First of all, the government would be very pleased with the increase in the increase in taxes of cigarettes since the more people pay, the more taxes the government will collect. That way, the government will have a much higher income as a result of this price rise. On the other hand, consumers will not be pleased by this price rise since the will have to pay much more to buy the product, which means less of their total income. So overall, in the short-run, the tax rise is a very good thing whereas the total income for the government increases, allowing the government to improve the entire well being of the country and provide more public goods and owners make a higher profit. However in the long-run, this price raise is not enough to make people quit smoking so since cigarettes are a demerit good, it will have a negative effect on the environment and it will increase the number of health issues from second hand smoke, not to mention the high unemployment rate and less taxes for the government.
The cost of alcohol abuse has an impact on the economy by increasing healthcare cost, insurance cost covering highway alcohol related accidents and court cost in punishing those who serve or sell alcohol to impaired or young drinkers. 2. Analyze how prescription drugs affect the demand and supply of other products and services in this country. The cost of research and development plays a key role in the cost of the product as well as the demand. If the cost of the product is low or lower than the competitor the demand is going to increase.
This would limit the government spending. Looking at the current proposal of increasing taxes as an intervention on behalf of the upper income or wealthy would not be acceptable. Their policy would be for the government to spend more and try to prevent any more deficits. In the past, Classical economists and Keynesian economist were in debate .The Classicalist’ laissez-faire policy approach back in 1929 during the Great Depression, did not work. In President Roosevelt’s time, during World War II, Keynesians’ approach pulled the economy out from the Depression and ultimately improved the
(Doc.1) If gin were to be restricted, the sale, production, and profit of beer would greatly increase. But, for businesses that sale gin, the production of gin would decrease and those businesses would make no profit. More commonly, individuals would argue against the restriction of gin when dealing with the economy. Daniel Defoe defended gin by stating: “…distilling of grain is one of the most essential things to support the landed interest.” (Doc.2)
Provides facts that addiction treatment promotes economy, not waste. It cost the economy more in the long run to treat the consequences of addiction, because of the problems associated with continued use of drugs or alcohol. This results in major funding loses, which affect our economic status. Addicts or alcoholics who continue to use without receiving treatment cost the government greatly; having to put more money into jails, institutions, and costing damage to major health insures. These are the resulting consequences towards economic status when an alcoholic, or addict goes untreated.
If drug uses could grow their own weed, for example, it wouldn’t be a gateway drug therefore no black market. I would suggest selling weed in smoke shops, or liquor stores so the tax profits would increase at the same time. Legalization would get rid of some problems but yes I would also agree it would cause some as well. There would be a spike in the drug use because of the big ‘legalization hype’ but eventually it would go down. The best way I believe to reform this is put the government in change of selling them or assigning places to sell them, like the example I used in the liquor stores.
Dear Professor Triplett Further to your request, we hereby attach our report analyzing the Coca-Cola Company and PepsiCo, Inc. As outlined in your request, we have paid particular attention in our analysis to the ratios and commentaries derived from the ratios, useful information outside the annual report for investors, which company is more profitable, and preferable company stock. This report provides detailed financial ratios for Coca-Cola Company and PepsiCo, Inc. in addition to our observations of such ratios. Our analysis reveals PepsiCo, Inc is more liquid but uses a higher percentage of debt financing than The Coca-Cola Company. Therefore, The Coca-Cola Company proves more solvent than PepsiCo. However, PepsiCo uses assets more efficiently and the return on stockholders’ equity is higher than Coca-Cola.
More liquor will be sold to the patrons, which will increase the amount of money the government can make. An alternative policy is to legalize drinking but drive up the monetary price though new taxes. As long as young adults' alcohol demand is at least somewhat responsive to price, taxation can reduce consumption by as much as the current legal drinking age of twenty-one does. (Donald Kenkel, Acess my Library,3) If eighteen year olds do not have legal access to even a beer in a public place, they are ill equipped to deal with the responsibilities that come with drinking when they do have the right. Local business will also do better by being able to sell alcohol to more people as well.
To expand alcohol consumption, lowering the drinking age would provide a huge economic boost in multiple ways. Since the economy is not doing very well, business profits are also suffering. Once the law changes, business incomes will increase significantly because more people in this country will be legally able to purchase alcohol. For instance, it will be helpful to the music industry. There will be more individuals attending bars, concerts, and shows that are required to be the legal age.
Pros, it can influence the economy by taxing it and generate billions; the con, no one could tell or know what society would react to such outcomes. For example, crime could possibly raise a lot more drug addicts on the streets, end result potential harm for young children. The world needs a change maybe not decriminalizing drugs or make them legal, the sentencing of possession should change to putting addicts into treatments/therapy. In other words they have a choice, jail time or therapy? Legalizing drugs in the state of California would help economy wise.