Mps Have Voted In Favour Of Assisted...
News3 mins ago
David Cameron plans minimum price for alcohol in England
Drinkers will pay a minimum price for alcohol under plans instigated by David Cameron to tackle a growing health crisis, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.
http://www.telegraph....cohol-in-England.html
Whoohoo! Finally Cameron is finally doing something about rip off Britain. At times of austerity, what better than to be able to get your grog at a minimum price. He gets my vote!
http://www.telegraph....cohol-in-England.html
Whoohoo! Finally Cameron is finally doing something about rip off Britain. At times of austerity, what better than to be able to get your grog at a minimum price. He gets my vote!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Gromit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
"The thing is, if the price goes up too much we will get more smuggling with possible reduction in duty gathered. "
It's a "minimum price" that's being talked about.
That's a bit like a "minimum wage". It doesn't mean that prices will go up generally any more the introduction of a minimum wage meant that there was a general increase in pay.
It's a "minimum price" that's being talked about.
That's a bit like a "minimum wage". It doesn't mean that prices will go up generally any more the introduction of a minimum wage meant that there was a general increase in pay.
Making alcohol more expensive to buy will not have any significant effect on curbing the problem Britain faces with alcoholism, it is only making the majority suffer for the excesses of the minority.
Make it only hit the pockets of this minority by making them pay for any drink related injuries/health issues.
i.e. charge for conveyance to hospital A&E department, and for the treatment they receive, and also impose high on the spot fines to all those who are found drunk and disordered on the streets.
Another idea would be to introduce a type of rationing of the amount of drinks one is allowed to purchase in drinking establishments.
Make it only hit the pockets of this minority by making them pay for any drink related injuries/health issues.
i.e. charge for conveyance to hospital A&E department, and for the treatment they receive, and also impose high on the spot fines to all those who are found drunk and disordered on the streets.
Another idea would be to introduce a type of rationing of the amount of drinks one is allowed to purchase in drinking establishments.
AOG
Tend to agree with you, except I would say a rationing in BUYING establishments. Publicans and bar managers know when people have had enough. But when people buy 24, 48 cans or bottles in a supermarket or booze chain, and get drunk cheaply before they go out, is what is causing a lot of the problems.
Booze should be sold at the recommended daily limit at a time. ie, 4 cans or bottles of beer at a time. Or 25% of your shop spend. ie, you would need to buy £75 worth of groceries to be able to buy £25 worth of alcohol.
Tend to agree with you, except I would say a rationing in BUYING establishments. Publicans and bar managers know when people have had enough. But when people buy 24, 48 cans or bottles in a supermarket or booze chain, and get drunk cheaply before they go out, is what is causing a lot of the problems.
Booze should be sold at the recommended daily limit at a time. ie, 4 cans or bottles of beer at a time. Or 25% of your shop spend. ie, you would need to buy £75 worth of groceries to be able to buy £25 worth of alcohol.
Personally I think it stands to reason. It is now supposed to be illegal to sell alcohol at a loss though I don't know how on earth that is enforced.
Impose a minimum unit price for alcohol gives something that's easier to enforce and will deter over-buying and therefore over-drinking of alcohol, particularly by younger, poorer, more vulnerable people.
Do we seriously think that people are automatically going to turn to crime because of it? Can't see that.
Also, presumably, as previously implied, alcohol currently priced at over the putative new minimum will not be affected. Indeed, as presumably more may have to be charged for cheaper crinks it may actually keep the other prices down. So the rich can get even more sozzled and be too p***ed to vote Tory at the next election. Sounds good to me :-)
Impose a minimum unit price for alcohol gives something that's easier to enforce and will deter over-buying and therefore over-drinking of alcohol, particularly by younger, poorer, more vulnerable people.
Do we seriously think that people are automatically going to turn to crime because of it? Can't see that.
Also, presumably, as previously implied, alcohol currently priced at over the putative new minimum will not be affected. Indeed, as presumably more may have to be charged for cheaper crinks it may actually keep the other prices down. So the rich can get even more sozzled and be too p***ed to vote Tory at the next election. Sounds good to me :-)
I agree with the over all proposal, this was brought up with the discussion on underage drinking and I think it would go some way towards tackling that issue. The kids can only afford so much!
It may not make massive inroads in cutting down the intake of alcoholics, but it should at least lead to casual drinkers cutting down if they can't afford it.
I think the rationing is way overstepping the mark towards a nanny state.
It may not make massive inroads in cutting down the intake of alcoholics, but it should at least lead to casual drinkers cutting down if they can't afford it.
I think the rationing is way overstepping the mark towards a nanny state.
/// I don't see how you could enforce rationing in a "free" country. ///
Rationing was introduced in this 'Free Country' during WW2 and after, petrol rationing has been introduced also.
One would have to produce the official state alcohol ration card, to be able to purchase drinks in bars, clubs, pubs and supermarkets, then when one had used up their quota, then that would be it.
If a person was planning a party the one would have to save up their allowances or ask others to bring 'a bottle'.
Rationing was introduced in this 'Free Country' during WW2 and after, petrol rationing has been introduced also.
One would have to produce the official state alcohol ration card, to be able to purchase drinks in bars, clubs, pubs and supermarkets, then when one had used up their quota, then that would be it.
If a person was planning a party the one would have to save up their allowances or ask others to bring 'a bottle'.
There are two seperate issues
-alcoholism
-alcohol related violence
The first is not a uniquely British problem - for all the Cafe-culture France has a huge problem nearly twice the number of alcohol related deaths that we have in the UK
A lot of their problem is put down to cheap red wine - don't know how reliable that is.
Yes there will be more smuggling - and to answer Howard's earlier question yes there is a huge Booze Cruise industry between Sweden and Denmark and smuggling there.
So putting up the price is not a panacea but it has to be worth trying - if alcohol related deaths don't go down it could always be reversed.
Alcohol related violence is a totally different issue and it's probably much less related to cheap alcohol - after all much of it happens when people are drinking out in pubs and clubs which don't sell cheap booze by any stretch.
So let's not confuse these two
The number of A&E admissions has nothing to do with this measure
-alcoholism
-alcohol related violence
The first is not a uniquely British problem - for all the Cafe-culture France has a huge problem nearly twice the number of alcohol related deaths that we have in the UK
A lot of their problem is put down to cheap red wine - don't know how reliable that is.
Yes there will be more smuggling - and to answer Howard's earlier question yes there is a huge Booze Cruise industry between Sweden and Denmark and smuggling there.
So putting up the price is not a panacea but it has to be worth trying - if alcohol related deaths don't go down it could always be reversed.
Alcohol related violence is a totally different issue and it's probably much less related to cheap alcohol - after all much of it happens when people are drinking out in pubs and clubs which don't sell cheap booze by any stretch.
So let's not confuse these two
The number of A&E admissions has nothing to do with this measure
AOG, rationing is far too simplistic and would create uproar. As I've said, if it came to that I'd go tee-total and sell my 'rations' at a profit, as would many many people I'd guess. It would possibly lead to production of counterfeit ration cards, theft of and, basically handing more power to the 'underworld', crime and gang culture. Basically, in my eyes, a crazy idea!!
pa___ul3
/// AOG, rationing is far too simplistic and would create uproar. As I've said, if it came to that I'd go tee-total and sell my 'rations' at a profit, as would many many people I'd guess. It would possibly lead to production of counterfeit ration cards, theft of and, basically handing more power to the 'underworld', crime and gang ///
That is in your opinion, which you have every right to, but when will some people get it in their heads that if the Government chose to introduce 'ration books' far from creating an uproar, there would be little that could be done.
Just as there were criminal elements during the rationing period of WW2, these were called black-marketers ans spivs, they knew that if they were caught they would face very sever punishment.
So you and others would be free to make your choice, 'don't commit the crime, if you don't wish to serve the time'
/// AOG, rationing is far too simplistic and would create uproar. As I've said, if it came to that I'd go tee-total and sell my 'rations' at a profit, as would many many people I'd guess. It would possibly lead to production of counterfeit ration cards, theft of and, basically handing more power to the 'underworld', crime and gang ///
That is in your opinion, which you have every right to, but when will some people get it in their heads that if the Government chose to introduce 'ration books' far from creating an uproar, there would be little that could be done.
Just as there were criminal elements during the rationing period of WW2, these were called black-marketers ans spivs, they knew that if they were caught they would face very sever punishment.
So you and others would be free to make your choice, 'don't commit the crime, if you don't wish to serve the time'
"I don't see how you could enforce rationing in a "free" country. What's to stop people simply touring the supermarkets?"
I completely agree.
"Rationing was introduced in this 'Free Country' during WW2 and after, petrol rationing has been introduced also"
I think it's fairly obvious that in the wartime context we were (quite reasonably) willing to temporarily sacrifice freedom for the greater good of the war effort. A country constantly living under wartime provisions wouldn't be a terribly free one, I'd suggest. Rationing is also pretty impractical unless there's widespread belief in its necessity and justification (it's pretty well-documented, for instance, that richer parts of society were perfectly able to quietly get around rationing if they wanted to).
---
I actually can't see what's wrong with the proposal. It's moderate enough to avoid causing crime to evade it, but enough to affect people in their spending habits. I'm not convinced it's a long-term solution, though. It won't do much other than stem the tide.
I completely agree.
"Rationing was introduced in this 'Free Country' during WW2 and after, petrol rationing has been introduced also"
I think it's fairly obvious that in the wartime context we were (quite reasonably) willing to temporarily sacrifice freedom for the greater good of the war effort. A country constantly living under wartime provisions wouldn't be a terribly free one, I'd suggest. Rationing is also pretty impractical unless there's widespread belief in its necessity and justification (it's pretty well-documented, for instance, that richer parts of society were perfectly able to quietly get around rationing if they wanted to).
---
I actually can't see what's wrong with the proposal. It's moderate enough to avoid causing crime to evade it, but enough to affect people in their spending habits. I'm not convinced it's a long-term solution, though. It won't do much other than stem the tide.
aog, you're kind of romanticising the black market trade in your post, nowadays it has strongly funds gang culture in the UK, and we know your opinion on that!
Compare it, if you will, to the 'rationing' of illegal drugs.. of course the 'ration' is none but that still exists as a black market and, in my opinion, is the primary source of the social problems this country faces. Throw alcohol into that equation, a substance with far more users, and you're playing with an almighty monster!
Compare it, if you will, to the 'rationing' of illegal drugs.. of course the 'ration' is none but that still exists as a black market and, in my opinion, is the primary source of the social problems this country faces. Throw alcohol into that equation, a substance with far more users, and you're playing with an almighty monster!
Latest Posts
Christmas3 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles11 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles17 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles30 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles32 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.