Minimum alcohol pricing is nigh

10000maniacs

realitykeeper wrote: »

Not sure what you mean. As far as I know the age limit in most other EU countries is 18 just as it is in Ireland. In Ireland, salaries are fairly good (too good in my opinion) hence the cost of living is generally higher.

Culturally, the Irish are known for drinking and to slay that dragon we need unapologetically draconian legislation with much higher prices.

Do you ever get the impression this forum is rim full of feckin' school teachers?. FFS

realitykeeper

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I am stating that penalising everyone to solve a problem that only a subset of that 'everyone' actively contributes to is unfair, and I'd apply that in every context, not just alcohol.

EDIT: Also, you still haven't answered my question - I've stated that I haven't been harmed by other peoples' alcohol consumption, and you have responded that I'm either a hermit or being dishonest. So again I ask you - how specifically do you imagine that I must surely have been negatively impacted by someone else's drinking? Can you cite some examples of things that apparently "everyone" deals with when others around them choose to get drunk? I'm all ears. Perhaps I've missed something.

I did not accuse you of being dishonest nor did I call you a hermit, that was only a guess.

Penalizing everyone is a price worth paying. I would be happy to forego the very rare occasion I might have a drink if it meant less of my tax was needed to run the HSE and if it meant no more inconsiderate and unruly behavior by drunk people on public transport, on planes and what not.

Spanish Eyes

Bring in prohibition. That's surely next, because this kind of mullarkey meddling in people's lives will NOT work to solve anything alcohol related.

I know I am preaching to the converted, but this is all to get people back in the pubs and curb "at home drinking".

Won't work. No matter what they do people will still buy and drink at home to their heart's content. They do not have to walk/taxi/bus to the pub. They do not have to pay inflated prices. They will not even get a packet of peanuts for gracing the establishment. They will have to get home aswell, so add 40 or so quid to the pot for the privilege of coming home by taxi (depending on the distance admittedly, but you get the point I am sure).

It is ridiculous the amount of clout the Vintners have, and equally ridiculous the amount of control that is placed on ordinary people who like to have a few cans/bottles/nice wine at home away from the forced jollity of a pub full of drunks.

Sorry now. But the majority are actually suffering for the way the few may behave. Nanny I hear you!

I personally do not care how much off sales will cost, I like having friends around and the conviviality of a house meet with a few jars. How do they think they are going to stop that?

It will NEVER ever again be as enjoyable or cheaper to go to an overpriced noisy pub.

I'm a wee bit older sorry, I might sound odd. But I'm talking about the many, not the few.

realitykeeper

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

You dont have to be young and into partying to know that punishing the majority for the actions of a minority is wrong.

The "punishment" is priceless for the majority. Sure the cost of drink will be more expensive but on the plus side, it will cost more for the minority to get drunk. Drunk people tend to cause more accidents, get into more fights, they tend to be louder, more obnoxious and smellier than your average Joe.

So higher prices have a definite benefit.

odyssey06

realitykeeper wrote: »

I did not accuse you of being dishonest nor did I call you a hermit, that was only a guess.
Penalizing everyone is a price worth paying. I would be happy to forego the very rare occasion I might have a drink if it meant less of my tax was needed to run the HSE and if it meant no more inconsiderate and unruly behavior by drunk people on public transport, on planes and what not.

More of your tax might be needed not just to run the HSE, but to pay for pensions and so on. Apparently alcohol is killing off all these people before their time. What's the additional cost to the taxpayer if someone instead was a teetotaller, lived another 20 years collecting pension payments, and then gets arthritis and dementia and needs nursing home care?
Plus the state won't get getting any alcohol sales tax revenue from them.
I'd like to see the breakdown of what the additional cost to the state is for a drinker versus a non drinker. Without that, it's entirely premature to think this will mean less government spending.

I'm assuming your only concern for your fellow citizens is how much they are costing you in tax.

It's all very well for you to be happy to forego your drink, but I see zero grounds for why you think the second part of your equation will be delivered - given that this is just a measure to herd people towards pubs. And there are pubs in the airport. And drunken people coming home from pubs take buses and trains.

odyssey06

realitykeeper wrote: »

The "punishment" is priceless for the majority. Sure the cost of drink will be more expensive but on the plus side, it will cost more for the minority to get drunk. Drunk people tend to cause more accidents, get into more fights, they tend to be louder, more obnoxious and smellier than your average Joe.

Some people don't need drink to be loud, obnoxious or smelly.

I guess people drunk on alcohol from pubs smell more sweetly?

realitykeeper

odyssey06 wrote: »

It's clear you are focused on trying to ignore analogies which highlight the basic flaws in your logic.

If we focus on all these analogies, we would be here all day. I am not saying they are all completely without merit but discussing them would have a filibustering effect.

10000maniacs

odyssey06 wrote: »

Some people don't need drink to be loud, obnoxious or smelly.

I guess people drunk on alcohol from pubs smell more sweetly?

The Hooley Rays will be dancing on top of their cars again. Its a result for them. Kerching

Garibaldi?

I wonder will there be a run on the off licences of the supermarkets in the coming days. Could have a counter productive effect!

realitykeeper

odyssey06 wrote: »

It's not cheap...

Yes it is. Slabs of cans are dirt cheap in some retailers and in the pubs there are special promotions making alcohol all too accessible. A minimum price is absolutely imperative.

odyssey06 wrote: »

There's nothing wrong with teenagers coming to like alcohol and enjoying it.

It would be more in their line to study, work or volunteer.

odyssey06

Garibaldi? wrote: »

I wonder will there be a run on the off licences of the supermarkets in the coming days. Could have a counter productive effect!

Don't panic.. yet. If it does look likely to come into force then I'm sure this will happen, but it's not yet signed into law here and won't be activated unless the North implements it. There would need to be significant time allotted for retailers to update their IT systems \ pricing etc to account for the levy structure.

odyssey06

realitykeeper wrote: »

Yes it is. Slabs of cans are dirt cheap in some retailers and in the pubs there are special promotions making alcohol all too accessible. A minimum price is absolutely imperative. .

Dirt's not even cheap these days, ask Greyhound.

Can you give us a list of these special promotions so we can establish for ourselves how accessible they are? I keep hearing rumours on this thread of cheap alcohol in pubs but no definite leads.

realitykeeper

odyssey06 wrote: »

Not only is our drink too cheap but we're paid too much as well.
We're so feckless we probably shouldn't even have the right to vote.
*tugs forelock*

You are beyond parody at this stage.

If it was 1820 I might agree with you but could you come back to the reality of 21st century Ireland and cut out the quasi racist / irish self-hatred guff.

Ireland runs a fiscal deficit and is in debt to the tune of 200 billion +. I assure you, self restraint now would be better than dealing with reality when the time comes to pay the piper.

realitykeeper

odyssey06 wrote: »

Dirt's not even cheap these days, ask Greyhound.

Can you give us a list of these special promotions so we can establish for ourselves how accessible they are? I keep hearing rumours on this thread of cheap alcohol in pubs but no definite leads.

If there is no cheap alcohol then you have no need to worry about a minimum price.

Reputable Rog

realitykeeper wrote: »

Yes it is. Slabs of cans are dirt cheap in some retailers and in the pubs there are special promotions making alcohol all too accessible. A minimum price is absolutely imperative.



It would be more in their line to study, work or volunteer.

You're a modern day Matt Talbot.

odyssey06

realitykeeper wrote: »

Ireland runs a fiscal deficit and is in debt to the tune of 200 billion +. I assure you, self restraint now would be better than dealing with reality when the time comes to pay the piper.

Germany has a fiscal surplus of 50 billion. It also has many Oktoberfests and alcohol can be had for half the price in their supermarkets and pubs as it is here.
I don't believe there is an economic link between the two, but if you aren't just trolling and somehow think the two are connected, logically you should be arguing for a reduction in prices.

Hotblack Desiato

odyssey06 wrote: »

I'm assuming your only concern for your fellow citizens is how much they are costing you in tax.

Sure looks that way. What a horrible way to live.

joe40

10000maniacs wrote: »

realitykeeper wrote: »

Not sure what you mean. As far as I know the age limit in most other EU countries is 18 just as it is in Ireland. In Ireland, salaries are fairly good (too good in my opinion) hence the cost of living is generally higher.

Culturally, the Irish are known for drinking and to slay that dragon we need unapologetically draconian legislation with much higher prices.

Do you ever get the impression this forum is rim full of feckin' school teachers?. FFS

It seems the vast majority on this forum are totally opposed to mup, so you're probably right, they're feckin school teachers.

Mr. teddywinkles

realitykeeper wrote: »

There are different reasons why drink is cheap, in the above case the motive may be footfall but the consequence is the same as when drink is given away cheaply to lure another generation into the habit of drinking alcohol. Hence the necessity for the legislation.

The sooner ya get you head around the fact alcohol is not cheap here the sooner a rational discussion can be achieved.

Wheres Me Jumper?

I disagree, the "drinking problems" are myths from the government.

Mr. teddywinkles wrote: »

The sooner ya get you head around the fact alcohol is not cheap here the sooner a rational discussion can be achieved.

What do you mean by "not cheap"?
not cheap in relation to what/where?

hatrickpatrick

Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »

What do you mean by "not cheap"?
not cheap in relation to what/where?

The entire rest of Europe, essentially.

realitykeeper

odyssey06 wrote: »

Germany has a fiscal surplus of 50 billion. It also has many Oktoberfests and alcohol can be had for half the price in their supermarkets and pubs as it is here.
I don't believe there is an economic link between the two, but if you aren't just trolling and somehow think the two are connected, logically you should be arguing for a reduction in prices.

I did not say drink was linked to our high levels of debt. There is an economic link does between this country`s pay rates and it`s level of debt. There is a cultural link to alcoholism in this country. For example, a lot of people take pride instead of shame in company`s that manufacture products like Guinness (aka Diageo).

realitykeeper

Mr. teddywinkles wrote: »

The sooner ya get you head around the fact alcohol is not cheap here the sooner a rational discussion can be achieved.

If drink is not cheap you have no reason to object to a minimum price.

VinLieger

realitykeeper wrote: »

If drink is not cheap you have no reason to object to a minimum price.

Its already massively overpriced and this will only increase the cost further so yes people do have a reason to object to MUP

odyssey06

realitykeeper wrote: »

I did not say drink was linked to our high levels of debt. There is an economic link does between this country`s pay rates and it`s level of debt. There is a cultural link to alcoholism in this country. For example, a lot of people take pride instead of shame in company`s that manufacture products like Guinness (aka Diageo).

And no German in history has ever taken pride in German beer? Or schnapps?
The French, Spanish and Italians in their wine?
The Scotch or Japanese with their whisky?
The Czechs and beer?

There is no connection between taking pride in the output of your country and anything to do with economics or alcoholism.

And finally, the German NAZIS recruited in BEER HALLs. Minimum alcohol pricing wouldn't have stopped that, so clearly it's a useless device.

Leroy42

VinLieger wrote: »

Its already massively overpriced and this will only increase the cost further so yes people do have a reason to object to MUP

Overpriced is a relative term. For example, I think Apple products are all massively overpriced, yet millions of people buy them, so it would appear that I am wrong in that perception.

Alcohol is overpriced compared to other markets is true, but our levels of consumption would appear to suggest that our pricing for alcohol is not massively overpriced.

Price is the amount that people are willing to pay for something, if they continue to pay that price then each individual has made the decision that the price is worth paying for what they what. Of course they would like it be be cheaper, but given the option to pay or go without, they choose to pay. Therefore, in terms of pricing for the market, it is not overpriced.

The real tell from this, when it does come into effect, is that I would expect to see a massive drop off in the off licence sales as people see the product as over priced and thus opt for alternatives.

joe40

realitykeeper wrote: »

I did not say drink was linked to our high levels of debt. There is an economic link does between this country`s pay rates and it`s level of debt. There is a cultural link to alcoholism in this country. For example, a lot of people take pride instead of shame in company`s that manufacture products like Guinness (aka Diageo).

I would be in favour of MUP if it helps to reduce problem drinking/excessive binge drinking especially among teenagers. (and I accept it is an "if") But that is not the same as demonising all alcohol and eventually looking for some sort of alcohol free society.

As a previous poster pointed out French and Italian culture is inextricably linked with wine.

Alcohol is a drug and should be treated with respect, but at the same time it provides a wonderful means of relaxation, and is mostly great in social occasions.
Like many things, severe problems can occur when it is misused, but the answer is not prohibition, it is better education and enforcement
The recent survey on teen drunkenness is heartening, in that we are improving in this regard, but not there yet.

Doctor Jimbob

joe40 wrote: »

I would be in favour of MUP if it helps to reduce problem drinking/excessive binge drinking especially among teenagers. (and I accept it is an "if") But that is not the same as demonising all alcohol and eventually looking for some sort of alcohol free society.

As a previous poster pointed out French and Italian culture is inextricably linked with wine.

Alcohol is a drug and should be treated with respect, but at the same time it provides a wonderful means of relaxation, and is mostly great in social occasions.
Like many things, severe problems can occur when it is misused, but the answer is not prohibition, it is better education and enforcement
The recent survey on teen drunkenness is heartening, in that we are improving in this regard, but not there yet.

I'd have a lot less issue with MUP myself if the extra money raised was actually going towards alcohol harm reduction - I still wouldn't entirely agree with it but at least I could see the logic in that approach.

VinLieger

Leroy42 wrote: »

Alcohol is overpriced compared to other markets is true, but our levels of consumption would appear to suggest that our pricing for alcohol is not massively overpriced.

Our prices are the 2nd highest in europe by ALOT


Our consumption rates at 7th highest in the EU with Germany at 8th and Latvia, Luxembourg, Austria, Czech Republic, France and Lithuania above us in that order, so no our levels of consumption would definitely appear to suggest our pricing for alcohol is indeed massively overpriced






Here's pricing data from the UK published this year, Latvia the 6th highest consumer in the EU are 9th on price at about 15% above the EU average. We are about 75% above the EU average while the the other 6 above us on consumption and Germany all fall below the average price so your argument that our prices reflect our consumption makes no sense especially when you compare it with the chart for consumption here



Im not arguing we should be below the eu average or even at the eu average but our prices are massively out of step with the rest of the continent when considering our consumption rates.

joe40

VinLieger wrote: »

Leroy42 wrote: »

Alcohol is overpriced compared to other markets is true, but our levels of consumption would appear to suggest that our pricing for alcohol is not massively overpriced.

Our prices are the 2nd highest in europe by ALOT


Our consumption rates at 7th highest in the EU with Germany at 8th and Latvia, Luxembourg, Austria, Czech Republic, France and Lithuania above us in that order, so no our levels of consumption would definitely appear to suggest our pricing for alcohol is indeed massively overpriced






Here's pricing data from the UK published this year, Latvia the 6th highest consumer in the EU are 9th on price at about 15% above the EU average. We are about 75% above the EU average while the the other 6 above us on consumption and Germany all fall below the average price so your argument that our prices reflect our consumption makes no sense especially when you compare it with the chart for consumption here



Im not arguing we should be below the eu average or even at the eu average but our prices are massively out of step with the rest of the continent when considering our consumption rates.

But surely pricing is determined by the market demand. The manufacturers and retailers have the sole purpose of maximising profits, so they will sell their product at the maximum price the particular market will take.
I know a lot of the price is excise, but that tax would have to be gotten from other sources if not alcohol.
I would prefer excise duty on alcohol than extra tax on food or fuel.
The price in other markets is not relevant to price here unless we are talking about essential services that people can't do without.