Originally Posted by addy
Willies.
It wasn't really that part i was highlighting Gill, i should have took that out.
You don't think that's a fucking scary prospect?Originally Posted by LesMTS
Originally Posted by addy
Last edited by LesMTS; 4th March 2009 at 11:46am. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Willies.
I've had about 15-16 pints this week already, so it doesn't seem that surprising to moi.
Saying The Words We Mean To No One
A Esperanca é quando a dor presente nós faz tentar outra vez.
You only need to go for a couple of pints after work every day and sink ten over the weekend to hit twenty pints.
And that's only if all you're drinking is beer.
How many people have a glass of wine or two with their tea every night and go pubbing/clubbing at the weekend too.
Or how many people might go for a pint or two every other night, drink wine with a meal on the remaining nights and go out for beers/shots/spirits at the weekend?
Doesn't take much to add up to twenty pints (or equivalent) a week.
Willies.
A lot of people I know do drink 2 bottles of spirits a week.
I'm totally with Gill here - people who have problems with alcohol will just find other ways of getting it, this doesn't properly address any of the issues behind it and will probably just cause more problems, particularly for the economy, in the long run.
I’m okay with setting a minimum price on cheap booze. I’m not clear on who is proposed to benefit financially from the increase though: retailers, distributers or manufacturers? Or would the increase be in the form of a tax? Making it an extra tax on bargain booze might not be a bad shout. The profit could be fired in to the NHS, in theory.
Acually, thinking a bit more, it shouldn’t matter. This measure should really just knock out the bottom end of the market. If your cheap-ass vodka is only a few pennies less than a low-range brand like Smirnoff or Glen’s, then nobody is going to buy the cheap-ass one any more. Manufacture and supply of the bargain basement shite would dry up and the market would return to the way it looked five years ago.
Last edited by poprock; 4th March 2009 at 12:12pm.
The interval between birth and death is fractal. Any given moment is infinitely deep and rich, and therefore one lifetime is quite enough for me.
I really don't see how this could be a bad idea. It might end up futile in the end, but that doesn't make it a bad idea. What drawbacks do you have to this, apart from 'people moaning cause drink costs more'?
Originally Posted by addy
Economic ones. People spending more money on booze when it could be spent elsewhere - what Gill said about Glens, and local companies who could face going bust because of it.
I'm not saying it's an AWFUL idea - I'm just saying that there are probably much better ways of going about it.
I’m not convinced by the economic arguments. This measure is designed to reverse a recent trend, not something that's entrenched in the country’s economy. The massive availability of ultra-cheap booze is a new development. Cans of Tesco Value Lager, for one example.
The interval between birth and death is fractal. Any given moment is infinitely deep and rich, and therefore one lifetime is quite enough for me.
when i am in charge everyone who is LOVELY will get a BIG HAT, that will be THE LAW.
Stalk me Follow my waffle
Bookmarks