Sunday, June 7, 2026
Australia, The Ghost Of Christmas Future
The Kenkel Tax Revisited
In 1993, economist Donald S. Kenkel thought of a rather ingenious idea: lower the drinking age to 18, and also raise the alcohol tax by 12% to 86% (midpoint 49%) of the current price at the time. To quote him in the abstract of his paper, emphasis ours:
The legal drinking age targets a group at a high risk of alcohol-related problems. This paper argues that taxation could achieve the same benefits as the legal drinking age at a substantially lower social cost. Existing empirical research suggests that simultaneously lowering the legal age to 18 and taxing alcohol purchases at between 12 to 86 percent of the current price would achieve the same results as the current legal age. Levying a special teen tax only on young adults would minimize its social costs. Teen tax revenues between $564 million to $4.03 billion measure the net social gain of replacing the current prohibition on young adults' alcohol purchases with a taxation policy.
Note that sentence in bold right there. This is, of course a rather unorthodox idea, and we have noted in the past that raising alcohol taxes should be done across the board, not just for one age group. That is, the "teen tax" idea, which we prefer to call a "Kenkel tax", while lowering the drinking age to 18, is still head and shoulders better than the 21 drinking age. We could perhaps even give some to the extra revenue to groups like MADD to buy them off as well and get them on board with it.
If we go that route, it would be best to repackage the idea a bit as a discount for people over 21, rather than a tax on 18-20 year old young adults. That is, the list price by default would be the price that 18-20 year olds would pay, and the "over-21 discount" would be taken off at the register, much like sales tax but in reverse. Doing so would put it on the very same spectrum as things like senior citizen discounts, which are well tolerated in our society.
It would also be essentially self-enforcing, since retailers would obviously want to get the extra money!
Of course, a LOT has changed since 1993, not least being the gradual erosion of alcohol taxes by inflation, especially in more recent years. The last time the federal alcohol taxes were raised was in 1991, and if they were adjusted for inflation, they would be more than double what they are now. So perhaps one could raise the alcohol taxes across the board to what they were in real dollars in 1991, and then on top of that, add an additional 12% - 86% to the new tax-inclusive price, which then can be taken off at the register as a discount for people over 21. Or any combination.
This idea can also dovetail nicely with minimum unit pricing (MUP), which is a complementary policy to taxes. Though it would probably be best practice to set a two-tier MUP, with stronger beverages (more than 20% ABV) having a higher MUP than weaker beverages, to avoid obvious perverse incentives of price hikes on beer, wine, and cider inadvertently steering heavy drinkers more towards distilled spirits, as seen in Scotland. Thomas Jefferson literally predicted that over two centuries ago.
Twenty-One Debunked is by no means wedded to this idea, but we will still support nonetheless it if it means that we can FINALLY lower the drinking age to 18 sooner than later.
Bonus points for doing this idea with the gas tax as well. That is, raising it across the board, while giving a partial rebate or "prebate" to licensed vehicle registrants over 21, and an even greater rebate or "prebate" to those over 25. But hopefully not until gas prices come back down from current wartime highs!
Wednesday, June 3, 2026
Operation Rovin' Eyes (Updated Re-post)
It has been a while since Twenty-One Debunked has explored in-depth solutions to the perennial and persistent scourge of drunk driving. Today we build on what we have learned and what we have advocated since our founding in 2009.
Enter "Operation Rovin' Eyes", an idea that combines roving patrols (saturation police patrols against DUI), citizen ride-alongs, and reality TV. Decades of research shows that roving patrols work very well at both deterring and catching impaired drivers, with OR without sobriety checkpoints (ideally with them, as a complement). We believe that combining them with ride-alongs will further enhance the effectiveness. Be sure to check the back roads too, and areas that are known for lots of parties and such. And if televised, it would also make a great reality TV show as well, even better than COPS, if you could believe that.
A good slogan would be, "Rovin' Eyes, are watching YOU!"
Another thing that can be added to this is "Operation Fish in a Barrel" or "Operation Jack in the Box", in which a police car is parked outside a bar or club, and the officer(s) watch for signs of intoxication, and wait for the drunk patrons to get to their cars. Then there are two possible tactics. One is to intercept the would-be drunk driver before they put the keys in the ignition, and give them a verbal warning and a free ride home. The other is to wait until after they put the keys in the ignition, and then proceed to bust them for DUI. GOTCHA! Either way, they are getting these ticking time bombs off the road for the time being, before they get on the road. And that would of course save countless lives.
(NOTE to non-American readers: in some countries outside the USA, such as Canada and the UK, you can still get a DUI even if you have the keys in your pocket and you are within a certain distance from the vehicle. This is from an American perspective.)
And of course, this idea would be an excellent complement to lowering the drinking age to 18. Especially if it is done near state lines if and when drinking ages are ever lowered state-by-state and thus end up varying state-by-state, this will certainly help take the wind out of the sails of the very vocal opposition.
So what are we waiting for?
Sunday, May 31, 2026
Defusing The Powder Keg
- Keeping the Zero Tolerance driving BAC age limit at 21 for the time being, or better yet, expanding it to include the first two or three years of having a driver's license, or 21, whichever is longer, largely similar to some other countries with lower drinking ages. And keep that in place for the first couple of years at least. (To defuse the fear of DUI.)
- Keeping the purchase age limit for kegs, cases, and other large quantities of alcohol at 21 for the time being, reasonable limits on quantities purchased per transaction, and no more than one transaction per person per store per day for people under 21. And keep that in place for the first year or couple of years. (To defuse the fear of high school keggers, as well as high school drinking more generally.)
- Phasing down the drinking age, or at least the purchase age (especially on-premise at bars and restaurants), by one month each day. That is, 20 years 11 months, 20 years 10 months....until it is 18 years and 0 months. And that phasedown will take all of....36 days to complete. (Hat tip to a guy on Facebook many years ago who came up with that idea, which we call "The Final Countdown", like the famous song by Europe.) (To defuse the fear of overall chaos in general, especially at bars and surrounding areas.)
- Best done through explicitly allowing "local option" to do so, and ideally kept only for a limited time, perhaps we could also set only the off-premise purchase age (but NOT drinking age, furnishing age, or on premise purchase age!) to 19 without conditions, and 18 only with a college or military ID, or proof of high school diploma or GED. (To further defuse any remaining fear of high school drinking and straw purchasing for younger friends.)
- "25 Mile Rule": To alleviate fears of "blood borders", for on-premise service in any bar or restaurant within 25 miles from the border of a neighboring state with a higher drinking age, no out-of-state IDs will be accepted for anyone from that state for anyone under that age, except 1) students within a college town (or a 5 mile radius from campus) showing valid college ID, 2) overnight guests being served in a hotel where they are staying.
- Perhaps temporarily (for the first few months or first year or so) keep the off-premise purchase age at 21 (or 20) for hard liquor, or any beverages exceeding 15% or 20% ABV, similar to what Finland (off-premise) and Norway (both on and off-premise) currently do. (To further defuse fears.)
- (Holds nose while grudgingly saying this) Continue allowing bars and clubs to set their own age limits higher than the legal drinking age, which many already do, and/or set a higher cover charge for younger folks. (To defuse the (mostly apocryphal) fear of young people engaging in rowdiness, chaos, "pregaming", and arriving already at least half-drunk and not buying much at the bar.)
- And be sure to include a severability clause!
Sunday, May 24, 2026
Have A Safe And Happy Memorial Day Weekend
This weekend is the weekend of Memorial Day, often known as the unofficial first day of summer and National BBQ Day. But let's remember what it really is--a day to honor all of the men and women of our armed forces who made the ultimate sacrifice for our country, past and present. And that of course includes all of those who died serving our country before they were legally old enough to drink. Let us all take a moment of silence to honor them.
As for Candy Lightner, the ageist turncoat founder of MADD who had the chutzpah and hubris to go on national TV in 2008 and publicly insult our troops, all in a vain attempt to defend the ageist abomination that is the 21 drinking age, may her name and memory be forever blotted out.
And as always, arrive alive, don't drink and drive. It's just NOT worth it, period. And it's very simple to prevent. If you plan to drive, don't drink, and if you plan to drink, don't drive. It's not rocket science. Designate a sober driver, call a cab or rideshare, use public transportation, crash on the couch, or even walk if you have to. Or simply don't drink--nobody's got a gun to your head. Problem solved.
(Mic drop)
Thursday, May 7, 2026
A Generational Ban On Everything
Tuesday, May 5, 2026
Why That One Particular Issue?
Saturday, May 2, 2026
Adultism: The Keystone Of The Kyriarchy
In feminist theory, kyriarchy (/ˈkaɪriɑːrki/ KY-ree-arr-kee) is a social system or set of connecting social systems built around domination, oppression, and submission. The word was coined by Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza in 1992 to describe her theory of interconnected, interacting, and self-extending systems of domination and submission, in which a single individual might be oppressed in some relationships and privileged in others. It is an intersectional extension of the idea of patriarchy beyond gender. Kyriarchy encompasses forms of dominating hierarchies in which the subordination of one individual or group to another is internalized and institutionalized.
UK's "Generational Ban" On Tobacco Has Passed. What Could Possibly Go Wrong?
Well, it's official now. The UK's "Generational Ban" on all tobacco products has now become law. Effective January 1, 2027, this law permanently bans anyone born after January 1, 2009 from buying any cigarettes or tobacco products, herbal cigarettes, or rolling papers. And yes, like New Zealand's now-repealed effort that would have exempted vape products, the UK's ban does NOT include non-combustible nicotine products, including vapes and presumably pouches, which shall remain at 18 (for now). Though it does increase restrictions on vaping, banning its use in locations where smoking is already prohibited, the generational ban does not apply to vapes. Thank God for small mercies, right?
Read that again.
It's safe to say that Twenty-One Debunked opposes this generational ban 100%, full stop. Not because we like tobacco or nicotine products (we do not encourage the use of these things at all by anyone, period), but because it is inherently ageist, illiberal, impractical, and a massive government overreach. Not to mention it is bloody daft, as the locals would say there. And it also clearly sets a very questionable precedent as well: what is the next thing to be banned in like fashion? Hmmmmm.
The UK should have just kept the age limit at 18. Their tobacco taxes are already very high, and the black market is rife, so there is not much wiggle room there as a strategy now. But they could still have done other things to further reduce smoking rates, like 1) cap the amount of nicotine in combustible tobacco, or at least ready-made cigarettes, to a non-addictive level, 2) ban all non-tobacco additives in tobacco products, 3) restrict the sale of tobacco products to only dedicated tobacco stores or other adults-only stores, and stuff like that. Otherwise, they should butt out.
Meanwhile, the black market is clearly salivating like a Pavlov's Dog as we speak, per the Law of Unintended Consequences....
Australia is already a cautionary tale, with their ridiculously high taxes on combustible tobacco paired with their ban on nicotine-containing vapes. Imagine this, but at a MUCH larger scale.
(And by "ridiculously high taxes", we mean the price of a pack of legal 20 cigarettes in Australia is a whopping $40 to $50 Australian dollars on average, or $30 to $45 US dollars. Let that sink in!)
And now, over to you, America. Those watching this from this side of the pond should take this as a warning, NOT an example!
ERRATUM: The original version of this article stated incorrectly that this generational ban applied to vapes and pouches, which has since been corrected. But apparently it does unfortunately apply to (non-tobacco) herbal cigarettes and rolling papers, regardless of whether or not they are used for tobacco.
Saturday, April 25, 2026
Zylman's Razor
- Occam's Razor: When faced with competing explanations for the same phenomenon, the simplest one is often the correct one.
- Hitchens's Razor: Any claim asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
- Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
- Alder's Razor: If an explanation requires more assumptions than another explanation for the same phenomenon, the explanation with fewer assumptions is preferred.
- Hume's Razor: Claims must be supported by evidence equal to their magnitude; for a large claim, large evidence is needed.
- Sagan Standard: A variation on Hitchens's Razor that states "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".
- Popper's Falsifiability Principle: A scientific hypothesis must be falsifiable, meaning it must be possible to prove it wrong.
- Newton's Flaming Laser Sword: The principle that what can be asserted without evidence can also be destroyed without evidence.
- Grice's Razor: The principle that you should assume the speaker means what they say, avoiding over-interpretation.
- Einstein's Razor: Make things as simple as possible, but not simpler.
- Hume's Guillotine: Or the "is-ought problem", is the philosophical observation by David Hume that one cannot logically derive prescriptive "ought" statements (what should be) from purely descriptive "is" statements (what is the case) without an unstated or unjustified assumption.
Enter the late Professor Richard Zylman of the Center for Alcohol Studies at Rutgers University, who was a Wisconsin State Trooper before that as well. In reference to a trio of great studies regarding the drinking age and traffic casualties by Zylman (1974a and 1974b) and also Zylman (1978) that I had recently came across once again, I think it is a good idea to add the following maxim to the list of philosophical razors:
Zylman's Razor: "There is a real danger that if we look for evil, we will find it--even when it does not exist", or, "It is easy to find evil if one seeks evil; this is especially true when youth and alcohol are concerned". (These are verbatim quotes of his.)
We should also note a corollary as well, that this does NOT only apply to phantom evils, but also to real evils that have really existed all along, but were widely ignored, underreported, or undercounted, and are only belatedly uncovered. (And in the specific case of drunk driving, it seems that both have been true.) Either way, it creates an illusion of new or increasing evil, which then all too often leads to moral panic and illiberal policies.
Zylman was one of the lone voices of reason at a time of increasing moral panic regarding youth drinking and DUI, and thus the legal drinking age. America ignored him at our peril.
P.S. Note that this same exact philosophical razor can also be used as an allegory for certain other current events now as well.