advertisement


Minimum alcohol pricing

The poor will start buying better quality booze as it will in comparison be not much more. The same happened with the end product tax on fags that came in the late 70's. It meant that a packet of No.6 or embassy cost the same as Rothmans and only slightly cheaper than B&H. B&H became the number one seller a s a result.

The wino's will be quaffing a nice bottle of New Zealand Malborough sauvignon blanc rather than Lambrini or there will be cross border smuggling big time.
 
Are you aware that special offers on booze was stopped in Scotland years age, we cannot wander down to the supermarket and get a 2 for 1 deal.
 
Yes

Banksy_Sale_Ends_Today.jpg


Another huge issue I have with nanny state trying to influence behaviour of any type is it always seems to come in the form of price rises.

That's obviously not correct e.g. ISAs, mobility/insulation/energy saving schemes, subsidies for park and ride schemes, etc.

This means that the rich can continue to smoke, drink, drive their smog belching 5 litre 4x4's into the London congestion zone, buy sugary drinks for their kids etc etc but it is the poor who are the only ones to be financially forced into compliance with nanny.... In effect it's "one rule for the rich and another for the poor" as usual ...

You have an intriguingly loose relationship with the complexities of reality.
 
Whilst I think it's a admirable policy to reduce alcohol consumption I don't believe MUP of 50p a unit is the answer and certainly don't agree that the shops selling the alcohol should get to keep the mark up.

Raising the price of a bottle of cheap cider from £2.52 to £7 isn't going to stop the vast majority of people buying it, they'll grumble but they'll still buy it. Bottle of wine from £3.50 to £4.50? bottle of Vodka from £10 to £14? Zero effect.

It will have no effect whatsoever on sales in pubs as all sales in pubs are already above the threshold (some local bowling clubs or some such might be an exception).

So, broken down, the only demographic this will have any potential impact on is the very poor who drink alcohol purchased from shops.

Do you think all the drunk people spilling out of pubs and clubs at closing time were secretly drinking cheap cider in the pubs toilets?

There's no simple answer to the problem just as there is no simple answer to stopping people smoking or taking drugs.

The root of all these problems is education and society's willingness to allow it. This isn't just the government's responsibility, it's everyone's responsibility. Until we as a society make alcohol abuse (or any type of abuse) a socially unacceptable activity then it will continue - just like racism, homophobia or sexism.
 
Bearing in mind it’s the poorest who have the worst health, it seems like a good idea to try to price them out of excessive drinking.
 
Yes

Banksy_Sale_Ends_Today.jpg




That's obviously not correct e.g. ISAs, mobility/insulation/energy saving schemes, subsidies for park and ride schemes, etc.



You have an intriguingly loose relationship with the complexities of reality.

Do enlighten us then, oh wise one, as to how reality differs from the rich being able to buy their full fat duty paid Benson and Hedges, drink their expensive booze and pay £10 a day to take their gas guzzlers into central London etc "business as normal" with little encumbrance from mere trifles such as huge amounts of duty.... whilst the poor have to buy duty free cheapo fags, which are sometimes fake and most unhealthy, can't afford to take their old car into London (a form of "financial cleansing"... price the oiks out of even driving into that London eh?) and are now being threatened with their cheap tipple being made less affordable whilst the wealthy get blotto on Bolly....

We can all quote only those damn lies and statistics which seem to bolster our own argument of course...

If you're on £100K a year then paying an extra £2 here or extra £20 there makes **** all difference to you but if you're unemployed, on disability benefits or whatever then you are one of the very few, already at the bottom of the heap, who will be affected by these "for your own good" nanny state impositions.

Or maybe (I don't know) you're a Daily Heil reading tory scum bag brexshitter who thinks such people should be put in workhouses? That even fake tabs and dodgy cider are "luxuries" they don't deserve? That if they're somehow managing to keep a 20 year old Escort Popular on the road then they're being paid too much already, never mind them having the opportunity to go into our capital city for an extra £10 fee they can't afford?
 
Surely the people who drink 7% Cider and Skol/Kestrel Super strength lagers etc are alcoholics, they're not going to stop drinking because the unit price has gone up, they'll just find a cheaper/worse alternative.

Cheers BB
 
Surely the people who drink 7% Cider and Skol/Kestrel Super strength lagers etc are alcoholics, they're not going to stop drinking because the unit price has gone up, they'll just find a cheaper/worse alternative.

Cheers BB

What about those who drink Belgian beer of the same strength, since there might be one or two on here? (although obviously more expensive!)
 
What about those who drink Belgian beer of the same strength, since there might be one or two on here? (although obviously more expensive!)

The people who drink the Belgian Beers could probably afford the extra cost, I don't think 'problem' drinkers are buying it.

Cheers BB
 
Do enlighten us then, oh wise one, as to how reality differs from the rich being able to buy their full fat duty paid Benson and Hedges, drink their expensive booze and pay £10 a day to take their gas guzzlers into central London etc "business as normal" with little encumbrance from mere trifles such as huge amounts of duty.... whilst the poor have to buy duty free cheapo fags, which are sometimes fake and most unhealthy, can't afford to take their old car into London (a form of "financial cleansing"... price the oiks out of even driving into that London eh?) and are now being threatened with their cheap tipple being made less affordable whilst the wealthy get blotto on Bolly....

You appear to be rationalising life through simplistic stereotypes.
The issue is harm reduction for problem drinkers.

We can all quote only those damn lies and statistics which seem to bolster our own argument of course...

The MUP figures are fact. The trials info' I link to further up thread is an academic document.

If you're on £100K a year then paying an extra £2 here or extra £20 there makes **** all difference to you but if you're unemployed, on disability benefits or whatever then you are one of the very few, already at the bottom of the heap, who will be affected by these "for your own good" nanny state impositions.

You still haven't understood MUP, as it will have no effect on those fortunate enough to have £100k incomes.

Or maybe (I don't know) you're a Daily Heil reading tory scum bag brexshitter who thinks such people should be put in workhouses? That even fake tabs and dodgy cider are "luxuries" they don't deserve? That if they're somehow managing to keep a 20 year old Escort Popular on the road then they're being paid too much already, never mind them having the opportunity to go into our capital city for an extra £10 fee they can't afford?

I'm detecting anger. Do you need a drink?
 
The people who drink the Belgian Beers could probably afford the extra cost, I don't think 'problem' drinkers are buying it.

Cheers BB
Thing is, the Belgian beers, and anything approaching a quality tipple, are already priced above the threshold anyway. This is intended to price the cheap, gut rot alky specials out of the market and I'm in favour of that. Those products only exist to supply the problem drinker market, a cynical and immoral exploitation which should be abhorred, even if you don't think the move will have the desired effect.
 
To all the doubters, I say that it's better than doing nothing, because the drinking problem has reached epidemic proportions and it's a waste of police/ambulance/hospital resources.
 
Who gets the extra income? Some will be recouped by the Scottish govt as VAT but does the rest stay with the brewer or the retailer?
 
Surely an opportunity for white van owners to smuggle cheaper booze over the border from England?

My thoughts exactly - what's going to stop the Caledonian equivalent of the cross-channel 'booze cruise', or is it time to set up a cash 'n' carry in Berwick-Upon-Tweed?
 
Some stats; in Scotland (2016) 74% of alcohol was sold through off sales - the highest market share since recording began in 1994. The Scots consume 20% more booze than the English. 1 in 4 people in Scotland (26%) drink at hazardous or harmful levels (defined as drinking more than 14 units per week). Most violent crime is associated with alcohol consumption. There were 1,265 alcohol-related deaths in 2016 (where alcohol was the underlying cause of death) - an increase of 115 (10%) compared with 2015. We have a problem!
 
Bearing in mind it’s the poorest who have the worst health, it seems like a good idea to try to price them out of excessive drinking.
Like they will spend it on quinoa instead?

Poverty leads to ill health for many reasons as you should and probably do know, but you are so Tory middle class that any excuse to blame the poor for their condition cannot be missed.
 
I spoke on the phone to the person who announced it on behalf of the Scottish Government in Washington DC today. Looks like Ireland and Sweden will follow suit. It's a world first.
 


advertisement


Back
Top