50p per unit...
Discussion
I've just been reading the articles on the BBC news website about potentially introducing minimum pricing for alcohol (50p per unit). At the moment I'm undecided as to whether this is a good idea or not to improve people's health and the state of our city centres, but the comment that has made the most sense to me so far is:
"who in their right mind drinks an alcoholic drink that costs less than 50p a unit anyway? meths costs about 50p a unit!"
It may seem simplistic, but for me it's so true! Do I drink more than I should do according to government guidelines? Yes. Work hard play hard is my motto. As log as I don't annoy others, it's all good. But like cigarettes, I strongly suspect that drinkers more than pay their way in the NHS. Would 50p per unit minimum price have affected any of my drinking habits in my life? No. And that includes when I was a poor student/young person and on a v v tight budget. Might it affect others' habits? Maybe.
Finally, what makes me laugh is the number of people that claim to be "responsible drinkers" on the BBC. I can honestly say that 90% of the people I know who drink alcohol would be, according to guidelines, binge drinkers (not responsible technically!) i.e. 5+ units per session etc. when they imbibe. What they should be describing themselves as is drinkers who take respobsibility for their own actions, don't get insensible, and don't cause society trouble on nights out!
"who in their right mind drinks an alcoholic drink that costs less than 50p a unit anyway? meths costs about 50p a unit!"
It may seem simplistic, but for me it's so true! Do I drink more than I should do according to government guidelines? Yes. Work hard play hard is my motto. As log as I don't annoy others, it's all good. But like cigarettes, I strongly suspect that drinkers more than pay their way in the NHS. Would 50p per unit minimum price have affected any of my drinking habits in my life? No. And that includes when I was a poor student/young person and on a v v tight budget. Might it affect others' habits? Maybe.
Finally, what makes me laugh is the number of people that claim to be "responsible drinkers" on the BBC. I can honestly say that 90% of the people I know who drink alcohol would be, according to guidelines, binge drinkers (not responsible technically!) i.e. 5+ units per session etc. when they imbibe. What they should be describing themselves as is drinkers who take respobsibility for their own actions, don't get insensible, and don't cause society trouble on nights out!
many will see this as a typical knee-jerk reaction to be seen to be doing something - even though, yet again - it may be seen as punishing the many to address the deeds of the few.
It won't stop binge drinking, as many have said, it may even lead to more crime as the people at whom this move is targeted will strive to fund their hobby.
just like the banning of anything, from guns downwards, has never stopped its proliferation, it will just look good, and hit those ordinary people for no reason.
And while you ask, I'm sitting here typing this with a can of Holsten Pils by my laptop - luvverly!!!
It won't stop binge drinking, as many have said, it may even lead to more crime as the people at whom this move is targeted will strive to fund their hobby.
just like the banning of anything, from guns downwards, has never stopped its proliferation, it will just look good, and hit those ordinary people for no reason.
And while you ask, I'm sitting here typing this with a can of Holsten Pils by my laptop - luvverly!!!
This is one of those simplistic "be seen to be doing something" issues that, when you think about it in detail, doesn't stand the test of scrutiny.
If somebody wants to get legless, they will do so irrespective of the price. If the price is higher than it used to be, then they'll forgo something else instead.
If somebody wants to get legless, they will do so irrespective of the price. If the price is higher than it used to be, then they'll forgo something else instead.
I do feel sorry for the drinks industry, the media were giving them a right pasting this morning, with a report suggesting that the drinks industry was reliant upon irresponsible drinkers. I would have thought that they were reliant on responsible drinkers, as they make up by far the bulk of their customers.
Imagine suggesting that the motor industry was reliant on irresponsible drivers, and the way to stop irresponsible driving was to set a minimum price for cars?
Imagine suggesting that the motor industry was reliant on irresponsible drivers, and the way to stop irresponsible driving was to set a minimum price for cars?
Edited by Balmoral Green on Friday 8th January 21:39
As a personal licence holder I'm quite interested in this. I think its a stupid idea thought up by morons who need to be seen to "do something" and as usual, just increasing prices/taxes are instantly seen as the best way to achieve anything. 50p a unit is still not very much and should you want to get blitzed a bottle of vodka will still only cost you £20.
Will Alcoholics give up their habit? No, theyre addicted and they actually get more money in benefits for being a drunk than they would if they were on jobseekers. Crazy. Will kids still get drunk at the weekends? yes because they just get someone else to buy the alcohol, we try our best to stop this but if an adult comes into a shop without their kids and buys alcohol for them how are we to know? The only people this will really affect are students are lower income families who want to pop out and have a few drinks of an evening and will find the cost has increased, just because some people cant control themselves.
Will moronic adults still get totally smashed and cause trouble? Yes, people in this country live for the weekend, we work the longest hours in europe and have dreadful weather most of the time, adding a few pennies onto the price of a pint is hardly going to change that. If it makes the off sale alcohol the same price as a pub beer then people will simply bite the bullet and go back to pubs instead of buying a cheap carry out from Tesco.
The funniest thing about this moronic policy is this, in Glasgow the biggest problem drink is Buckfast Tonic wine. Its already too expensive to be affected by the price of a unit being 50p, do the neds still buy it and get hammered? Of course they do, why would it be any different if cider etc suddenly becomes the same price?
The people in charge of this haven't really got a clue and are flapping their arms around trying to be seen to be doing something, the latest one up here in scotland was our new licensing laws which came in in september last year. Instead of opeining at 8am and being able to sell booze straight away we now have to wait until 10am. Do the same crowd of alcoholics turn up at 10am instead of 8am? Yes, so what was gained there exactly? Nothing.
Will Alcoholics give up their habit? No, theyre addicted and they actually get more money in benefits for being a drunk than they would if they were on jobseekers. Crazy. Will kids still get drunk at the weekends? yes because they just get someone else to buy the alcohol, we try our best to stop this but if an adult comes into a shop without their kids and buys alcohol for them how are we to know? The only people this will really affect are students are lower income families who want to pop out and have a few drinks of an evening and will find the cost has increased, just because some people cant control themselves.
Will moronic adults still get totally smashed and cause trouble? Yes, people in this country live for the weekend, we work the longest hours in europe and have dreadful weather most of the time, adding a few pennies onto the price of a pint is hardly going to change that. If it makes the off sale alcohol the same price as a pub beer then people will simply bite the bullet and go back to pubs instead of buying a cheap carry out from Tesco.
The funniest thing about this moronic policy is this, in Glasgow the biggest problem drink is Buckfast Tonic wine. Its already too expensive to be affected by the price of a unit being 50p, do the neds still buy it and get hammered? Of course they do, why would it be any different if cider etc suddenly becomes the same price?
The people in charge of this haven't really got a clue and are flapping their arms around trying to be seen to be doing something, the latest one up here in scotland was our new licensing laws which came in in september last year. Instead of opeining at 8am and being able to sell booze straight away we now have to wait until 10am. Do the same crowd of alcoholics turn up at 10am instead of 8am? Yes, so what was gained there exactly? Nothing.
Anyone remember the story a couple of years back which said the 'safe' alcohol limits were essentially plucked out of fresh air? IIRC the committee set up to decide what was safe couldn't agree. They realised that they couldn't produce a report which said 'f
ked if we know' so guessed...
Its been really obvious the anti-drink hysteria has been ramping up this last year. Could it be that it's based on dodgy figures repeated ad nauseam until everyone believes it's true? Remind you of anything?
ETA:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/fo...
ked if we know' so guessed...Its been really obvious the anti-drink hysteria has been ramping up this last year. Could it be that it's based on dodgy figures repeated ad nauseam until everyone believes it's true? Remind you of anything?
ETA:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/fo...
Edited by Oystercatcher on Friday 8th January 22:28
BBC News "Health campaigners won the battle on smoking and have now set there sights on alcohol..."
Yes because they'd have no reason to exist if they didn't have a new target for their "industry", no issue - out of a job... And when they have succeeded in their creeping prohibition, cos thats the obvious end game, alcohol = poison, they'll move on to speed limiting cars, err... your electric car, and deciding you must be vegetarian. More lefty middle class 'we know best for you' fascism.
BBC pandering to them, preparing the ground, by altering public perception to accept, by asking the wrong question, not 'do you think it's right to tax everyone for the irresponsible actions of a minority?' but rather getting them to defacto agree to that proposition by asking 'how much more do you think it will need to be taxed before it alters your behaviour?"...
Perhaps they should target the people with an alcohol problem with a licencing. I need to take a test to drive a car, a test and a personal licence to drink alcohol... Can't handle licence revoked... (I'm being sarcastic...)
Yes because they'd have no reason to exist if they didn't have a new target for their "industry", no issue - out of a job... And when they have succeeded in their creeping prohibition, cos thats the obvious end game, alcohol = poison, they'll move on to speed limiting cars, err... your electric car, and deciding you must be vegetarian. More lefty middle class 'we know best for you' fascism.
BBC pandering to them, preparing the ground, by altering public perception to accept, by asking the wrong question, not 'do you think it's right to tax everyone for the irresponsible actions of a minority?' but rather getting them to defacto agree to that proposition by asking 'how much more do you think it will need to be taxed before it alters your behaviour?"...
Perhaps they should target the people with an alcohol problem with a licencing. I need to take a test to drive a car, a test and a personal licence to drink alcohol... Can't handle licence revoked... (I'm being sarcastic...)
Edited by Northern Munkee on Friday 8th January 22:39
Edited by Northern Munkee on Friday 8th January 22:39
Surely a starting point for a deterrent is to start applying fines to people who:
a) require hospital treatment due to excess alcohol
b) are drunk and disorderly in public
i.e. those that cause the problems, rather than the ordinary members of the public who just want a few drinks now and again, and who cause no harm to anyone..
But that's not really the Labour way........
Sidicks
a) require hospital treatment due to excess alcohol
b) are drunk and disorderly in public
i.e. those that cause the problems, rather than the ordinary members of the public who just want a few drinks now and again, and who cause no harm to anyone..
But that's not really the Labour way........
Sidicks
sidicks said:
Surely a starting point for a deterrent is to start applying fines to people who:
a) require hospital treatment due to excess alcohol
b) are drunk and disorderly in public
i.e. those that cause the problems, rather than the ordinary members of the public who just want a few drinks now and again, and who cause no harm to anyone..
But that's not really the Labour way........
Sidicks
Perhaps they ought to be made to wear a burkha?a) require hospital treatment due to excess alcohol
b) are drunk and disorderly in public
i.e. those that cause the problems, rather than the ordinary members of the public who just want a few drinks now and again, and who cause no harm to anyone..
But that's not really the Labour way........
Sidicks
Northern Munkee said:
Perhaps they should target the people with an alcohol problem with a licencing. I need to take a test to drive a car, a test and a personal licence to drink alcohol... Can't handle licence revoked... (I'm being sarcastic...)
Stop giving them ideas. It would need a massive new govt agency with a BFO computer system to store all our details. We would all be issued cards with little chips in containing our medical records so they could work out what proportion of 21 units we are actually allowed to consume... Needn't cost more than, say, £50-70 per card. Purely for administrative purposes you understand...Rusty Arches said:
The more they push it, the better for the home brewing industry perhaps?
Might push more people towards cannabis.
Win win.
Surely the more they push it, and the higher they set the tax, the bigger the blackmarket (none tax revenue generating), illegal importation, and the more people who will accept the blackmarket as a victimless and excessively nannying crime. It's not that we haven't already seen this with blackmarket tobacco, then they'll be complaints about problems with no one knowing what's really in the illegal beverages (paint stripper, aftershave, Austrian anti freeze, etc).Might push more people towards cannabis.
Win win.
Be fair now, it isn't a Labour party proposal. It's coming from the parliamentary Health Select Committee (which is made up of 6 labour MPs, 3 Tories, 1 Lib Dem and 1 Independent). Apparently they're being very critical of the government's existing approach in the same report.
Also in Scotland, Labour, the Tories and the Lib Dems all oppose the SNP's minimum pricing proposals so I don't think England has anything to worry either.
By the way, minimum pricing isn't a tax. The additional revenue will be going to the shops and drink producers (although there will be a minor effect on revenue from price-dependent taxes such as VAT). Supposedly minimum pricing has support from all NHS trusts in Scotland although I believe there is some doubt whether the expected level (40p) will be high enough (think research showed it needed to be 60p to begin to have an effect).
Also in Scotland, Labour, the Tories and the Lib Dems all oppose the SNP's minimum pricing proposals so I don't think England has anything to worry either.
By the way, minimum pricing isn't a tax. The additional revenue will be going to the shops and drink producers (although there will be a minor effect on revenue from price-dependent taxes such as VAT). Supposedly minimum pricing has support from all NHS trusts in Scotland although I believe there is some doubt whether the expected level (40p) will be high enough (think research showed it needed to be 60p to begin to have an effect).
Balmoral Green said:
I do feel sorry for the drinks industry, the media were giving them a right pasting this morning, with a report suggesting that the drinks industry was reliant upon irresponsible drinkers. I would have thought that they were reliant on responsible drinkers, as they make up by far the bulk of their customers.
Imagine suggesting that the motor industry was reliant on irresponsible drivers, and the way to stop irresponsible driving was to set a minimum price for cars?
Quite, a pub landlord can be fined £2000 for serving somebody who is drunk. Also look at the number of towns that operate a VOLUNTARY barring scheme, where if you're barred from one pub and reported then you're barred from all pubs in the area. As you say, pubs rely on responsible drinkers as it makes life easier for them. Imagine suggesting that the motor industry was reliant on irresponsible drivers, and the way to stop irresponsible driving was to set a minimum price for cars?
Edited by Balmoral Green on Friday 8th January 21:39
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff