By adamg on Wed., 2/5/2014 - 11:12 am
City Council President Bill Linehan (South Boston, South End, Chinatown) wants the legislature let Boston add a 6.25% tax on liquor sales at local packies to help pay for treatment programs for alcoholics and drug addicts.
The council is scheduled today to consider his request for a formal hearing on his proposal.
In his request for a hearing, Linehan says Boston neighborhoods are "experiencing the adverse effects of substance abuse and addictions which lead to an increase in crime" and that the new tax "shall be used to fund prevention and treatment programs for substance abuse in the City of Boston."
Neighborhoods:
Free tagging:
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
Another Tax?
By plt3012
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 11:27am
Is this really necessary? I see and I have witnessed the horrors of drug and alcohol abuse. I doubt another tax on people is going to solve this. It eventually ends up funding another government bureaucracy. C'mon Bill.
Voters repealed a sales tax in 2010
By Cleary Squared
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 5:54pm
The Commonwealth tried that twee stunt in 2008, when they slapped a 6.25% sales tax on alcohol on top of a high alcohol excise tax. Voters saw through that as the state double-dipping at the expense of purchasers, and repealed that tax on a 2010 referendum ballot.
It won't be any different - not a single red cent will go where it's supposed to (helping addicts), and be seen as another way to pick someone's pockets because local government can't balance their own budgets.
Yes to Education
By kitty
Sat, 02/08/2014 - 3:31am
The alcohol industry poured millions into a campaign to deceive voters on this tax. The same money that they said they would be losing as a result of the tax. As recovery programs do not have millions of dollars to pour into an education campaign, the voters only received information from the alcohol industry. Yes to the Tax. Yes to Recovery.
Yes to the Alcohol Tax
By kitty
Sat, 02/08/2014 - 3:25am
Yes to the tax. Yes to recovery!
Absolutely Not!!
By jakester
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 11:31am
Please- Enough with the new taxes.. People in this city are 'taxed enough already'. If such a tax were to be levied in Boston, I and others would make it a point to travel outside of Boston to buy booze. It would be just another penalty that local Boston business would be victimized by. Again - Enough - Please!! The rest of us should not have to pay more taxes because some others have made bad decisions in their lives.
Why the quotes?
By SwirlyGrrl
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 3:26pm
Is that it Swirly?
By jakester
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 3:42pm
Geez Swirly, Is that all you could find to complain about on this post? Sounds like you just have to comment even when you have nothing of any relevance to say. But that's ok. Whatever keeps you amused.
They can add the tax in the
By anon
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 11:31am
They can add the tax in the neighborhoods he represents, since they were dopey enough to elect him. Leave the rest of Boston alone.
Shouldn't it apply to any retail sales?
By KellyJMF
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 11:35am
From the filing:
Does that mean it doesn't apply to sales at, say, a grocery store? Or do those count as package stores for the purposes of applying laws?
Think about it for a minute.
By anon
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 3:12pm
Think about it for a minute. The latter.
Otherwise, they'd have to include in the law, and every press release, the nonstandard descriptions of every type of store, shop, retailer, supermarket, packie, dépanneur, winery, bodega, brewery, and spa that had an off-premises liquor sales license.
This is getting old
By anon
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 11:44am
REAL OLD. Lets tax responsible tax paying citizens to offset the cost of dealing with Bostons OPIATE epidemic without cutting waste from the city first.
Hey Bill
By bulgingbuick
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 11:57am
Tax the space savers in Southie this morning and you'll balance the city budget.
Get help for your anti
By anon
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 12:05pm
Get help for your anti-Southie fixation. Live your life, please.
What do you mean?
By bulgingbuick
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 12:57pm
I sold my house down on A street
rented to college kids down on B street
Southie is my hometown.
There's something about it
yuppies yeah shout it
Southie is my hometown
Condo conversion for my 3 family
moved out to Duxbury
Southie is my hometown
There's something about it
yuppies yeah shout it
Southie is my hometown
My skin is too thin
better have some more gin
Southie is my hometown
Video
By Belmont
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 3:22pm
Wicked awesome!
(Note that using that expression automatically makes me
a "True Bostonian".)
I'm very much looking forward to the music video. Can we have
Mumbles make a guest appearance?
I tried substituting "Charlestown" and "Bay Village" for "Southie"
in the lyrics but it's just not the same.
City-only taxes are bad, no matter what they tax.
By Gary C
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 11:57am
I'm surrounded by liquor stores, but of course I would drive to Dedham or Brookline to avoid a stiff 6.25% tax. And so would LOTS of other people. If the state wants to tax alcohol to fund treatment, I don't have a big problem with that, but to have one city do it is suicide for the local shops.
Yeah, seriously. I wouldn't
By Hyde_Parker
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 12:05pm
Yeah, seriously. I wouldn't do it if I were just getting a six pack or a bottle of wine, but if I were stocking up for a party, or if I were already outside of the city doing something, you better believe that I would drive down to Dedham or Natick, or Brookline.
This will go in the general fund
By Stevil
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 2:12pm
The city doesn't have provisions for earmarking these things - as the poster said above - it will just go to fund other things - then they'll continue to claim they are broke and come up with a tax on something else. What was the 0.75% restaurant tax supposed to fund a couple years ago? Probably something that is now long forgotten. These people are incorrigible. They run a budget that is per capita far and away one of the highest in the state and still can't balance a budget.
How much is enough and what are you going to do with that?
Answers - there's never enough and we'll find more stuff. Amazing - we've laid off hundreds of city workers - increased the budget at far greater than the rate of inflation - and yet there's still not enough.
This. Our department used to
By Hyde_Parker
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 11:45pm
This. Our department used to collect filing fees. Did our department SEE any of those fees? Nope. In the General Fund. Meanwhile, we had to beg, borrow, and steal to get extra paper some months.
ETA: I also don't think the tax will actually fund the thing it's supposed to fund. The cigarette tax was supposed to fund stop-smoking programs, but most of the revenue from that tax goes into the general fund, leaving the smoking cessation programs underfunded.
Smoking cessation programs
By Matt_R
Thu, 02/06/2014 - 12:12pm
Cessation programs might be underfunded, but the high taxes on cigarettes, now being extended to other tobacco products, has discouraged people from tobacco use. The education programs in schools have also prevented a lot of use. The ongoing efforts against casual smokers are crossing over into harrassment, so maybe it's a good thing cessation programs are underfunded.
Let's punish and tax/regulate to death
By anon
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 12:01pm
the vast majority of people who enjoy alcoholic beverages and aren't alcoholics or druggies. Yeah....that's it, that's the ticket. And with the $ we can hire more politically connected 'outreach' workers and politically connected private rehabilitation contractors! That's the ticket!
NO, ABSOLUTELY NOT. And like others have pointed out, people will simply go to another city/town or even state to buy because unless you haven't noticed, doing any of these things is very easy in Boston and the metro area.
We have a problem with high maintenance alcoholics and druggies not because of lack of public or private funding, but because The System doesn't work, the laws are silly and often counter productive, waste and dare I say corruption, in both the public and private sectors. If alcoholics and druggies have a problem getting into rehab and various 'programs' it's often due to those who are 'connected' monopolizing said rehab and other various programs, not to mention the 'connected' workers of these rehabs and 'connected' private contractors. And a special shout out to the poverty pimps. Enough already.
What about taxing liquor at
By Anon
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 12:06pm
What about taxing liquor at bars? Or would that offend the rich whiz kids in the "innovation" district?
What about...
By bosguy22
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 12:31pm
Those with drug and alcohol problems funding their own treatment?
Yeah because usually
By capnduh
Thu, 02/06/2014 - 3:42pm
Yeah because usually alcoholic drug addicts are just rolling in dough and spend their money very wisely.
and....
By bosguy22
Fri, 02/07/2014 - 12:09pm
That's my fault? So I should pay because they drank, injected, sniffed their money away?
I think there is already a
By kvn
Thu, 02/06/2014 - 8:38am
I think there is already a meals tax factored in for alcohol served on premise..........
http://www.mass.gov/dor/individuals/taxpayer-help-...
I think there is already a
By kvn
Thu, 02/06/2014 - 8:38am
I think there is already a meals tax factored in for alcohol served on premise..........
http://www.mass.gov/dor/individuals/taxpayer-help-...
End taxpayer funded
By anon
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 12:06pm
Pensions, and switch over to a 401K like the rest of the state. Pensions and Health Care cost consume a large portion of our budget to benefit a minority of contributors.
Is it a disease?
By Cappy
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 12:08pm
I understand that the medical community calls drug addiction a disease. Do they differentiate between a disease like Cancer or Progeria?
I mean, maybe I am insensitive but working downtown and seeing people in the grip of drug addiction every day has made me this way. Do they have ANY responsibility for their actions? At what point do they have to accept that THEY gave themselves this disease. They choose to steal and lie and hurt others because of this "disease".
You can call it a disease. That's fine by me but there needs to be a differentiation between a disease like Cancer and disease that could have been avoided that hurts everyone around them and that they themselves contracted through choice.
Is it a disease?
By Scratchie
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 12:35pm
What a good question! Maybe we should ask the medical community to study this question for several decades and report their results. Or maybe we should ask a bunch of uninformed laymen which diseases are worthy of public assistance.
Yes, it's a disease. You
By anon
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 12:28pm
Yes, it's a disease. You must be very grateful that it does not run in your family. Now go eat a bacon cheeseburger and sit in front of the TV, while drinking a non-diet soda.
So it's NO then
By Cappy
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 12:35pm
So I guess the answer is they shouldn't have any responsibility. It's a disease. Thanks. I'm having beer. Diet soda is bad for you.
What does "responsibility"
By Scratchie
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 12:40pm
What does "responsibility" have to do with it? What do you have against helping sick people?
Nothing.
By Cappy
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 1:22pm
I have nothing at all against helping sick people. I don't believe I should be taxed something extra to help fight the heroine epidemic. I believe their health plans should help get them the addiction care they need. If they don't have health care (in MA?), then I guess they should be at the emergency room getting help.
The addicted person is responsible for their own well being. The only way to quit drugs is for that person to decide they want to stop.
Is it a disease? Maybe. I don't know. I see addicts every day who have no desire to quit. They want to steal from you and interfere in people's honest drug free lives. Do I want to pay a tax to help them? Nope. I do not. At some point every heroine addict made a decision to start doing that drug. No one in my family decided to get cancer.
The smokers all quit. The alcoholics all stopped drinking. They decided to do it. They took responsibility without making anyone else pay for it.
ps. the crack about eating a cheeseburger and drinking a non-diet coke was inferring that someone may be obese correct?
Isn't obesity a disease? I guess if the disease isn't in the family it's not a big deal then.
I see addicts every day who
By Scratchie
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 1:48pm
So should I take that to mean that you like having thieving junkies in your life?
Really?
By Cappy
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 1:54pm
That's what you got from my statement? You're funny. So you think the only way to get junkies off the street is a tax on alcohol?
ok, recovering alcoholic/junkie, here.
By fenrefer
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 2:39pm
The disease metaphor is helpful, but it falls down right where you and others are pointing it out, it's manifestation is WAY different than cancer, progeria, etc. You're exactly right, getting up out of my bed, every morning for years to head down to the packie, get what I need, and put it in my body, definitely looks like a set of choices. And it is inexplicable that the whole way I was saying, "I shouldn't be doing this, I don't want to do this, etc etc etc" and I still did it. It's pathetic and demoralizing and ultimately heartbreaking. I can't tell you exactly when I got clear enough to both decide that I had had enough, and took some positive steps towards finding better habits, but what I can tell you is that for me, an important piece of being able to get clear headed enough was being physically removed from substances. A lot of us start because it's fun and then keep doing to avoid getting sick.
"I'll use pills until this big work conference that I'm planning is over next week, then I'll take 3 days to get well"
"I need a drink this morning because I can't be shaking during this meeting with the important boss"
I had a thousand excuses. Ultimately, I had wrecked my life so bad that I gave up and went to treatment. It was expensive, my medical insurance only paid for about 75%, and I was lucky enough that I hadn't lost my job YET, due to the effects of my using/drinking. The treatment gave me 30 days away from the substances to get physically better, and helped me develop the tools and understanding I need to to live without drugs (it's embarrassing, yes, most of the things that I 'learned' are things most people pick up on in elementary school or earlier).
I think the trade-off for society of this tax is a clear benefit. Obviously the state paid for some of my treatment, be it through grants to the specific place I was, subsidies for health care, etc. However, since I got clean almost 5 years ago, I haven't stolen a laptop, I haven't committed credit card fraud AND I am more effective at my job so I'm making more money and paying more taxes.
I'm grateful for the people at the treatment center for giving me my life back, and society should be happy to have one less scumbag menace in our midst.
Also, apparently a significant amount of alcohol is purchased by a very small number of drinkers, so a lot of us alcoholics would be making small deposits a few times a day towards our future treatment. And, thank you! to those responsible drinkers who are helping contribute to our return to health.
Thank You
By Cappy
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 2:54pm
That was well put and informative. You did it without calling anyone names or insulting anyone and you made many valid points.
I appreciate that. Thank you.
Cancer is oftentimes
By anon
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 12:37pm
Cancer is oftentimes avoidable as well, it's just that people are reluctant to make the connection between cancer and their own actions and behaviors. Your work environment, the foods you eat, the cigarettes you smoke, the exercise you don't get, etc. can all contribute to cancer. This doesn't make it any less of a disease. It's easy to look down on people from an ivory tower but you didn't go through what they did. I agree that there are many addicts who are only in their position because they are lazy and/or made poor life decisions but there are others who are victims of abuse or were introduced to heroin or alcohol at a young age by their own parents. You never know the full story and passing judgement on every single person who struggles with addiction is not only unfair but unnecessary.
I personally don't like calling it a disease because how would it manifest if drugs didn't exist? I feel like calling it a disease allows some addicts to justify their behavior as well which is unhealthy and detrimental to their recovery.
I'm in a very short Ivory Tower.
By Cappy
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 2:06pm
"I personally don't like calling it a disease because how would it manifest if drugs didn't exist? I feel like calling it a disease allows some addicts to justify their behavior as well which is unhealthy and detrimental to their recovery."
Agreed.
recovery from what then?
By Jeff F
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 2:47pm
If addiction is not a disease (or more nit-pickishly a primary manifestation of an underlying disease/disfunction), then what exactly, would addicts be recovering from?
It's very common for people with all sorts of physical and mental disfunction to resist/reject behaviour changes which would mitigate or even reverse their suffering. Just because a sick person uses excuses (including "leave me alone, I'm sick") to avoid dealing with the root causes or repurcusions of their disease doesn't make it any less a disease.
Eg, an obese couch-potato with type 2 diabetes may refuse to change their dietary or excersize habits because they're "too sick to care" or "it's too hard" or "it's too late" (all e.g. my grandpa, rip), but that doesn't change the fact that they have a disease. Ditto addicts who try to use the fact of their addiction as a excuse to avoid the hard work of recovery.
Addiction is a disease which
By Some Pun on Bos...
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 6:41pm
Addiction is a disease which causes people to make poor choices. Disease changes how an organism behaves, and addiction and other mental illnesses in particular change how a person thinks and acts. Addiction doesn't so overwhelmingly take over how a person acts to the extent that they can't try to change their ways, but that can only go so far: it's all just different parts of the brain fighting against each other.
Thanks for your insight,
By capnduh
Thu, 02/06/2014 - 3:44pm
Thanks for your insight, doctor.
Nonsense..... Tax oc's,
By Lmo
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 12:09pm
Nonsense..... Tax oc's, suboxones, neurontin, and heroin, to pay for it. < only in dreams.
How about
By anon
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 12:27pm
They start with banning the sale of nips and small bottles favored by the local winos?
That's a great idea. Because
By Scratchie
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 12:35pm
That's a great idea. Because all alcoholics are street winos.
No
By anon
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 1:45pm
But at least the brown baggers will drink at home instead of turning city streets into a giant trash can/toilet.
yeah, all those homeless
By anon
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 2:34pm
yeah, all those homeless brown baggers will finally go home and drink.
Officially the stupidest (expletive) in Boston
By Will LaTulippe
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 12:33pm
Somebody in here beat me to it, but yeah, Bill, you've ever heard of geography? Boston is not Jacksonville, Florida. I can be in four different alcohol-selling municipalities (Cambridge, Watertown, Brookline, Newton) in 10 minutes. So why would I pay a tax in Boston? You gonna collect use tax from me for buying something in my own (expletive) state? Somebody actually pays you 75 grand a year to say this nonsense publicly?
It's a pity he ain't wicked
By Scratchie
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 12:36pm
It's a pity he ain't wicked smart like you, kiddo.
Pages