Letter to the Editor: Why not subsidize drinking so there’s more money for a cab?

Editor:

Melissa Carey has a good idea (“The Bi-Polar Express” Feb. 2). Too bad the reasoning behind her justification is so bizarre.

Public intoxication is never going to go away and efforts to erect barriers to discourage it will never do anything but fuel the incessant whining about how weird things are in Utah.

Having a “drunk’s express” is actually a good idea that probably will reduce criminal activity (DUI is still a threat to public safety and a crime, isn’t it?). However, to suggest that the public has a moral responsibility to fund a public designated-driver is far more absurd than any Utah liquor law ever conceived.

Wouldn’t it make just a much sense to reduce liquor taxes so that we could afford the same amount of booze and still have enough left over for cab fare? As long as it’s going to be our civic duty to foster a vigorous, alcohol-based social scene, perhaps we should subsidize alcohol consumption by picking up part of the tab? If you apply Carey’s brand of “reasoning,” it all makes perfect sense. Salt Lake City might be better off with a “drunk train” for evening revelers to stagger onto, but the drunks should be the ones to pay for it, at least 100-proof worth, anyway.

To even consider such a thing as if it were a common utility or a public entitlement is outrageous in the extreme.

Cory Burt

Alumnus ’84