Where am I talking 'sh1te' as you so eloquently put it?

I was merely pointing out that the idea is not simply a revenue generating scheme from the Government as several posters asserted earlier.

The questions are mine, perhaps rhetorical, but I am not sure they indicate anything other than an objective view.

Excise duties and VAT collected from alcohol sales in the uk (beer, spirits, wine) most recently exceed £14billion per annum (£8.5bn duty & £5.5bn VAT)

The costs of dealing with alcohol related matters is of course very difficult to accurately assess, but the available costs quoted appear to be somewhat more than that - anywhere from £20bn to £25bn depending on who you believe.

So on the face of it alcohol costs UK plc more than it generates. Of course, that doesn't tell the whole story, as the figures conveniently exclude the tax revenues generated by way of all the taxes paid by the alcohol industry itself (including suppliers, producers, distributers, storage, distributers and retailers) both directly and indirectly.

Demonstrate to me, David, that on balance, taking everything into account, the social and health costs of alcohol exeed the total of revenue to "UK plc" generated by way of its manufacture and sale and I'll stop drinking altogether :)

The other difficulty is that if you restrict sales, you lose the income immediately, but the costs take longer to follow. People will still be ill, and in all likelyhood those that reduce their consumption are not going to be those that fall into the problem categories. Those that get pissed up and commit crime will still do so. The ill will still be ill. The addicts will still be addicts. The younger members of our society who go out of a night and end up in the gutter, a fight, or an ambulance will still do so. It will just cost them a bit more.


Pricing isnt the answer. Proper policing, education and suitable punishment for those who cross the line is.

Probably :)

A good example of where pricing and education have worked is smoking. Smoking has steadily declined over the past 2 decades.

I'm sure nobody expects a rise in price to have an immediate effect, but if the smoking example is repeated there would be a gradual change.

The big difference, and the reason i'm opposed to minimum pricing is that drinking a small amount of alcohol is not damaging to health, whereas smoking is in any quantity (over the long run). Therefore I feel punishing the responsible is just plain wrong

Then realistically what is it?

I understand what you say about policing/healthcare etc. but why is this yet again a sticking plaster approach by the government (and a revenue raiser, which to some extent it is)?

Why is this approach one that punishes all for the actions of some? It is about time the real issues were tackled, education, policing etc. We need o tackle the social issues, not try for a quick fox that just won't work. Those hellbent on causing trouble will carry on anyway, those addicted will find extra money somehow, and the same for the youngsters.

I personally like a couple of drinks to wind down after work, or a few on a weekend in the house listening to some music/watching some crap on TV (too expensive to go out nowadays). I don't cause any trouble, I don't end up taking up space in A&E, so why should it become more expensive for me to have a little enjoyment, because of a lack of social responsibility of some drinkers?

I managed to get through my youth, including going out on a weekend without ever getting in trouble or ending up in hospital. Others didn't, maybe something to do with parenting... and that is getting worse. There is no fear anymore.

It was on the radio today that the government is going to make it law the pubs and clubs can't offer cheap drinks such as 2 for 1 or drink as much as you can. I think this will kill a few pubs off as when you go out you only drink in some of these pubs at the begining of the night for the cheap drink and if thats no longer there you may as well drink in some quality pub instead :)

Do you ever think there are too many pubs and other drinking places and that we should perhaps not focus all our socialising round it, my Muslim mates seem to have a full social life without it, eating out, cinema, cafe's etc etc, it is possible.

Usually any pub with cheap booze offers is horrible, look at Wetherspoons, ok, a cheap pint but they are generally depressing sh1t holes full of old fleggers.

I don't believe a word of it. Drinking is no worse than before (20yrs ago when I were a lad we used to get drunk at w/ends :wonder:), it just gets more headlines today. Excuse to tax us & that's all :mad:

TX.

Are we ignoring the fact that the 'Government' is not actually imposing a minimum price on alcohol units - so it can't be an excuse to tax us as they have rejected this idea recommended by several Government advisers, oh, and the Liberal Party.

^^ Pre-election vs post election :wonder: + it's already taxed pretty well!

TX.

Edit - 14 Jan 2010 article:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/he...ohol-rise.html

I'm glad the Govt are protecting me from my own stupidity ... FFS they take us for feckless idiots :mad:

http://www.alcoholpolicy.net/

What an absolute load of old bollox.
That pic of the lady in the snow, she may have been on an Saxoboy, once a year bender.
We all do it and are entitled too.
It is getting beyond a joke now, all this mamby pamby attitude of, do this and don't do that.
Most folks who drink are old enough to know how much and how often.
Lets leave it up to the individual. Christ, how much more can we take of people telling us what to do and when to do it :cuckoo:

and me, and me. Don't forget me. i only do it once a year too.

I think the problem lies with pubs being too expensive. It makes people buy their drink from the cheaper off license/supermarket. This can create irresponsible drinking habits particularly for young people, as its not a controlled measure of alcohol in a supervised environment.
When I started drinking back in the seventies, there wasn't such a huge price difference, so we would do our drinking in a pub. Obviously the landlord would tell us when we'd had enough. Over the years, the breweries have got greedy where as the off license price has just risen gradually.
Nowadays, I hardly ever go out, as I grudge paying three quid a pint. I get my drink from the supermarket. If the government get their way, I'll stop altogether.
I don't think setting a minimum price is the answer, perhaps the pub prices should be capped at a more affordable level. After all, the pub industry have been complaining about the lack off customers for the past few years. They try to blame it on the smoking ban, but the high cost of drinking in a pub is the real answer.

Can anyone explain why supermarkets have taken it upon themselves to raise the drinking legal age to 25?

They all seem to be advertising the same now, "If you look under 25, be ready to ID yourself".

25? Why 25?

I think GC8WRX put his finger on it when he said the whole idea of drinking nowadays is to get drunk!

Its an attitude of mind with so many younger people now-maybe they feel it is almost a duty to all get well and truly lathered or they are not proper members of the "gang".

Trouble is, apart from it being objectionable to seeing them all over the floor virtually unable to stand or talk or anything and making life unpleasant for others, is that it is so bad for your health.

In the old days no one knew that smoking was as dangerous as it is and thats why most people were hooked on tobacco-me included!

Maybe if the dangers of alcohol were well publicised so that people knew from a young age what it can do to you, it might persuade them to be a bit more sensible and to drink considerably less.

Perhap's if they knew how it damages the liver and eventually is likely to lead to liver cancer, and how that is virtually impossible to cure unless you are very lucky. If they have seen someone with that and had it spread to the stomach where is was also incurable, and how your body becomes bloated with gallons of water, and you can only lie there in the hospice unable to move or talk and just are waiting to die, as I saw with a friend last year, then it might make them think twice before going over the top with drink so regularly.

I think it is time that the authorities established a real education about these problems at school in order to catch people while they are young and so that they grow up knowing the real dangers of tobacco, alcohol and drugs before they have the chance to get hooked.

Les

Do you take a break, though :D

cheeky mare!!!! suppose i deserved that after the ginger joke.

:lol1:

I'm not ginger (praise the Lord), so you are safe, for now :D

The age is 18 - what they are saying is that if you look under 25 they will make sure you are over 18.

This is pretty standard on most age control id things.

+1 :D



PS I bet you never saw that coming did you Les ;)

I agree, i was stopped from buying a beer from tescos with my baguette and fruit cos i didnt have id, this pi55ed me right of as im nearly 30 and have been buying beer for 15 years, more to the point why 25 if the legal age is 18, who self imposed this gay rule?

The thought behind this is that someone who is 16 may look 18, however a 16 year old is unlikely to look 25 years old.

It's just that some folk think you have to prove you are 25 to buy alcohol. :rolleyes:

Just make damn sure that before you supply any proof of your age, you demand the ID of the person checking (including their age) and make a point of writing down their details (to provide a record should this transaction be queried at a future date). If they call for a supervisor (and you could even suggest this) then demand the same from them!

This whole thing is getting fecking ridiculous :mad:

The potential problem of an underage person obtaining alcohol via a purchase has been replaced by a stupid administrative hierarchy of absolute proof and auditable pseudo-accountability. Bland spokes-people will trot out statements such as "we have taken measures to draw a line under the remote potential for a transgression for which lessons have been learnt, blah blah blah" rather than confronting the chavs in the local kiddies playground drinking litres of white cider out of plastic bottles bought by older (looks more than 25) chavs who probably work in said establishments!

[/and-relax]

mb

Will never happen as it kills you very slowly, too slow in fact for it to worry young people. What they will worry about though is Swine Flu which has killed virtually no one in the UK albeit if you catch it you may die quickly.

And before anyone mentions cigs, people are only just turning away from them despite the dangers being well known for 20+ years. Also dying from lung cancer "seems" a nastier way to go than liver disease which of course isn't the Big C which is a WORRY to even the most hardened individual.

TX.

Edit - from what I've read Leslie liver cancer is rare accounting for 1% ish of all cancers in the UK. Lung cancer is much higher (x22).

Now that tickled me :lol1::lol1::lol1:

I take a little offence to that, working in a shop and knowing why things are done this way. And I for one am not one of those people upholding these rules whilst personally buying drink for chavs. :mad:

For years shops have been targeted by mystery shoppers to ensure age restricted products weren't being sold to minors, alot of which the public as a whole agree with. For shops to protect themselves more from any prosecution, they have over time raised the age for when ID is asked for. It can be very difficult to guess someones age if in their mid to late teens, and therefore places get caught out regardless of if they are trying to be responsible. And don't get too arsey with the cashier, as ultimately if they make a mistake (we are told) it's us that gets the fine/punishment.

As much as I firmly agree that the authorities need to take action against the anti social element of society, shops have to both protect themselves as well as be seen to be responsible themselves as to not add to the problem.

Believe me, it annoys me to a point as despite being 27, I have been ID'd on quite a few occassions, and it is made worse by the fact I have none (my fault). I can understand why it is done though.

As for those serving, I agree those serving should be of age (think it law that they are). I know from recent experience in Tesco that this is the case. We were buying some beer amonst our normal shopping over Christmas, the lad serving put our stuff through, but when it came to the beer, he had to get authorisation to process the sale as he was underage. No doubt this slips through in some places, but it shouldn't.

I watched a very scientific presentation on what metaphysical effects alcohol has on the body and the impact of that.

It was from some American medical college and the Professor that presented it wasn't anti-alcohol at all but boy! did it open my eyes to why there are unit restrictions in place, which doctors say you shouldn't exceed and just how unique the chemical make up of alcohol is and how it can permeate through the body at a cellular level.

I also saw a UK tv prog where a professor who admitted that he liked a drink or three went on a quest to find out what it was doing to him (His father had been a major piss artist :p) and that was an eye opener as well because it categorised the human race into 3 camps when it comes to alcohol. The people who just can't really stand it physically and hardly if at all drink, the people who drink but are not addicted and the people who are unable to control themselves once they start :D

Apparently there is a genetic test to show whether you are most likely to fall into the last group........he thought he was but found out he was just a strong member of the middle group :)

I think alcohol abuse is getting worse, the excessive consumption at an earlier age will start to show in the next few years as more people in their 30s start to suffer from the years of abuse. If I remember rightly the trend indicated that young woman as a group have shown a marked increase in consumption and the impact is likely to be worse as the effects of alcohol are more damaging in woman due to physical differences when compared to men.

Mind you saying all that if I remember rightly one of the professions with the worst record for alcohol abuse are doctors themselves :p

Cheers....Bottoms Up :D:thumb:

Of the first group - a very significant proportion of the world's population do not have the enzyme - ethanol dehydrogenase - meaning they cannot metabolise alcohol. A big clue from nature that consuming a toxin is probably not a good thing.

I am in that camp!

You are nothing if not a constant enigma Trout!

Les :D

:D

Its has, there are loads of graphs detailing it, wine consumption went from nothing in the fifties to millions of bottles every year now, more alcohol is sold than ever before.

I have seen it change over the years, when I was a kid drink wasnt a big thing in our house, my mum never drank and my dad rarely, the "Christmas booze" was a bottle of Advocaat and 4 small tins of Heineken, back then you couldnt buy booze at the supermarket, you had to go to the off licence and it was relatively expensive and sold in smaller cans which were in smaller bundles of four, basically I remember India Pale Ale, Watneys, Mackesons etc and this was all three percent, you couldnt buy the really strong stuff except perhaps Special brew and Gold Label which were very specialist (i.e. tramps) and again in single tins or packs of four, no 24 can packs to stick in your trolley. I never saw any of my family drunk, ever, only seen my dad anywhere near drunk once since wheras I have been fairly p1ssed on numerous occasions, not falling over but pretty merry.

There has always been those blokes who go to the pub every night, I worked in pubs around 1990 and have been back since and seen the same (craggier) faces stood in the same spot where I left them when I pulled my last pint. These people go almost every night and I dont think that has really changed but its the drinking at home people do more now and kids boozing, ok we all tried it but we were never regular drinkers.

To me it feels that at some point before the millenium the gloves came off with regards to booze and it has become a total free for all, the old reserve for a lot of people went and a new generation of drinkers came through and embraced it and now its a huge part of their lives, I guess I am part of that, me and my brother drink a lot more than my parents ever did when we were kids.

I am curbing my alcohol intake, I have never been that bad but can see that the goalposts moved in what was socially acceptable when at the same time the medical establishment have been telling us to cut right back, I dont think they do it to spoil our fun, I think alcohol is great but dangerous in large quantities or on a very regular basis.

I have stopped myself having any mid week and this time have bought the 4% Stella to try and wean myself off progressively stronger ones, like Proper Stella, Leffe and Duvel, you can tell yourself you are a beer aficianado when drinking these strong one but in reality its just getting p1ssed, quickly, not stopping drinking, just re-setting my intake.

Take a look at what you drink, ho much, how often, the cost, problems its caused and decide whether its acceptable, what others drink isn't relevant, if you mate drinks 12 pints and you have 10, thats still a lot, dont compare yourself to p1ssheads !

I have heard recently of two blokes in their fifties dying through booze, ok, proper boozers but still dead before their time leaving teenage kids in one case.