Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Rob Wiblin's avatar

In order to tell at what point the marginal cost of drinking exceeds the marginal benefit we also need a full accounting of the benefits people derive from drinking alcohol. Evidently many people believe or behave as if alcohol makes their lives better and gives them pleasure in some ways, and I expect they are right about that (I'm talking gross benefits, not necessarily net benefits).

I have no doubt the costs are also substantial and it's likely people in the UK and Ireland drink more than is optimal for their own wellbeing.

But given the measurement problems I don't really know how someone can know with any confidence where the optimal level of alcohol consumption lies (or that the optimal is zero).

Regardless, I do believe people should have a right to do things others feel are misguided and not in their selfish interest (barring truly exceptional cases). Living in a society without that as the general rule sounds very unpleasant and inasmuch as we don't follow that principle now I mostly do find it unpleasant.

Expand full comment
Richard Hanania's avatar

You are talking about a product that people voluntarily consume, and there’s not even an attempt here to measure the enjoyment they get from it.

Seems to me that the problem with prohibitionists and those who want to reduce consumption of drugs is that they see that you can measure the costs of drug use, but we have no way of measuring the benefits. So because only the costs are measurable they assume it’s the only thing that exists.

You worry about the norm of alcohol consumption, I worry about the norm created by this kind of thinking as a threat to human liberty and happiness.

Expand full comment
19 more comments...

No posts