Stop out of control drinking

Ted_YNWA

conorh91 wrote: »

I'm guessing alcohol doesn't cause the same drain on their health services and their criminal justice systems as it does here. We're a tiny country, and alcohol abuse costs us over 3 billion euro per annum.

Part of the reason alcohol is so expensive in Ireland is because of excise duty. I'm not in favour of lower excise duty, because I believe if alcohol abuse is costing the State that much money, then it is we the consumers of alcohol who should pay. It's a blunt instrument, but it's the fairest one available.

How do they actually quantify the cost to economy.

Guards & hospital staff need to be paid regardless.

martingriff

Michelle Tangy Doorbell wrote: »

Damn right, I gave up going out sober about 10 years ago after trying it a handful of times. It's basically watching other people have fun and missing out on all the craic. If for some very rare reason I can't drink I just stay at home.

I don't get people problem with the drinking culture. Those of us who want to be part of it week in week out enjoy it and don't want it curtailed. Those who complain and don't partake are not involved so why not just leave the rest to enjoy it.

I go out sober most night and have a great night. If you an't have a goodnight with people or listening to music without been drunk then something is wrong. I do drink sometimes its 4 or 5 but other times its just the 1.

Schwiiing

Michelle Tangy Doorbell wrote: »

Because not drinking takes away a major part of going out and it's just not enjoyable without it or the feeling given by the alcohol.

Then that's your problem. If you can't be in a social situation without a chemically altered personality I feel sorry for you.

martingriff

Ted_YNWA wrote: »

How do they actually quantify the cost to economy.

Guards & hospital staff need to be paid regardless.

The cost of keeping those people in jail/hospital maybe they will have to go to court. Medical bills for themselves or those they could hurt eg drunk driving crashes. Its not just the paying of the guards or hospital staff.

martingriff

Michelle Tangy Doorbell wrote: »

Because not drinking takes away a major part of going out and it's just not enjoyable without it or the feeling given by the alcohol.

You my friend have a problem if to enjoy yourself you have to drink/get drunk

hatrickpatrick

Raise young people with fewer inhibitions, and they won't feel the need to use mind altering substances to rid themselves of those inhibitions.
I wish I didn't have to have a few drinks on board to feel confident. But from what I've seen, this is something which is set in stone during childhood and is almost impossible to change later on. Ask most young people why they want to get locked and they'll tell you it's because they don't find chatting up members of the opposite sex as mortifying if they're piddly eyed.

I consistently fail to understand why this root cause of the desire to get locked is almost never raised in the public discussion around booze. Ireland has an absolutely horrible level of social and sexual repression, one which only becomes apparent once you've spent some time in another country with people who don't have that repression.

gctest50

Schwiiing wrote: »

Then that's your problem. If you can't be in a social situation without a chemically altered personality I feel sorry for you.

were just big bags of chemicals anyway though ? and everyones different

eg : not enough/too much whatever in your brain and you've add

hatrickpatrick

Schwiiing wrote: »

Then that's your problem. If you can't be in a social situation without a chemically altered personality I feel sorry for you.

It's society's problem. We don't do nearly enough to instill confidence in young people.

YFlyer

€18 for 3 double vodkas and redbull is a bargain.

Ted_YNWA

martingriff wrote: »

The cost of keeping those people in jail/hospital maybe they will have to go to court. Medical bills for themselves or those they could hurt eg drunk driving crashes. Its not just the paying of the guards or hospital staff.

They must include public & private sector costs.

Can't see it costing the exchequer 3bn over normal day-to-day spend.

Schwiiing

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It's society's problem. We don't do nearly enough to instill confidence in young people.

Lots of people out there with no lack of confidence and still regularly get wankered.

darkpagandeath

martingriff wrote: »

The cost of keeping those people in jail/hospital maybe they will have to go to court. Medical bills for themselves or those they could hurt eg drunk driving crashes. Its not just the paying of the guards or hospital staff.

That argument does not really stand up. Hospitals still have to be open, same with the garda same with courts. If you immediately banned alcohol you would get a worse situation. Some of the figures you see to do with drink related accidents for example are heavily massaged. Guy slips breaks his leg after 1 drink on a wet floor for example. Was not the drink but that's included in the stats as alcohol was taken. Same from the night before, guy slips under a bus, he had been drinking the night before sober now but drink had been taken. I could go on. For example per capita we have no were near the problems the UK has for example.

LDN_Irish

YFlyer wrote: »

€18 for 3 double vodkas and redbull is a bargain.

My figures must be wrong somewhere then because it was in town, so not cheap. How much does a double vodka usually run you back?

Grays Sports Almanac

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Raise young people with fewer inhibitions, and they won't feel the need to use mind altering substances to rid themselves of those inhibitions.
I wish I didn't have to have a few drinks on board to feel confident. But from what I've seen, this is something which is set in stone during childhood and is almost impossible to change later on. Ask most young people why they want to get locked and they'll tell you it's because they don't find chatting up members of the opposite sex as mortifying if they're piddly eyed.

I consistently fail to understand why this root cause of the desire to get locked is almost never raised in the public discussion around booze. Ireland has an absolutely horrible level of social and sexual repression, one which only becomes apparent once you've spent some time in another country with people who don't have that repression.

Sexual repression? Inhibitions? You're reading way too much into it and you sound like you're just making things up to be honest.

My family is from another European country and are very religious. No sexual repression and no desire by any of them to get hammered every week.

Some of my cousins drink socially and some don't drink at all. It's to do with the culture and how drinking is part of it. In Ireland, it's everything, over there, they simply don't include it as much. Occasions are more about being with family and enjoying food. Simple as that.

martingriff

darkpagandeath wrote: »

That argument does not really stand up. Hospitals still have to be open, same with the garda same with courts. If you immediately banned alcohol you would get a worse situation. Some of the figures you see to do with drink related accidents for example are heavily massaged. Guy slips breaks his leg after 1 drink on a wet floor for example. Was not the drink but that's included in the stats as alcohol was taken. Same from the night before, guy slips under a bus, he had been drinking the night before sober now but drink had been taken. I could go on. For example per capita we have no were near the problems the UK has for example.

Who said ban on this thread I have not read one. That guy who had 1 drink may have had a low tolerance to drink at that time so 1 drink could have impaired him. Have you an example where a guy slipped under a bus and the cause is drink or is that just a straw man example.

People who have to be in beds or jail cells cost money where otherwise they may not. If they are in the beds then others who may need it are not and in a trolly (not a cause for our over crowding btw)

I am not saying the cost of the original poster is correct but it is very short sighted to say just because a hospital or police station is open then the cost be the same. You think that if a prison was open with no one in it would cost the same with people in it

YFlyer

LDN_Irish wrote: »

My figures must be wrong somewhere then because it was in town, so not cheap. How much does a double vodka usually run you back?

Treble vodka and redbull be close to €18.

LDN_Irish

Jesus christ. That's madness.

conorh91

conorh91 wrote: »

I'm guessing alcohol doesn't cause the same drain on their health services and their criminal justice systems as it does here. We're a tiny country, and alcohol abuse costs us over 3 billion euro per annum.

What about the billions generated by excise duty and vat from alcohol sales, the vat on food after the pubs close, all the employment generated in pubs, takeaways and taxis etc etc.

martingriff wrote: »

You my friend have a problem if to enjoy yourself you have to drink/get drunk

But getting drunk in itself is extremely enjoyable and is one of the reasons for going out in the first place. I have no problem saying that I love drinking and going out drinking once or twice a week is part of my life.

Berserker

sugarman wrote: »

Its no different on any other country iv been to,

Germany, every night of the week the pubs are absolutely packed. A lot of people go straight from work every evening, but they do only have 1 or 2.

It is very different here and you have shown that yourself with your experience in Germany. They have one or two social drinks, as you said. That is not the case here. Drink is at the centre of every event and people go out to get drunk.

LDN_Irish wrote: »

Jesus christ. That's madness.

And the same people who are willing to pay €18 for that drink will probably claim that they cannot afford to make ends meet.

lertsnim

Abolishing the closing times of pubs and off licences would be a good start in reducing anti-social behaviour. Herding everyone out onto the streets at the same time is moronic and is only asking for trouble.

Golaco

lertsnim wrote: »

Abolishing the closing times of pubs and off licences would be a good start in reducing anti-social behaviour. Herding everyone out onto the streets at the same time is moronic and is only asking for trouble.

Part of me agrees but I think a lot of people will see pubs that never close as an opportunity to go bat **** crazy. So instead of 1 hour of carnage we get an entire night/morning of it?

Ted_YNWA

Golaco wrote: »

Part of me agrees but I think a lot of people will see pubs that never close as an opportunity to go bat **** crazy. So instead of 1 hour of carnage we get an entire night/morning of it?

The honeymoon period of that will soon wear off.

AndonHandon

Berserker wrote: »

It is very different here and you have shown that yourself with your experience in Germany. They have one or two social drinks, as you said. That is not the case here. Drink is at the centre of every event and people go out to get drunk.

If you're going to use that poster's comment then so will I;

Germany, every night of the week the pubs are absolutely packed. A lot of people go straight from work every evening, but they do only have 1 or 2. But it all adds up, and on weekends they really let rip.

They have one or two social drinks during the week but would head out a few times midweek and then on the weekend would let rip. So it is the same here.

martingriff

But getting drunk in itself is extremely enjoyable and is one of the reasons for going out in the first place. I have no problem saying that I love drinking and going out drinking once or twice a week is part of my life.

My main reason for going out is meeting my mates listening to a band/music and maybe having a couple of drinks I do not go out with the express thought of to have a good time I must get drunk. I have been out drinking and not and had the same enjoyment

Golaco

martingriff wrote: »

But getting drunk in itself is extremely enjoyable and is one of the reasons for going out in the first place. I have no problem saying that I love drinking and going out drinking once or twice a week is part of my life.

My main reason for going out is meeting my mates listening to a band/music and maybe having a couple of drinks I do not go out with the express thought of to have a good time I must get drunk. I have been out drinking and not and had the same enjoyment[/QUOTE]

I honestly don't get going out with the sole intention of getting rat arsed. Obviously it happens from time to time but why seek it out?!

conorh91

Ted_YNWA wrote: »

How do they actually quantify the cost to economy.

Guards & hospital staff need to be paid regardless.

Not quite: since excessive alcohol consumption and alcohol-related public order offences are constantly ongoing, they obviously do increase the number of Gardai that are hired, and the numbers hired elsewhere in the emergency services; they also impede crime-detection, and distort resource allocation elsewhere in hospitals, causing a treatment bottleneck, requiring agency staff, etc.

But those direct costs are only some of the picture.

I think the major costs for the economy relate to higher insurance premiums, unemployment and disability benefits for alcoholics, and welfare paid to the dependents of those who die from alcohol-related injury and disease, and the rehabilitation of drivers and passengers involved in alcohol-related road traffic collisions.

There is also the issue of lower economic output because of time off work for reasons of injury or illness, or simply being hungover on the job.

weldoninhio

Schwiiing wrote: »

Then that's your problem. If you can't be in a social situation without a chemically altered personality I feel sorry for you.

Absolute claptrap.

It'd be one thing if the OP couldn't go out at all without a drink, but going to a pub where all of your friends will be drinking is not fun. You sit there and they get gradually drunker and drunker. You aren't on the same wavelength as them because you have not drank anything.

Shenshen

AndonHandon wrote: »

They have one or two social drinks during the week but would head out a few times midweek and then on the weekend would let rip. So it is the same here.

Speaking as a German myself, no they don't normally.

The one or two drinks you may have once or twice during the week will invariably accompany a meal - very few people would go out for drinks only, especially during the week that would be almost unheard of.
And on the weekend you may go out with friends for a meal and drinks, usually something around 3 or 4. Closing time for bars and restaurants in my home town would be midnight Friday and Saturday, and around 10/11pm during the week.

Calina

darkpagandeath wrote: »

That argument does not really stand up. Hospitals still have to be open, same with the garda same with courts.

Well, I don't know if you've spent any time in our A&E services lately but at the weekend's in particular, a good lot of their workload is alcohol related.

Match that with the wait times in A&Es. Ultimately, it's likely our health care issues would be significantly reduced if we did not have to deal with alcohol related issues. In other words. the load placed on A&E by alcohol has a net impact on people with injuries who have not been drinking because their waiting times are going through the roof.

________________

I lived outside Ireland until 1999 and when I came back, there was a poster campaign running along the lines of "I've sick of being let down" and "It was a great night, I can't remember a thing" and personalising some things like the impact on taxi drivers of puking customers, the absolute yukkiness of cleaning the city after the weekends, the impact on families.

I was working in a bank for a short while and yes people did say things like "oh yeah, last year's Christmas party; must have been fantastic, can't remember a thing about it". I found this shocking. But not as shocking as Irish colleagues who had only ever lived in Ireland found the idea that you could go out for a few drinks after work on a Friday and not get trashed.

In my opinion, there is an issue with alcoholic consumption in Ireland. Being mid table doesn't mean there isn't in Ireland, only that some places are worse again.

This doesn't mean we can sit back and say "yerra it's grand". Put simply, many people in the country like alcohol a little too much and haven't the self awareness to recognise it.

Calina

weldoninhio wrote: »

Absolute claptrap.

It'd be one thing if the OP couldn't go out at all without a drink, but going to a pub where all of your friends will be drinking is not fun. You sit there and they get gradually drunker and drunker. You aren't on the same wavelength as them because you have not drank anything.

Seriously, that's stupid. I go out with friends who drink on a regular basis. I accept they drink, I also accept that they will not notice me leaving at some point that they are too drunk to enjoy their company any more. They come to terms with that. I come to terms with that. Up to that point, however, it's fun.

I mean, if all your friends were going to jump off a cliff to their deaths, would you think it's not fun not to do that too?

martingriff

Golaco wrote: »

My main reason for going out is meeting my mates listening to a band/music and maybe having a couple of drinks I do not go out with the express thought of to have a good time I must get drunk. I have been out drinking and not and had the same enjoyment

I honestly don't get going out with the sole intention of getting rat arsed. Obviously it happens from time to time but why seek it out?!

Hey Golaco I am not sure why the bit you quoted was in my name that was someone else who said that. It is probably my fault as I went back and edited my reponse and changed the quotation marks a bit

darkpagandeath

Calina wrote: »

Well, I don't know if you've spent any time in our A&E services lately but at the weekend's in particular, a good lot of their workload is alcohol related.

Match that with the wait times in A&Es. Ultimately, it's likely our health care issues would be significantly reduced if we did not have to deal with alcohol related issues. In other words. the load placed on A&E by alcohol has a net impact on people with injuries who have not been drinking because their waiting times are going through the roof.

________________

I lived outside Ireland until 1999 and when I came back, there was a poster campaign running along the lines of "I've sick of being let down" and "It was a great night, I can't remember a thing" and personalising some things like the impact on taxi drivers of puking customers, the absolute yukkiness of cleaning the city after the weekends, the impact on families.

I was working in a bank for a short while and yes people did say things like "oh yeah, last year's Christmas party; must have been fantastic, can't remember a thing about it". I found this shocking. But not as shocking as Irish colleagues who had only ever lived in Ireland found the idea that you could go out for a few drinks after work on a Friday and not get trashed.

In my opinion, there is an issue with alcoholic consumption in Ireland. Being mid table doesn't mean there isn't in Ireland, only that some places are worse again.

This doesn't mean we can sit back and say "yerra it's grand". Put simply, many people in the country like alcohol a little too much and haven't the self awareness to recognise it.

Replace alcohol with the word car/drugs and you will get the same effect, using your examples. And fail logic really saying oh well being mid does not mean it's not that bad here just not as bad as the bad places.

the evasion_kid

We definitely need to look at our drinking in this country,having worked in the drinks industry and suffered with a drink problem myself I can safely say alcoholism is rife in this country,while a certain percentage of a population will always turn alcoholic our culture of binge drinking is setting people up for disaster down the road.

Here's what the drinks industry rep's don't show you :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=291TBlwlP1c

conorh91

Michelle Tangy Doorbell wrote: »

What about the billions generated by excise duty and vat from alcohol sales, the vat on food after the pubs close, all the employment generated in pubs, takeaways and taxis etc etc.

The excise duty on alcohol comes to about 1 billion. I'm not sure what the VAT is, probably about the same. That's two billion.

The cost of alcohol to society is about 3.7 billion euro.

Now it is certainly true that some of that 3.7 billion comes back in the form of revenue, but here's the issue. If people weren't going mad on booze, it isn't true to say they'd be doing nothing with that money they saved. Disposable income, if not spent on alcohol, would likely be spent on less harmful pursuits like clothing, eating out, purchasing a car, whatever. That's how disposable income works. It wants to be spent somewhere, anywhere.

Also, even if alcohol consumption 'paid for itself', it would mean that there were no net VAT benefit accruing to the Exchequer such as happens with the sale of furniture, coffee, newspapers, machinery -- everything. Why should alcohol not be expected to contribute to the State?

In short, the excessive consumption of alcohol doesn't seem to pay for itself, doesn't benefit the State, but we should be glad that some of the costs are recouped, even if they are insufficient.

darkpagandeath

Sounds like Americans that vid.

darkpagandeath

conorh91 wrote: »

The excise duty on alcohol comes to about 1 billion. I'm not sure what the VAT is, probably about the same. That's two billion.

The cost of alcohol to society is about 3.7 billion euro.

Now it is certainly true that some of that 3.7 billion comes back in the form of revenue, but here's the issue. If people weren't going mad on booze, it isn't true to say they'd be doing nothing with that money they saved. Disposable income, if not spent on alcohol, would likely be spent on less harmful pursuits like clothing, eating out, purchasing a car, whatever. That's how disposable income works. It wants to be spent somewhere, anywhere.

Also, even if alcohol consumption 'paid for itself', it would mean that there were no net VAT benefit accruing to the Exchequer such as happens with the sale of furniture, coffee, newspapers, machinery -- everything. Why should alcohol not be expected to contribute to the State?

In short, the excessive consumption of alcohol doesn't seem to pay for itself, doesn't benefit the State, but we should be glad that some of the costs are recouped, even if they are insufficient.

Nope, But try again with none massaged figures. Removing all the costs that are there anyway would be a start.

Calina

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Replace alcohol with the word car/drugs and you will get the same effect, using your examples.

Seriously? That's your response?

Christ almighty. You could replace it with gun shot injuries and have the same logic but does that mean we should just accept those gun shot injuries?

Because that's what you're implying: other things cause problems so let's just tolerate this bad thing. Personally I'm quite happy to include drugs as an issue here. You might have missed it but the country is actually trying to do something about driving related accidents between enforcement of driving legislation and changes to driver classification and training.

darkpagandeath wrote: »

And fail logic really saying oh well being mid does not mean it's not that bad here just not as bad as the bad places.

No, in absolute terms, we have an issue with alcohol in this country. Looking at other countries and pointing saying "well it's worse there" is actually not a good reason to pretend we don't have an issue with alcohol. In other words, if by addressing alcohol related issues here and now, regardless of the beer consumption rate in the Czech Republic, the country would be benefited, then maybe, just maybe we should do it because it's a good thing to do, rather than saying "yerrah, we're not as bad as 10 other European countries, tis grand".

conorh91

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Nope, But try again with none massaged figures. Removing all the costs that are there anyway would be a start.

Here you go, genius. It's 3.7 billion. Knock yourself out.

http://www.hse.ie/eng/services/Publications/topics/alcohol/Costs%20to%20Society%20of%20Problem%20Alcohol%20Use%20in%20Ireland.pdf

the_monkey

DRINK !

conorh91

conorh91 wrote: »

The cost of alcohol to society is about 3.7 billion euro.

A figure someone with an agenda pulled out of their arse.

As others have said most of the costs in providing health care, policing etc would not change if drinking reduced.

Employment etc in the drinks industry and other related industry's would however.

darkpagandeath

conorh91 wrote: »

Here you go, genius. It's 3.7 billion. Knock yourself out.

http://www.hse.ie/eng/services/Publications/topics/alcohol/Costs%20to%20Society%20of%20Problem%20Alcohol%20Use%20in%20Ireland.pdf

Nah your alright when in the first pages it says estimates I stop reading. Someone with an agenda is going to link what they want with a cause.

Ted_YNWA

conorh91 wrote: »

Here you go, genius. It's 3.7 billion. Knock yourself out.

http://www.hse.ie/eng/services/Publications/topics/alcohol/Costs%20to%20Society%20of%20Problem%20Alcohol%20Use%20in%20Ireland.pdf

Heading of that is "Cost to society"

" Cost of output lost due to alcohol related absence from work" - does this impact the exchequer that much? , it would impact the production company by even more if their output was down.

Cost of alcohol related premature mortality
Cost of alcohol related suicides

Don't mean to sound flippant, but these costs would be affecting the family moreso. Are they using the loss in potential VAT / PAYE etc ...

there does not seem to be a micro breakdown of the headline figures in that article, just assumptions.

the_monkey

sugarman wrote: »

Again, that is nothing unique to Ireland. Its the same attitude in most other EU countries.

It's not though, mind you people in Spain go out and 10 people sit around a glass of water - but thats just being tight cúnts..

darkpagandeath

Ted_YNWA wrote: »

Heading of that is "Cost to society"

" Cost of output lost due to alcohol related absence from work" - does this impact the exchequer that much? , it would impact the production company by even more if their output was down.

Cost of alcohol related premature mortality
Cost of alcohol related suicides

Don't mean to sound flippant, but these costs would be affecting the family moreso. Are they using the loss in potential VAT / PAYE etc ...

there does not seem to be a micro breakdown of the headline figures in that article, just assumptions.

All arbitrary to be fair someone with an agenda could just take basic absenteeism figures and say well. 70% I would say is down to drink with no backup. Why I pointed out estimated figures and stopped reading. Estimated figures to me generally are heavily biased on the side you are trying to prove.

conorh91

Ted_YNWA wrote: »

Heading of that is "Cost to society"

Yeah those are the costs borne by the Exchequer, firms and households.

That actually aggravates the statistics, since households and firms don't get any direct benefits of an exchequer return on alcohol, despite having to pay for higher insurance premiums directly, for example.

Cost of output lost due to alcohol related absence from work" - does this impact the exchequer that much? , it would impact the production company by even more if their output was down.

Well since the Exchequer loses taxes on profits and salaries, yes it does. Bear also in mind that the government has about 300,000 employees, and it suffers from low productivity.

Low productivity is only about 10% of the cost. The major costs are criminal justice and healthcare.

darkpagandeath

conorh91 wrote: »

Yeah those are the costs borne by the Exchequer, firms and households.

That actually aggravates the statistics, since households and firms don't get any direct benefits of an exchequer return on alcohol, despite having to pay for higher insurance premiums directly, for example.

Well since the Exchequer loses taxes on profits and salaries, yes it does. Bear also in mind that the government has about 300,000 employees, and it suffers from low productivity.

Low productivity is only about 10% of the cost. The major costs are criminal justice and healthcare.

wonder how much courts regular customers cost you know guys with 150 previous convictions. Free legal aid and all that, bet its the bulk of the cost.

Ted_YNWA

conorh91 wrote: »

Yeah those are the costs borne by the Exchequer, firms and households.

That actually aggravates the statistics, since households and firms don't get any direct benefits of an exchequer return on alcohol, despite having to pay for higher insurance premiums directly, for example.

Well since the Exchequer loses taxes on profits and salaries, yes it does. Bear also in mind that the government has about 300,000 employees, and it suffers from low productivity.

Low productivity is only about 10% of the cost. The major costs are criminal justice and healthcare.

I agree that these services are affected more by alcohol abuse, but these need to be paid anyway. Judges are paid the same if they have 1 case on the day or 50. There is a huge backlog of cases, so there is unlikely to have been an increase in judges to be paid.

There was a hiring freeze until recently in the guards, again they are not paid on an incident basis.

A&E may be busier, but nurses are paid the same regardless how busy they are. Waiting time increase cannot have a monetary value placed on it.

Calina

Ted_YNWA wrote: »

Waiting time increase cannot have a monetary value placed on it.

But this does not mean it cannot be counted as a cost against people's lives, when there may be many other things they would prefer to be doing than a) waiting in A&E because some drunken fool slammed them one in the face and b) waiting in A&E because some drunken fool slammed their friend/relative one in the face. The intangible costs may be difficult to quantify but this does not mean they do not exist.

darkpagandeath

Calina wrote: »

But this does not mean it cannot be counted as a cost against people's lives, when there may be many other things they would prefer to be doing than a) waiting in A&E because some drunken fool slammed them one in the face and b) waiting in A&E because some drunken fool slammed their friend/relative one in the face. The intangible costs may be difficult to quantify but this does not mean they do not exist.

A&E is not packed to the roof with Drunks, That's what people want to see when they go in, over the past number of years people in A&E are regular hospital patients being admitted that way. No beds for them on trolleys, But don't that that get in the way.

Ted_YNWA

Calina wrote: »

But this does not mean it cannot be counted as a cost against people's lives, when there may be many other things they would prefer to be doing than a) waiting in A&E because some drunken fool slammed them one in the face and b) waiting in A&E because some drunken fool slammed their friend/relative one in the face. The intangible costs may be difficult to quantify but this does not mean they do not exist.

The majority of these instances happen after 2 AM, is there intangible costs associated with sleep or having sex?

that is what most family/friends would have been doing if they did not end up in A&E because of said incident.