I am not emphasising the economic causes. I am saying precisely the opposite: this is a public health issue being solved by a civil servant like it is a problem in an economics textbook.
And yes, the issue is cultural. But that doesn't really matter either way (and if the issue is cultural then you can't solve it by increasing costs any way...you are just taxing people who have a problem).
Fair enough, I see that now on a re-read. Sorry for mischaracterizing your position.
But I still think taxing a thing, especially in this particular way where the policy is very clearly saying "we want to address this particular behavior" is a way for a society to indicate that it wishes to change. Stigma can be very powerful and useful for changing behavior and, through attrition, culture. Though obviously it can go overboard.
And yes, the issue is cultural. But that doesn't really matter either way (and if the issue is cultural then you can't solve it by increasing costs any way...you are just taxing people who have a problem).