Minimum Alcohol pricing to be signed into Law

L1011

Gaygooner wrote: »

We had late opening on Thursdays and had to scrap it because absenteeism rose and production collapsed on Fridays.

We have the same opening hours Monday to Saturday...

Countries with restricted opening hours and higher duty don't drink less than those with liberal opening hours and lower duty. If anything they drink far more - and far more riskily - going on European examples.

Gaygooner wrote: »

1l Jameson was €25 in Barca, bought one. Does me a long time.

Do the Spanish drink to excess with their drink being so cheap?

Are you starting to realise that there isn't a correlation between price and alcohol abuse?

Gaygooner wrote: »

http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/FinalReport.pdf/Files/FinalReport.pdf

Link does not support your assertions. At all, actually.

You found that in a quick, desperate Google to try back up a statement you can't prove, didn't you?

dr.fuzzenstein

Gaygooner wrote: »

Excise duty help pay for all the drunks clogging up our A&E's every weekend

This reply shows that you haven't read the thread or haven't been paying attention to the arguments made on both sides.
The higher price will not result in any significant rise in tax take, indeed my theory is that if anything, tax take will fall. Why? Because people (including myself) will be making border runs or taking the ferry to France to pick up a year's supply of booze. Furthermore, the same gangs that smuggle in counterfeit cigarettes will now be very happy indeed to also supply the country with dodgy booze and on top of that, you can be sure that home brew kits will be starting to sell like hotcakes. Expect a resurgence in poitin as well.
This will result in more policing (and not just the gards, revenue and the navy will have to put in more work) being needed due to more smuggling, a fall in sales and a fall in tax take and still no help for A&E financially.
So if anything, this will cost us big time.

odyssey06

And if we're talking about A&E... let's not forget the possibility of deaths due to bootleg booze which is culpable for potentially thousands of deaths per year in Russia in recent times:
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2007/s1820269.htm

Gaygooner

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

This reply shows that you haven't read the thread or haven't been paying attention to the arguments made on both sides.
The higher price will not result in any significant rise in tax take, indeed my theory is that if anything, tax take will fall. Why? Because people (including myself) will be making border runs or taking the ferry to France to pick up a year's supply of booze. Furthermore, the same gangs that smuggle in counterfeit cigarettes will now be very happy indeed to also supply the country with dodgy booze and on top of that, you can be sure that home brew kits will be starting to sell like hotcakes. Expect a resurgence in poitin as well.
This will result in more policing (and not just the gards, revenue and the navy will have to put in more work) being needed due to more smuggling, a fall in sales and a fall in tax take and still no help for A&E financially.
So if anything, this will cost us big time.

I was talking about people saying the excise is too high

1 unit is 1 unit surely the new increased price would slow down people's drinking- due to cost

Gaygooner

odyssey06 wrote: »

And if we're talking about A&E... let's not forget the possibility of deaths due to bootleg booze which is culpable for potentially thousands of deaths per year in Russia in recent times:
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2007/s1820269.htm

Russia is applicable????

Gaygooner

rubadub wrote: »

eh, my entire post was questions! WTF are YOU talking about.


So I take it you would not like to see it reduced? if not then do you not think it's crazy not to be getting even more tax, rather than lining the pocket of the retailers? They are in effect bringing in a "sin tax" but not bothering to actually take the tax! pure madness, and I still feel many people are not aware of this, I have heard people say stuff along the lines of "of course they are getting it, sure whats the point otherwise, why wouldn't they get it, who gets it?"


Most doctors would say otherwise, as spirits are far more likely to be drank at higher concentrations, and can be drank faster. You will hear of alcoholics like Shane Magowan saying doctors telling him to lay off the spirits and stick to strong wine or beer. You see it in pubs all the time, "last order culture", people turning to strong spirits at the end of the night, as they are incapable of drinking beer as they are so full. 700ml bottles are traditionally far cheaper per ml than smaller bottles so people will be getting these. Once drunk people can lash down spirits far too easily. This is already evidently acknowledged by the law, as exicse duty per unit is currently about twice that on spirits as is it is on beer -to disuade spirit drinking and have a higher "sin tax" attached to it.

I specially said 1 unit

syklops

If Varadkar had said, the HSE needs 100 extra million, and from our figures there is 500,000 people in ireland who regularly drink cans of beer, so we are putting a euro on every can that is currently sub-2 euro and ring fencin that into the HSE, if that was the plan I could maybe swallow it. I'd get over it. The money is going to help the health service which badly needs imrovement.

Discovering I need to pay more and the money will be going to Mr Tesco, makes all this much harder to simply forget.

Gaygooner

L1011 wrote: »

We have the same opening hours Monday to Saturday...

Countries with restricted opening hours and higher duty don't drink less than those with liberal opening hours and lower duty. If anything they drink far more - and far more riskily - going on European examples.



Do the Spanish drink to excess with their drink being so cheap?

Are you starting to realise that there isn't a correlation between price and alcohol abuse?



Link does not support your assertions. At all, actually.

You found that in a quick, desperate Google to try back up a statement you can't prove, didn't you?

Pubs - Regular Licence:
Monday to Thursday: 10:30 - 23:30
Friday and Saturday: 10:30 - 00:30
Sunday: 12:30 - 23:00

So it's not the same

Gaygooner

We Irish have a poor attitude to drink, until that improves, I support tight regulation

BeerNut

Gaygooner wrote: »

surely the new increased price would slow down people's drinking- due to cost

I think this wonky logic is the biggest problem we have in getting the message through. I mean it sounds like it should be true -- of course people will consume less of a thing as it gets dearer -- but there's zero evidence that it's the case.

The blue highlighting here shows years when excise duty went up for that product, and consumption increased:

(table via guildofevil)
With this sort of public policy it's really important to have good evidence because the boneheaded stands-to-reason-dunnit? approach is what has created the mess we have and will make it worse if left unchecked.

jobbridge4life

Gaygooner wrote: »

We Irish have a poor attitude to drink, until that improves, I support tight regulation

But the regulation is not working! WE already have some of the most expensive alcohol in the world. Restricting off-licenses achieved what? Peoples attitude to this is maddening.

BeerNut

Gaygooner wrote: »

We Irish have a poor attitude to drink, until that improves, I support tight regulation

In 2003 we banned happy hours; in 2008 we made offies close at 10pm. Neither measure was good enough. When do we admit that restrictions on price and availability are doing nothing to fix our national drink problem?

L1011

Gaygooner wrote: »

Pubs - Regular Licence:
Monday to Thursday: 10:30 - 23:30
Friday and Saturday: 10:30 - 00:30
Sunday: 12:30 - 23:00

So it's not the same

Late licence hours are the same. And that's what you meant.

Gaygooner wrote: »

We Irish have a poor attitude to drink, until that improves, I support tight regulation

Where, precisely, has tight regulation changed attitudes to drink in a positive manner?

It has a huge impact here - a negative one. Over here, limited opening hours and off-sales hours cause stocking up, people hockeying drink in to them knowing they "can't get any more", etc, etc.

listermint

BeerNut wrote: »

In 2003 we banned happy hours; in 2008 we made offies close at 10pm. Neither measure was good enough. When do we admit that restrictions on price and availability are doing nothing to fix our national drink problem?

its abudently clear he is clueless, All the states since 2005 indicate a fall in consumption across the board in Ireland of alcohol we dont even rate in the highest in Europe.

He is just supporting this out of hand possibly to be difficult but more realistically because he hasnt looked up anything and is ignoring all of the evidence.


This i am adamant is a FG solo run for their VFI buddies you can clearly if you read the bill they are after 'offer selling' and its not targeted at supermakets (where there is no evidence of below cost selling) it is targeted at Wetherspoons who will be heavily shaking up the market here in Ireland next year with a large number of venues open.

The VFI does not want this in any way shape or form.

dr.fuzzenstein

BeerNut wrote: »

In 2003 we banned happy hours; in 2008 we made offies close at 10pm. Neither measure was good enough. When do we admit that restrictions on price and availability are doing nothing to fix our national drink problem?

He/She is one of those people who is happy as long as we do "something". That something doesn't have to be coherent, sensible or even work, as long as "someone" will proclaim "something" from their ivory tower, which will then be ignored/circumvented/make the problem worse, but "something" was done.
God help us if anyone actually thought about a problem and engaged with it in a meaningful manner. Lord save us and bless us, Jaysis, doesn't that mean doing any kind of work, I'll just jack up the price, at least I'll be doing "something" and all the Mad Marys will be happy and vote me back in.

odyssey06

listermint wrote: »

This i am adamant is a FG solo run for their VFI buddies you can clearly if you read the bill they are after 'offer selling' and its not targeted at supermakets (where there is no evidence of below cost selling) it is targeted at Wetherspoons who will be heavily shaking up the market here in Ireland next year with a large number of venues open. The VFI does not want this in any way shape or form.

Looking at the current prices charged by Wetherspoons and the minimum prices speculated for under this bill, I see it affecting Wetherspoons by about 5% and supermarkets by about 50%...

BeerNut

listermint wrote: »

This i am adamant is a FG solo run for their VFI buddies you can clearly if you read the bill they are after 'offer selling' and its not targeted at supermakets (where there is no evidence of below cost selling) it is targeted at Wetherspoons who will be heavily shaking up the market here in Ireland next year with a large number of venues open.

I think it's scarier than that: I think the people behind this really do think that they're doing something good, to solve a problem, for the good of the people of Ireland. That it happens to suit certain interests is what makes it possible to achieve, but I don't think that's the driver. And that makes it so much harder to fight:

C.S. Lewis wrote:

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

Geuze

listermint wrote: »

This i am adamant is a FG solo run for their VFI buddies you can clearly if you read the bill they are after 'offer selling' and its not targeted at supermakets (where there is no evidence of below cost selling) it is targeted at Wetherspoons who will be heavily shaking up the market here in Ireland next year with a large number of venues open.

The VFI does not want this in any way shape or form.

I agree that a min price supports the VFI.

But I disagree that this measure is targeted at JDW. With 5 pubs at the moment, they are just too small to have much effect on pubs.

They have 5 more pubs at the plans stage, but none due to open in next 12 months.

But 1,000s of supermarkets selling 33cl bottles at 70c-1.00 do affect pub sales.

This is targeted at the sub-1 euro 33cl bottle and the 1 euro can, which are low prices for Ireland, but may not be below-cost.

Geuze

odyssey06 wrote: »

Looking at the current prices charged by Wetherspoons and the minimum prices speculated for under this bill, I see it affecting Wetherspoons by about 5% and supermarkets by about 50%...

As far as I see, it should have very little effect on JDW.

In fact, by increasing off-trade prices, it makes JDW relatively cheaper.

syklops

Gaygooner wrote: »

We Irish have a poor attitude to drink, until that improves, I support tight regulation

Instead of a blanket statement, can you support that in any way?

Being drunk and disorderly is already against the law but the law doesnt get enforced. That its not enforced is not the fault of the average drinker, but its the reason why O'Connell street is in such a state at 3am on a Friday night.

Another poster said that pub opening times was reduced because so many people were late or unproducive on a Friday. Well, if Im late or unproductive in work Im reprimanded. "I was out lsat night" isn't and shouldn't be an excuse for anything, but for some reason in Ireland it is. Again, thats not the fault of the average drinker.



It seems to me, if there is a problem, the Irish have a problem with rules and the law, and enforcing the law.

BaZmO*

BeerNut wrote: »

....CS Lewis Quote....

On a slightly OT note, and maybe the comparison is a tad over dramatic, but I was reading something about Trevelyan the other day that holds testament to the point that more harm can be done than good when someone is of the belief that they are doing good by others by their actions, or in his case the lack of action.

As for Leo, I think he genuinely believes he is doing good with his proposal. I somehow doubt he's the type to bow to the VFI's influence.

Gaygooner

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

He/She is one of those people who is happy as long as we do "something". That something doesn't have to be coherent, sensible or even work, as long as "someone" will proclaim "something" from their ivory tower, which will then be ignored/circumvented/make the problem worse, but "something" was done.
God help us if anyone actually thought about a problem and engaged with it in a meaningful manner. Lord save us and bless us, Jaysis, doesn't that mean doing any kind of work, I'll just jack up the price, at least I'll be doing "something" and all the Mad Marys will be happy and vote me back in.

He knows that banning happy hours and ending late Thursday drinking was very positive ask the doctors and IBEC! We only have this issue due to the below cost selling law Eddie Hobbs got repealed

listermint

odyssey06 wrote: »

Looking at the current prices charged by Wetherspoons and the minimum prices speculated for under this bill, I see it affecting Wetherspoons by about 5% and supermarkets by about 50%...

BeerNut wrote: »

I think it's scarier than that: I think the people behind this really do think that they're doing something good, to solve a problem, for the good of the people of Ireland. That it happens to suit certain interests is what makes it possible to achieve, but I don't think that's the driver. And that makes it so much harder to fight:

Well it pulls the brakes on their Spirit Mixer and next spirit discounts completely.

So i would garner that the VFI has been watching that with gusto. I dont believe people understand the threat the VFI see this brand having.

listermint

BaZmO* wrote: »

As for Leo, I think he genuinely believes he is doing good with his proposal. I somehow doubt he's the type to bow to the VFI's influence.

I would have thought that 2 years ago, but he has been consistently a man that lacks substance and contributes nothing but soundbites . (ive been following him for some time)

So im off the belief that yes he is dyed in the wool FG and anything that benefits the lobbyists is 'good business'

Dravokivich

listermint wrote: »

its abudently clear he is clueless, All the states since 2005 indicate a fall in consumption across the board in Ireland of alcohol we dont even rate in the highest in Europe.

He is just supporting this out of hand possibly to be difficult but more realistically because he hasnt looked up anything and is ignoring all of the evidence.


This i am adamant is a FG solo run for their VFI buddies you can clearly if you read the bill they are after 'offer selling' and its not targeted at supermakets (where there is no evidence of below cost selling) it is targeted at Wetherspoons who will be heavily shaking up the market here in Ireland next year with a large number of venues open.

The VFI does not want this in any way shape or form.

Same scam for over 250 years really. Different parts of the booze business demonizing each other and trying to have legislation support them, profitably at that.

Guinesses did it to the distillery companies in the city, then against other brewers based on their particilur beverage. Quite the scam so it is. Funny to see it is still being put forward.

dr.fuzzenstein

Gaygooner wrote: »

He knows that banning happy hours and ending late Thursday drinking was very positive ask the doctors and IBEC! We only have this issue due to the below cost selling law Eddie Hobbs got repealed

Please list instances of persistent below cost selling. They are few and far between, if any.
Have you read this thread at all? Or do you just jump in, spout sh*te and hop off again?

Gaygooner

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Please list instances of persistent below cost selling. They are few and far between, if any.
Have you read this thread at all? Or do you just jump in, spout sh*te and hop off again?

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/unit-pricing-of-alcohol-better-than-low-cost-selling-310772.html


Cold you at least try to post in a civil respectful manner?

BeerNut

Gaygooner wrote: »

He knows that banning happy hours and ending late Thursday drinking was very positive ask the doctors and IBEC!

Link please. Numbers please.

rubadub

Gaygooner wrote: »

I specially said 1 unit

wow, you are either completely & utterly clueless about what I am saying, or deliberately avoiding the points as you have no reasonable answer, or just plain old trolling.

syklops

Gaygooner wrote: »

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/unit-pricing-of-alcohol-better-than-low-cost-selling-310772.html


Cold you at least try to post in a civil respectful manner?

Thats an article supporting minimum pricing. Dr Fuzz asked you for a list of persistent below cost selling, a list I'd be very interested in myself. I'm sick of hearing about "cheap alcohol". Where is all the below cost selling going on? I never encounter it.

I was watching Steptoe and Son last night. Albert bought in a few bottles of wine for the Christmas for 81p a litre. God be with the days I thought.