Minimum alcohol pricing

Status
Not open for further replies.
I know that there is a problem with alcohol abuse in the whole of the UK, not just Scotland, but I am totally against introducing minimum pricing because it discriminates against the poorest in society.
Do you think that it is fair to only allow wealthy people to get drunk?
 
andy700 said:
I know that there is a problem with alcohol abuse in the whole of the UK, not just Scotland, but I am totally against introducing minimum pricing because it discriminates against the poorest in society.
Do you think that it is fair to only allow wealthy people to get drunk?
Click to expand...

I think we know the answer to that...
 
andy700 said:
I know that there is a problem with alcohol abuse in the whole of the UK, not just Scotland, but I am totally against introducing minimum pricing because it discriminates against the poorest in society.
Do you think that it is fair to only allow wealthy people to get drunk?
Click to expand...

Should the poorest in society if they are so poor not be buying heating, paying rent food etc rather than booze.

Alcohol is a luxury item, not a neccesity like food or clothing. No-one has a right to it. Is it right only the wealthy can drive a rolls royce, I think so.

Alcohol consumption is a major issue in this country and it needs addressed. Pricing it heavily to deter its excessive consumption is a start. I'd rather see rationing myself but this is ok.
 
andy700 said:
I know that there is a problem with alcohol abuse in the whole of the UK, not just Scotland, but I am totally against introducing minimum pricing because it discriminates against the poorest in society.
Do you think that it is fair to only allow wealthy people to get drunk?
Click to expand...
High prices haven't stopped folks from smoking, so I've got my doubts about its success.
It is ridiculous though that you can pay less for alcohol then water.
 
Bobsyeruncle said:
High prices haven't stopped folks from smoking, so I've got my doubts about its success.
It is ridiculous though that you can pay less for alcohol then water.
Click to expand...

It might help reduce the problem. Smokers aren't a public/social menace, not since the smoking in indoor public spaces ban. Drunks can be. If it prices out this binge drinking culture, it can only be a good thing. It cannot make the problem worse for sure.

I was in a west end bar, I paid more for a soft drink than my friend paid for a beer.
 
Bobsyeruncle said:
High prices haven't stopped folks from smoking, so I've got my doubts about its success.
It is ridiculous though that you can pay less for alcohol then water.
Click to expand...

I think the prices certainly stopped some thinking about starting smoking. And that is already good news. I am particularly concerned about kids and teenagers getting into those nasty habits. By the time they are 18, most youths are hardened boozers. And what do you think they are on? Cheep beer and ciders or even value vodka. It is only right to target the cheap drinks, and I would be delighted to see EU wide legislation with regards to pricing of such substances. They could also clean up smoking in France, Spain and Germany while they are at it.
 
I hardly ever buy / consume it TBH, (Alcohol per se )
but wan't there something a little while ago, where the the supermarket chains agree to
keep the prices "realistic", especially on cider(s)?

Maybe it was just a "suggestion" that never happened though.
 
It won't reduce drinking whatsoever. All it does is unfairly push prices up for sensible, social drinkers and will encourage cheap knock-off booze to be smuggled into the country that could be potentially dangerous, just like cigarettes and tobacco.
 
daugirdas said:
They could also clean up smoking in France, Spain and Germany while they are at it.
Click to expand...
But as usual its only the UK that abides by such "Euro legislation" ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
ecoleman said:
It won't reduce drinking whatsoever. All it does is unfairly push prices up for sensible, social drinkers and will encourage cheap knock-off booze to be smuggled into the country that could be potentially dangerous, just like cigarettes and tobacco.
Click to expand...

There will be an undercurrent/minority of this, but the majority of binge drinkers would be priced out, places like weatherspoons etc won't see bootleg booze. It's at least the government doing something about a nasty problem in this country. Rationing would be another sensible approach to the en mass binge drinking we see in our cities.
 
ST4 said:
It might help reduce the problem. Smokers aren't a public/social menace, not since the smoking in indoor public spaces ban. Drunks can be. If it prices out this binge drinking culture, it can only be a good thing. It cannot make the problem worse for sure.

I was in a west end bar, I paid more for a soft drink than my friend paid for a beer.
Click to expand...

Smokers are still menace, just not as bad as they once were. In daytime they are far worse than drunks, only reversed on Friday and Saturday nights in city centres.

Pricing of soft drinks in pubs is another issue. I don't think it is right. You can get tap water, but that just usually tastes of bleach and dead sheep if unfiltered, so you end up on ales.
 
Cobra said:
But as usual its only the UK that abides by such "Euro legislation" ;)
Click to expand...

Sadly, there isn't one banning smoking in pubs or public places. The UK could push for that in the EP and EC, however they choose to take the back seat instead.
 
daugirdas said:
The UK could push for that in the EP and EC, however they choose to take the back seat instead.
Click to expand...
As always ;)

But of course the French particularly, have a reputation of strong protest,
of things they don't agree with,
You only have to look at their reaction to the imports of sheep sometime ago ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
ST4 said:
Should the poorest in society if they are so poor not be buying heating, paying rent food etc rather than booze.
Click to expand...

Perhaps Andy's use of the word 'poorest' sent you on the wrong tack. Replace 'poorest' with 'those with the least disposable income' and you can see his point a bit clearer.
 
Perhaps what is needed is a better understanding of alcohol and using it in moderation from an earlier age. Our cousins in Europe seem to consume as much as the British do with less binging going on.

A lot of the Friday/Saturday night crowd have already had a few drinks quickly before they go out because it's cheaper to get partially tanked at home then finish the job in the pub. Perhaps if the drinks in pubs where cheaper then people may drink slower while out rather than binging at home beforehand? With our current culture around alcohol though that's probably unlikely.

Personally, I don't see having a minimum price being the solution to a problem that is caused by a minority.
 
PaulF said:
Perhaps Andy's use of the word 'poorest' sent you on the wrong tack. Replace 'poorest' with 'those with the least disposable income' and you can see his point a bit clearer.
Click to expand...

No I don't. Alcohol consumption is an optional activity.

Minimum pricing proposed here is not IMHO at the level that prohibits the occasional and moderate level of drinking that's not adverse to human health.

Let's say I earn £200k/yr. of course I'll have more income than someone who earns £20k. I'd be able to afford phase 1 gear, Mercedes, audis etc, private school for my kids and to eat and dine in Michelin star restaurants. The other person wouldn't. That's not a bad thing, a richer person has more money to do nicer things with. That rich person could buy lots and lots of alcohol, the other couldn't buy as much. Big deal.
 
PaulF said:
Perhaps what is needed is a better understanding of alcohol and using it in moderation from an earlier age. Our cousins in Europe seem to consume as much as the British do with less binging going on.

A lot of the Friday/Saturday night crowd have already had a few drinks quickly before they go out because it's cheaper to get partially tanked at home then finish the job in the pub. Perhaps if the drinks in pubs where cheaper then people may drink slower while out rather than binging at home beforehand? With our current culture around alcohol though that's probably unlikely.

Personally, I don't see having a minimum price being the solution to a problem that is caused by a minority.
Click to expand...

No, they'd just drink more in the pubs. It's a cultural thing in the UK. Perhaps make it as expensive here in shops and harder to procure in the way the Finns have so it's a costly exercise to get tanked up before going to the pub. The fact people "want to get partially tanked " shoes the sort of behaviour that needs to priced or legislated out.

Quite why people need to be out drinking at 3am beats me. There should be no alcohol licenced places open past 11am but this is a good baby step for sure
 
ST4 said:
No I don't. Alcohol consumption is an optional activity.

Minimum pricing proposed here is not IMHO at the level that prohibits the occasional and moderate level of drinking that's not adverse to human health.

Let's say I earn £200k/yr. of course I'll have more income than someone who earns £20k. I'd be able to afford phase 1 gear, Mercedes, audis etc, private school for my kids and to eat and dine in Michelin star restaurants. The other person wouldn't. That's not a bad thing, a richer person has more money to do nicer things with. That rich person could buy lots and lots of alcohol, the other couldn't buy as much. Big deal.
Click to expand...

Sorry, not fully seeing the point you are making with the rich person could buy more alcohol than someone with less income, it's kind of obvious but in no way relates to people that a minimum price could effect, those with the least disposable income -pensioners, people on low wages etc.
 
PaulF said:
Sorry, not fully seeing the point you are making with the rich person could buy more alcohol than someone with less income, it's kind of obvious but in no way relates to people that a minimum price could effect, those with the least disposable income -pensioners, people on low wages etc.
Click to expand...

So what. They will be able to afford to drink less. That's kind of the idea ;) alcohol is bad for you and if people feel their drinking is being priced out at 50p unit min cost, they're probably drinking too much.

Most of the drunks out in the week are students who will be on a low income. It will save their health and they'll do better in their jobs and studies.
 
Last edited:
If they put the price of the booze up they should reduce the price of fuel to compensate those drinkers among us who do not go out binge drinking but sit at home getting hammered having a pleasant glass of chardonnay at the weekend instead.
 
Or another way to look at it, and it's a matter of principle really. Why punish everyone for the issues of a minority?

As a way of an example, say you work in an office of 100 people. Out of those 100 say 5 of them talk/shout quite loudly to each other and disturb the other 95 from doing their work. Instead of dealing with the issue with the 5 shouters you impose a no talking rule for the whole office, would that be fair?
 
PaulF said:
Or another way to look at it, and it's a matter of principle really. Why punish everyone for the issues of a minority?

As a way of an example, say you work in an office of 100 people. Out of those 100 say 5 of them talk/shout quite loudly to each other and disturb the other 95 from doing their work. Instead of dealing with the issue with the 5 shouters you impose a no talking rule for the whole office, would that be fair?
Click to expand...

That's what this does though, the minimum prices are not so heavy as they'd punish a moderate drinker, but heavy enough to make a heavy drinker maybe drink less. 50p minimum prices per unit will put drink prices up, but not to a level which will make moderate alcohol consumption unduly expensive.

The equivalent of your no talking rule, would be a blanket ban on alcohol all together.
 
cambsno said:
It's not prices that's the issue. It's society. Maybe jail those who cause a menace rather than tax everyone.
Click to expand...

The jails would be full - whilst I take your point about society you need to think about prevention rather the cure and those that don't drink heavily won't be taxed so heavily as it's only a few units a week they consume.

I prefer rationing myself - 10 units per week no more than 5 in a 24hr period would be great level and enforceable by a system like the Oyster card.
 
ST4 said:
The jails would be full - whilst I take your point about society you need to think about prevention rather the cure and those that don't drink heavily won't be taxed so heavily as it's only a few units a week they consume.

I prefer rationing myself - 10 units per week no more than 5 in a 24hr period would be great level and enforceable by a system like the Oyster card.
Click to expand...

You should move the North Korea, You'd like it there. Just the sort of rules you're suggesting.
 
I have a much better idea.
Start fining people for the damage they cause - vandalism, assaults etc - charging them for medical treatment caused by their alcoholic excess.
I don't see why the rest of us who behave ourselves should pay for the crimes of others by paying more for anything.
 
daugirdas said:
They could also clean up smoking in France, Spain and Germany while they are at it.
Click to expand...

daugirdas said:
Sadly, there isn't one banning smoking in pubs or public places. The UK could push for that in the EP and EC, however they choose to take the back seat instead.
Click to expand...

I don't understand. Smoking has been banned in German pubs and restaurants for some time.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
PaulF said:
Or another way to look at it, and it's a matter of principle really. Why punish everyone for the issues of a minority?

As a way of an example, say you work in an office of 100 people. Out of those 100 say 5 of them talk/shout quite loudly to each other and disturb the other 95 from doing their work. Instead of dealing with the issue with the 5 shouters you impose a no talking rule for the whole office, would that be fair?
Click to expand...

In what way exactly will it punish the majority? 50p / unit or around £1 a bottle of beer or cider is in reality cheaper than any half decent product on the supermarket shelves. We are talking horrible value brands cheap booze that does nothing but gets the chavs and kids drunk on the cheap. The proposed price is in fact too low to make much [needed] impact. I hope I made my point clear enough.

P.S. I absolutely hate the culture of getting drunk, vomiting and waking up in AE every weekend. I don't know what is so attractive about it, and it is not just the British thing. It's everywhere.
 
ianp5a said:
I don't understand. Smoking has been banned in German pubs and restaurants for some time.
Click to expand...

I am not 100% sure about Germany, but it seems it may vary from region to region. It is also the culture in those countries of ignoring signs and openly smoking in railway stations, and acting funny when gently asked to stub it out.
 
Well there are plenty of gits around who think it's OK to stand in a bunch in a restaurant doorway smoking because "there's no law against it"
 
ianp5a said:
Well there are plenty of gits around who think it's OK to stand in a bunch in a restaurant doorway smoking because "there's no law against it"
Click to expand...

In decent places they may be told to move on. They need to stand out in the cold, windy pouring rain to enjoy their bloody stinky fag. /rant
 
andy700 said:
I have a much better idea.
Start fining people for the damage they cause - vandalism, assaults etc - charging them for medical treatment caused by their alcoholic excess.
I don't see why the rest of us who behave ourselves should pay for the crimes of others by paying more for anything.
Click to expand...

Prevention is better than cure, not only for society but for the individual too. @daugirdas is right though, the minumum is too low. If people feel a 50p/unit minimum price is too low they must drink a lot of alcohol and as such they are ruining their health.

The fact people will oppose this move as it will cost them more, rather than drink less alcohol at the same price speaks volumes about how they live their lives - and if people feel the need to be out at 2am drinking alcohol, they need to look at themselves in the mirror IMHO and really ask themselves, is this really right, is this good for me.

Alcohol should be rationed to the amounts per week our medical experts at the NHS say in my view, or priced the way the Finns to have stop UK PLC's love affair with the bottle.
 
Too many p***heads walking the streets during the day who should be working, minimum price for a 4 pack of lager should be one days honest work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
ecoleman said:
You should move the North Korea, You'd like it there. Just the sort of rules you're suggesting.
Click to expand...

Rumour has it there might be a job opening too :-)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top