Minimum alcohol pricing

neiltb

if it looks like going through, buy your shares in brewing/distilling. We have this in Ontario, $1.07 is the cheapest beer you can buy, the big brands make value beer at $1.07 (cost is much less) and the regular brand is ~$1.50 and costs not much more.

They make a fortune.

Cressers

Well as cyclists can sometimes come off their bikes and cost the NHS why not have a minimum price for cycles and associated products?

Some of you don't quite grasp this Freedom Of Choice thing, do you!

rhext

Cressers wrote:

Well as cyclists can sometimes come off their bikes and cost the NHS why not have a minimum price for cycles and associated products?

Some of you don't quite grasp this Freedom Of Choice thing, do you!

If we were ever presented with a free choice I might agree with you. Retailers exploit every weakness in the human organism ruthlessly to squeeze maximum profit out of each of us. Sometimes the government needs to step in and say 'this far and no further': that's their job!

Pross

Cressers wrote:

Well as cyclists can sometimes come off their bikes and cost the NHS why not have a minimum price for cycles and associated products?

Some of you don't quite grasp this Freedom Of Choice thing, do you!

There's certainly a case for having insurance that covers the cost (as motor insurance companies can be recharged for NHS treatment).

verylonglegs

Cressers wrote:

Well as cyclists can sometimes come off their bikes and cost the NHS why not have a minimum price for cycles and associated products?

Some of you don't quite grasp this Freedom Of Choice thing, do you!

I think you'll most posters on here grasp it perfectly well but are also aware there are people out there who are too stupid to realise or simply don't care about the responsibilities that also come with those freedoms, it's no different to the laws that stop your neighbours playing loud music all night and keeping you awake. You really think having ambulances on stand-by in our city centres at weekends just to scrape drunken morons off the floor is something we should just shrug our shoulders at and tolerate?

dilemna

Cressers wrote:

Well as cyclists can sometimes come off their bikes and cost the NHS why not have a minimum price for cycles and associated products?

Some of you don't quite grasp this Freedom Of Choice thing, do you!

Alcohol isn't being banned, you still have a freedom of choice to buy it, but just not at the crazy low prices some supermarkets sell it at. You are obviously a boozer :roll: ?

Cressers

No.

motdoc

Damn straight.
When I can't afford 38p for a can of booze then I'll stop drinking.
I't is not a right it's a choice.
Cycling raises your life expectancy so should be subsidised.
Not talking about individual choices really it's population health. All the evidence is that the best way to drive down consumption is to up the cost.

rick_chasey

motdoc wrote:

Damn straight.
When I can't afford 38p for a can of booze then I'll stop drinking.
I't is not a right it's a choice.
Cycling raises your life expectancy so should be subsidised.
Not talking about individual choices really it's population health. All the evidence is that the best way to drive down consumption is to up the cost.

Only if the product is elastic.

Inelastic products are a little different.

Observe oil, for example.

beverick

rhext wrote:

I thought it was a minimum price, not a tax. ...

No it's all about preserving the tax take.

What HMRC are saying is that you can discount the production and sales cost as much as you want but the minimum price a retailer will be able to sell alcohol at is 18p per unit of alcohol for wine, 17p beer, 7p cider and 24p spirits (plus VAT at 20% of course). All of this will go straight into the revenue's coffers.

So for a can of beer containing up to 2 units of alcohol, the revenue will be guaranteed income at least 40p (ok 39.6p) plus a further 1p for each 5p the retailer adds for themselves.

Simples (to name a quote).....or at least the government think we are.

Bob

rhext

But the government gets the alcohol tax regardless of what the retailers charge. All this is doing is saying 'you can't sell this stuff for less than you have to pay us in tax'. There may be a marginal increase in VAT income, but if they were really doing this for revenue generation purposes it would be far more effective simply to increase alcohol tax.

The 18p (or whatever) does indeed go directly into the revenue's coffers, but it goes there anyway regardless of what the retailer chooses to charge for the stuff. As you point out, the revenue will also then get 1p of every 5p that the retailer adds for themselves, but that's always been the case.

All this legislation is doing is setting a floor below which retail prices can't fall. I really can't see a mechanism for significantly increasing the tax take. They've already got a perfectly good mechanism for doing that which collects from the whole alcohol market.

finchy

On the whole question of the government putting higher taxes on damaging products, what exactly is wrong with that?

Surely cigarettes, alcohol and junk food should be taxed more highly than, say, fruit and vegetables anyway.

rick_chasey

johnfinch wrote:

Surely cigarettes, alcohol and junk food should be taxed more highly than, say, fruit and vegetables anyway.

Because they're reasonably inelastic products, and taxes on basics and essentials like food are ultimately regressive.

There need to be better alternatives.

Le Commentateur

It's to stop supermarkets doing 3 for the price of 2 type offers, which encourage people to buy more than they might originally have intended. They should do the same for that brown fat people here call chocolate.

Frank the tank

Lancslad wrote:

But It isnt really going to do anything other than collect more tax. At what price is it not considered cheap? Its like petrol no matter how much it goes up people will still buy it.The binge drinkers will still binge and the rest of us have to pay more for one of lifes little pleasures.

In one. :evil:

brin

It doesn't matter how much an increase is imposed on supermarket alcohol, people will still buy it, something the government are well aware of.
It will come to the stage where people will decide what to surrender in order to enable a purchase of alcohol, maybe a lower priced loaf, cheaper milk, own brand biscuits etc.
then there will be the kids on the street who will revert to stealing to fund their habits, as they do for drugs.
So basically IMO a 'tax' on cheaper alcohol is just that, a 'tax' - it won't make no difference to how many drunks we see on the streets, or alleviate the police/ambulance workload, as the government would like us believe.

Le Commentateur

I think there must be a supermarket somewhere nearby.

EKIMIKE

Rick Chasey wrote:

johnfinch wrote:

Surely cigarettes, alcohol and junk food should be taxed more highly than, say, fruit and vegetables anyway.

Because they're reasonably inelastic products, and taxes on basics and essentials like food are ultimately regressive.

There need to be better alternatives.

Agreed with food but Cig's and Booze are inelastic because of an overwhelming culture of smoking and drinking. They're not in the same category as bread, milk, vegetables e.t.c.

Equally, if the Govt. want to try and 'break' the culture then good luck... I have doubts.

StillGoing

Cressers wrote:

Did yo ever hear of the medical profession or the police ever claim that they didn't lead stressful lives? It's all just part of the propaganda...

Alcohol abuse is probably the main cause of most problems for the emergency services. Domestic violence, assaults and serious assaults including murder and manslaughter, public order, sudden deaths, road traffic collisions, missing persons, anti-social behaviour health issues etc etc. I live near one of the pimples on this earth, namely a Bargain Booze store, where nightly we see kids congregating outside accosting passers-by including motorists to try and persuade them to buy alcohol for them. Girls no more than 13 years old dropping their nickers in full view of everyone in order to urinate in the middle of the road. People being assaulted because they refuse to buy drink for the group.

With late opening and 24 hour drinking, the police are now diverted to policing violence hot spots instead of patrolling your neighbourhood to deter burglars and thieves. Where a shift could concentrate on such things after 2am, now they're still dealing with fights at 6am. Officers are scattered all over counties at custody suites and emergency reception at hospitals dealing with people who don't know when to stop drinking. Labour brought in the revised licensing laws to make us more European; well we're not. On the continent, they're quite content to go into a bar and order a cup of coffee. Here we order everything on the list of alcoholic beveridges because alcohol is cheap. If it's more expensive, then maybe, just maybe, dickheads will learn to stop drinking to excess.

rick_chasey

philthy3 wrote:

Cressers wrote:

Did yo ever hear of the medical profession or the police ever claim that they didn't lead stressful lives? It's all just part of the propaganda...

Alcohol abuse is probably the main cause of most problems for the emergency services. Domestic violence, assaults and serious assaults including murder and manslaughter, public order, sudden deaths, road traffic collisions, missing persons, anti-social behaviour health issues etc etc. I live near one of the pimples on this earth, namely a Bargain Booze store, where nightly we see kids congregating outside accosting passers-by including motorists to try and persuade them to buy alcohol for them. Girls no more than 13 years old dropping their nickers in full view of everyone in order to urinate in the middle of the road. People being assaulted because they refuse to buy drink for the group.

With late opening and 24 hour drinking, the police are now diverted to policing violence hot spots instead of patrolling your neighbourhood to deter burglars and thieves. Where a shift could concentrate on such things after 2am, now they're still dealing with fights at 6am. Officers are scattered all over counties at custody suites and emergency reception at hospitals dealing with people who don't know when to stop drinking. Labour brought in the revised licensing laws to make us more European; well we're not. On the continent, they're quite content to go into a bar and order a cup of coffee. Here we order everything on the list of alcoholic beveridges because alcohol is cheap. If it's more expensive, then maybe, just maybe, dickheads will learn to stop drinking to excess.

Alcohol is cheaper on the continent too.

It's a cultural problem - and as such, not one that can be solved by minor market intervention.

Rindle

It doesn't matter how much an increase is imposed on supermarket alcohol, people will still buy it, something the government are well aware of.
It will come to the stage where people will decide what to surrender in order to enable a purchase of alcohol, maybe a lower priced loaf, cheaper milk, own brand biscuits etc.
then there will be the kids on the street who will revert to stealing to fund their habits, as they do for drugs.

I think this has hit the nail on the head. People will sacrifice other things in order to be able to buy it. I think a lot of people who are not physically adicted to alcohol are mentally addicted and feel they HAVE to have it to have a good night.

shm_uk

Rick Chasey wrote:

It's a cultural problem

This.

The key to solving the alcohol abuse / binge drinking problems is to change attitudes etc toward alcohol consumption.

I can't suggest how though. But it'd take a long time. And probably cost money (shock horror).

All too easy for the govt to whack up prices to try and curtail purchasing & therefore consumption, but in the long run it still doesn't address the root issue.

Everyone's too eager to look for a quick fix I think.

Plus, the cynic in me just believes it's a convenient way of introducing another form of tax.

shm_uk

Rindle wrote:

I think a lot of people who are not physically adicted to alcohol are mentally addicted and feel they HAVE to have it to have a good night.

There does seem to be an obsessive behaviour toward alcohol in the UK.

The majority don't seem capable of doing anything or going anywhere unless it involves drinking.

It's almost childish.

It's not a required taste (beer especially, but that's just a personal opinion)

da goose

Interesting one, with the cutbacks one things for sure, Police/Paramedics/Hospitals simply will not have the budgets to deal with drink issues as they have sadly been forced to in the last few years.
Clearly this is an issue in the uk and abroad however we appear unable to `deal` with alcohol consumption as others do.
Another factor here will be the bootleggers who with increased prices/vat will have a fine profit this yaer, sadly at all taxpayers expense.
It makes me sad to think we have gone so far down this dangerous road.....

StillGoing

Rick Chasey wrote:

Alcohol is cheaper on the continent too.

It's a cultural problem - and as such, not one that can be solved by minor market intervention.

That's my point Rick. This country has a culture of going out and tipping as much drink down your neck as you can before the bar closes. There's not much pacing of drinking going on in the town at night or a realisation that you're losing your common sense and inhibitions so drink something non-alcoholic for a bit. We're also a nation of bitter, stout adn mild drinkers not fancy bottled lagers. The old days of pub fights used to be mainly over once you knocked the other bloke down or he gave up, nowadays it's knock them down and stamp on their head risking killing them. Bitters, stouts and milds made happy drunks who just wanted to smile and fall asleep. Continental lagers bring out the violence in people. If you take music like Heavy Metal, loud, fast tempo and often aggressive with a fan base who mainly drink bitter, you don't tend to get any trouble at their events. A disco though and there's plenty.

I've no idea how you change attitudes towards drink in this country but going back to the old licensing hours would be a start in teh right direction. I also see a minimum price on alcohol as a good move.

rick_chasey

Fo what it's worth, and probably not much, when I was studying violence in the 18th Century, exactly the same things were being said. "The British have a massive drinking problem that causes lots of violence, illness, etc etc".

Brits were saying it, Dutch were saying it, the little that I translated it looked like the French were saying it too.

It's deeply ingrained.

tarquin_foxglove

Le Commentateur wrote:

I think there must be a supermarket somewhere nearby.

Phew! Minimum pricing has been introduced. We're all saved.

pneumatic

tarquin_foxglove wrote:

Le Commentateur wrote:

I think there must be a supermarket somewhere nearby.

Phew! Minimum pricing has been introduced. We're all saved.

But wait! Look at those two blokes on the left! One of them is smoking and both of them have clearly spent too much time in fast food joints. Time for a health and fitness tax. Your rate of income tax rate is directly related to the number of minutes it takes you to cycle up the Alpe d'Huez.

That should sort it.

bails87

Frank the tank wrote:

Lancslad wrote:

The binge drinkers will still binge and the rest of us have to pay more for one of lifes little pleasures.

In one. :evil:

:roll:

"They" binge, "we" enjoy one of life's pleasures eh?

Why not say "the binge drinkers will have to pay a lot more and the rest of us will only be paying a couple of pence more for our occasional pint"?

daviesee

pneumatic wrote:

But wait! Look at those two blokes on the left! One of them is smoking and both of them have clearly spent too much time in fast food joints. Time for a health and fitness tax. Your rate of income tax rate is directly related to the number of minutes it takes you to cycle up the Alpe d'Huez.

That should sort it.

Looks like they have steins of beer as well :twisted: