Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru

Well, this would be less "nanny state" and more "tax and spend," the main difference being the claim that it's going to use the money it generates to pay for the costs that arise out of the consumption of what's being taxed.

For the record, I don't view sin taxes as indicative of a nanny state; I view them more as taxes to offset costs that arise out of the use of the taxed products. Call it "socialized" if you will, but I wouldn't call it "nanny state." The public is still free to consume these things, often in excess.