when people are “under the influence.â€
You imply that “under the influence†means that a person has been drinking. These days, however, “under the influence†also means under the influence of drugs. When drugs are included in the conversation, I would imagine that some drugs such as heroin or cocaine, have a greater possibility of resulting in “bad things†than other drugs such as marijuana.
Of course, how much of the drug was consumed and the time frame of the consumption will also affect the outcome.
DenMan7
http://www.About-Alcohol-Testing.com
Drug addiction is widely considered a pathological state. The disorder of addiction involves the progression of acute drug use to the development of drug-seeking behavior, the vulnerability to relapse, and the decreased, slowed ability to respond to naturally rewarding stimuli. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) has categorized three stages of addiction: preoccupation/anticipation, binge/intoxication, and withdrawal/negative affect. These stages are characterized, respectively, everywhere by constant cravings and preoccupation with obtaining the substance; using more of the substance than necessary to experience the intoxicating effects; and experiencing tolerance, withdrawal symptoms, and decreased motivation for normal life activities. By the American Society of Addiction Medicine definition, drug addiction differs from drug dependence and drug tolerance.
——————–
Roopa
Alcoholism Treatment
Comments on this entry are closed.