Minimum Alcohol Pricing

[Dons_1988]

- no tax benefit in terms of being reinvested in public services 

- no real evidence that it directly impacts people’s health outcomes 

- no evidence that it changes the culture and attitude towards alcohol in this country

To me this is state over reach in terms of policy masquerading as public healthcare, a policy they think sounds good in terms of their care for the Scottish public. They frequently cite the cost of living crisis as an outrage for the public (it is) but would refuse to recognise the impact this policy has on it. 

Im sure if a large populace told them they could no longer afford a bottle of wine at the weekend then they’d see it as a victory. 

[Todd_is_God]

1 hour ago, Left Back said:

The most shocking thing about this thread is someone admitting they willingly drink Heineken tbh.

Each to their own but I really like it.

[Bairnardo]

5 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

Each to their own but I really like it.

I know LB is having a joke in this instance, but my personal opinion is "you don't drink that shite do you?" has fed into this policy at every level.

[10menwent2mow]

The issue, as many have pointed out, is this is now targeting everyone rather than just 'problem drinkers'. The cost of buying alcohol for a BBQ/party/social event at home is becoming preventative and I highly doubt that these types were going down the offy and buying a dozen 3l bottles of turbo cider for their guests. 

 

[orfc]

19 hours ago, Salt n Vinegar said:

It's just going up by the rate of inflation plus about 3p, presumably to "round it up".   Keep the heid.

 

Inflations not 30% which is what a 15p rise on a 50p charge is

You have to go back to 2015 to see prices today that are 30% higher than they were, which is 3 years before they introduced the charge

[topcat(The most tip top)]

35 minutes ago, 10menwent2mow said:

The issue, as many have pointed out, is this is now targeting everyone rather than just 'problem drinkers'. The cost of buying alcohol for a BBQ/party/social event at home is becoming preventative and I highly doubt that these types were going down the offy and buying a dozen 3l bottles of turbo cider for their guests. 

 

Aberdonian man in complaining about having to spend money shocker

[10menwent2mow]

Just now, topcat(The most tip top) said:

Aberdonian man in complaining about having to spend money shocker

Nae really. I very rarely have a drink at home and I don't think it'll affect the prices in pubs too much. It's just a very poorly thought out policy in my opinion.

[topcat(The most tip top)]

 

1 hour ago, orfc said:

Inflations not 30% which is what a 15p rise on a 50p charge is

You have to go back to 2015 to see prices today that are 30% higher than they were, which is 3 years before they introduced the charge

True, sort of, certainly if the rise were to happen today

50p in 2018 is equivalent to  62.4p now
Source: https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/monetary-policy/inflation/inflation-calculator

However inflation in the 3 years between 2015 and 2018 was equivelant to about 8 months worth of inflation last year

If the rise is going to be rolled out in September that's 7 months away and we don't know what the rate of inflation is going to be between now an then so there is some doubt about what the inflation rate over the whole period would be

If inflation were, for example, to hold constant at the December rate of 5.2% for 7 months then by September that 62.4p would be 64.3p

You can, of course,  speculate about how inflation is likely to be a little bit lower but  possibly we need to calculate for 8 months given that the 62.4p would have been a January number (that takes it up to 64.5p)

 

But the general point, that in real terms this price rise will be roughly equivalent to inflation, stands up pretty well

 

 

Edited February 9 by topcat(The most tip top)

[Steelly]

Another terrible idea by the wanna be nanny state SNP.

I really hope that they get booted out at the next election. They are slowly but surely destroying Scotland. 

[topcat(The most tip top)]

57 minutes ago, 10menwent2mow said:

Nae really. I very rarely have a drink at home and I don't think it'll affect the prices in pubs too much. It's just a very poorly thought out policy in my opinion.

It was a cheap gag based on dated stereotypes

I'll try to stick to maths 

[Salt n Vinegar]

1 hour ago, orfc said:

Inflations not 30% which is what a 15p rise on a 50p charge is

You have to go back to 2015 to see prices today that are 30% higher than they were, which is 3 years before they introduced the charge

Much though I hate to quibble, according to the Bank of England inflation calculator, the 2023 equivalent of 50p in 2018 when it was introduced is 62p. I added the 3p for rounding. It's a bit clunky to copy and paste, but the exact lift from the page shows...

"What would goods and services costing £.5 in 2018 cost in 2023

£.5 in 2018 would be worth £0.62 in 2023"

Inflation averaged 4.5% a year."

To me, it isn't only the effect the charge has on what might be called danger level drinkers.  True, it might have little or no effect on the poor sods who are utterly addicted but they were not always like that.  There will be thousands of folk, young, middle aged or old, nowhere near that level of harm who may now buy less alcohol, or buy it less often who will therefore not ever reach the danger level, or will reach it much later because their overall consumption will be less than it might have been without the charge. I'm not claiming any expertise... I like a pint, a glass of wine and a nice malt as much as the next person (not at the same time!), but controlling the consumption of things by price is hardly a novelty.  

I'm also annoyed that we have minimum unit pricing and can't deal with this issue by means of a tax or duty, but to complain about that is to criticise a country without the necessary powers for not being able to do what a country with the necessary powers can do.  Without powers over such taxes and duties, MUP will have to do.  I'd much rather the extra income found its way into public services.

It's obviously an imperfect position to be in - it's an imperfect world - but to me it's worth a go, especially if the alternative is to make the consumption of what is after all quite a hazardous substance easier, by making it cheaper. 

To the best of my knowledge nobody close to me has died as a result of alcohol abuse, but I have lost friends and relatives to the consequences of tobacco addiction.  Anyone who was to suggest now that cigarettes should now be made cheaper... all the bollox of 'it's her only enjoyment' or 'they're targeting the poor and working class by taxing ciggies even more' ... would richly deserve a nick in the nuts.

 

[Todd_is_God]

3 minutes ago, Salt n Vinegar said:

Much though I hate to quibble, according to the Bank of England inflation calculator, the 2023 equivalent of 50p in 2018 when it was introduced is 62p. I added the 3p for rounding. It's a bit clunky to copy and paste, but the exact lift from the page shows...

"What would goods and services costing £.5 in 2018 cost in 2023

£.5 in 2018 would be worth £0.62 in 2023"

Inflation averaged 4.5% a year."

To me, it isn't only the effect the charge has on what might be called danger level drinkers.  True, it might have little or no effect on the poor sods who are utterly addicted but they were not always like that.  There will be thousands of folk, young, middle aged or old, nowhere near that level of harm who may now buy less alcohol, or buy it less often who will therefore not ever reach the danger level, or will reach it much later because their overall consumption will be less than it might have been without the charge. I'm not claiming any expertise... I like a pint, a glass of wine and a nice malt as much as the next person (not at the same time!), but controlling the consumption of things by price is hardly a novelty.  

I'm also annoyed that we have minimum unit pricing and can't deal with this issue by means of a tax or duty, but to complain about that is to criticise a country without the necessary powers for not being able to do what a country with the necessary powers can do.  Without powers over such taxes and duties, MUP will have to do.  I'd much rather the extra income found its way into public services.

It's obviously an imperfect position to be in - it's an imperfect world - but to me it's worth a go, especially if the alternative is to make the consumption of what is after all quite a hazardous substance easier, by making it cheaper. 

To the best of my knowledge nobody close to me has died as a result of alcohol abuse, but I have lost friends and relatives to the consequences of tobacco addiction.  Anyone who was to suggest now that cigarettes should now be made cheaper... all the bollox of 'it's her only enjoyment' or 'they're targeting the poor and working class by taxing ciggies even more' ... would richly deserve a nick in the nuts.

 

Nannying Pish

[Salt n Vinegar]

25 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

Nannying Pish

You might, of course, be right and you're certainly entitled to hold that view. 

However I'd reckon that there's thousands and thousands of people who wish there had been a bit more "Nannying Pish" about tobacco.  It's obviously not an exact comparison but the complaints about nannying, interference with personal choice, being down on the poor and working class seem pretty familiar.  

[Stephen Malkmus]

Get it up you you bunch of drunks.

[Todd_is_God]

44 minutes ago, Salt n Vinegar said:

You might, of course, be right and you're certainly entitled to hold that view. 

However I'd reckon that there's thousands and thousands of people who wish there had been a bit more "Nannying Pish" about tobacco.  It's obviously not an exact comparison but the complaints about nannying, interference with personal choice, being down on the poor and working class seem pretty familiar.  

It's nannying pish that you're trying far too hard to justify for some reason.

Next time round it'll be £1

[Billy Jean King]

2 hours ago, Steelly said:

Another terrible idea by the wanna be nanny state SNP.

I really hope that they get booted out at the next election. They are slowly but surely destroying Scotland. 

It's a long time away though

[Molotov]

Out of interest do MSPs that sanction these rises have a members bar at Holyrood? If so do they obey the same rules as the rest of the population?

Our elected UK MPs get significantly subsidised drinks at multiple bars/restaurants in London.

“The Strangers’ Bar is the Houses of Parliament’s popular in-house pub, and it serves up some serious bargains. 

A pint of Carlsberg is just £3.56, and Green King IPA is even less at just £3.45. And wine drinkers will find their tipples a steal too: a small glass of sauvignon blanc white wine is a penny-pinching £3.05. Even champagne clocks in at under a tenner a glass.

It’s an impressively cheap price list, especially when you consider that the average London pint everywhere else costs £5.33, according to shopping comparison site Finder.com.”

[Left Back]

7 minutes ago, Molotov said:

Out of interest do MSPs that sanction these rises have a members bar at Holyrood? If so do they obey the same rules as the rest of the population?

Our elected UK MPs get significantly subsidised drinks at multiple bars/restaurants in London.

“The Strangers’ Bar is the Houses of Parliament’s popular in-house pub, and it serves up some serious bargains. 

A pint of Carlsberg is just £3.56, and Green King IPA is even less at just £3.45. And wine drinkers will find their tipples a steal too: a small glass of sauvignon blanc white wine is a penny-pinching £3.05. Even champagne clocks in at under a tenner a glass.

It’s an impressively cheap price list, especially when you consider that the average London pint everywhere else costs £5.33, according to shopping comparison site Finder.com.”

There certainly used to be a bar at Holyrood.  Mrs B used to work there.  She can’t remember if it was subsidised or not.  The restaurant definitely was.

[Molotov]

7 minutes ago, Left Back said:

There certainly used to be a bar at Holyrood.  Mrs B used to work there.  She can’t remember if it was subsidised or not.  The restaurant definitely was.

To me it seems hypocritical to be laying down the law to the peasants while they get subsidised bevvy at the expense of the taxpayers. 

I don’t think the French or the Spanish would put up with their MPs getting all these benefits in kind. 

Let’s march on Edinburgh and London.  

[Trogdor]

4 minutes ago, Molotov said:

To me it seems hypocritical to be laying down the law to the peasants while they get subsidised bevvy at the expense of the taxpayers. 

I don’t think the French or the Spanish would put up with their MPs getting all these benefits in kind. 

Let’s march on Edinburgh and London.  

Say the word and I'm there. My pitchfork and torch are standing ready.