Government to set min price on gargle

ScumLord

Idbatterim wrote: »

interested to see if it will make it worthwhile going up the north again, if it comes in...

It wouldn't be worth a 3 hour drive to me. I might get more serious about doing home brew though, make me some 13% ale.

humbert

rubadub wrote: »

You have that totally backwards. Methanol is present in many fermented products, its in beer, it naturally occurs in unfermented apple juice. I have never EVER seen a case of methanol poisoning due to home brewed & distilled spirits, and I have searched hard. This myth gives it a bad name.

Gangs will raid warehouses and steal methanol or other industrial alcohols and sell them as vodka or other spirits. This is very well documented, loads of cases.

Some gangs will just set up their own distilleries and have fake bottles of branded stuff.

It seems you're right. When I was young I'd been told of farmers suffering ill effects having used vessels which previously contained, I think, formaldehyde. That story (which may have been bs) coupled with the lower boiling point of methanol making it seem plausible that it would make it through crude distillation instilled a distrust in me of home distillation.

Having done some googling I see that it is not unheard of for bootlegers to use methanol which is a scary thought, though I couldn't find any deaths in Ireland due to that either.

Galwayguy35

biko wrote: »

I'm willing to pay whatever a pint cost in the Dáil bar, nothing more.

Ha when I read that first I thought you meant the Dail bar in town.

MadYaker

Jimoslimos wrote: »

You ever hear of methanol poisoning? Black market alcohol is a bad thing.

Yes I know what methanol is. I'm not talking about homemade moonshine. I meant stuff smuggled in from other countries or stolen stuff being sold under the radar.

Atlantic Dawn

In the next referendum they are running they should tag on a vote asking the people do they support the minimum pricing of alcohol.

syklops

MadYaker wrote: »

Yes I know what methanol is. I'm not talking about homemade moonshine. I meant stuff smuggled in from other countries or stolen stuff being sold under the radar.

I know what you mean but unfortunately there is no way to tell the difference. When there was the poisonings in the Czech Republic last year, all major brands were affected. As a whiskey drinker Im confident that I could tell if what I was drinking wasn't what it said on the tin, but it was still scary stuff.

Bog Standard User

uch wrote: »

How exactly ?

alcoholic parents will be forced spend more on drink... they will spend less on their children's needs thus the problems these disadvantaged children suffer such as malnutrition and neglect increases.

if this increase in tax on drink is pushed through it will require more tax payer's money to be spend on social services who will then be required to deal with more n more neglected children.

the few pennies the government make from the extra tax will have to be spent on social services

increased taxes on drink will further serve to kill off the pubs and reduce tourism with it

it will also encourage black market scumbags to smuggle in more drink or make dodgy stuff

Stheno

folan wrote: »

has this been shown to be effective elsewhere?

i thought they introduced it in scotland, but to very little success?

rubadub wrote: »

They planned/discussed introducing it in Scotland, they were left like red faced ignorant idiots when they found out the plan was illegal in the EU, after wasting christ knows how much money on it.

Luckily we were once bitten, twice shy, and did not make fools out of ourselves too, oh wait...

Noonan actually mentioned this on the radio when he was discussing the budget last week, and specifically said that the Attorney General had not yet advised if it would or would not be legal.

Days 298

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

In the next referendum they are running they should tag on a vote asking the people do they support the minimum pricing of alcohol.

Democracy? Go on away out of that. We only get a say when they need their Dail membership renewed and even at that they blatantly lie every time.

darkpagandeath

Bog Standard User wrote: »

alcoholic parents will be forced spend more on drink... they will spend less on their children's needs thus the problems these disadvantaged children suffer such as malnutrition and neglect increases.

if this increase in tax on drink is pushed through it will require more tax payer's money to be spend on social services who will then be required to deal with more n more neglected children.

the few pennies the government make from the extra tax will have to be spent on social services

Were are the figures for the apparent massive child neglect due to alcohol consumption ? or is it the same stereo type of jono on the dole outside the bookies everyday drinking going home drinking and so on ? it sounds made up by a anit drinking anti fun lobby group

ScumLord

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

In the next referendum they are running they should tag on a vote asking the people do they support the minimum pricing of alcohol.

We'll see less and less referendums as time goes on I reckon, the government know they're out of sync with the general population, they don't want what we want and visa versa.

Atlantic Dawn

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

In the next referendum they are running they should tag on a vote asking the people do they support the minimum pricing of alcohol.

They already put it in their manifesto. The people voted them in
So... that's already a vote

darkpagandeath

bluewolf wrote: »

They already put it in their manifesto. The people voted them in
So... that's already a vote

so was not cutting child benefit and not raising college fees

suicide_circus

How do I know if a pub is NOT a member of the vintners association? I would like to give these establishments my business. ****ing greasy FF/FG/Publicans out to corrupt screw the population at every turn.

syklops

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Were are the figures for the apparent massive child neglect due to alcohol consumption ? or is it the same stereo type of jono on the dole outside the bookies everyday drinking going home drinking and so on ? it sounds made up by a anit drinking anti fun lobby group

Im not sure if the figures exist, but it is a very real situation which I have seen first hand.

darkpagandeath

syklops wrote: »

Im not sure if the figures exist, but it is a very real situation which I have seen first hand.

So you reported it to the HSE the child neglect then ? or are you just making it up. It’s always the same my sisters brothers cousin knows a scanger who drinks and takes drugs i think there kids are being neglected to. Figures please not whataboutary and made-up nonsense.

syklops

darkpagandeath wrote: »

So you reported it to the HSE the child neglect then ? or are you just making it up. It’s always the same my sisters brothers cousin knows a scanger who drinks and takes drugs i think there kids are being neglected to. Figures please not whataboutary and made-up nonsense.

:rolleyes:

darkpagandeath

syklops wrote: »

:rolleyes:

So that's a no then

syklops

darkpagandeath wrote: »

So that's a no then

Really not sure if you're serious or trolling.

goose2005

humbert wrote: »

It seems you're right. When I was young I'd been told of farmers suffering ill effects having used vessels which previously contained, I think, formaldehyde. That story (which may have been bs) coupled with the lower boiling point of methanol making it seem plausible that it would make it through crude distillation instilled a distrust in me of home distillation.

Having done some googling I see that it is not unheard of for bootlegers to use methanol which is a scary thought, though I couldn't find any deaths in Ireland due to that either.

I think there have been Irish tourists in Indonesia who drank suspect spirits and died

darkpagandeath

syklops wrote: »

Really not sure if you're serious or trolling.

What's trolling about saying you have made something up ? maybe look up the word trolling. Because my opinion does not fit your omg everyone is drinking and beating there kids whataboutary ?

syklops

darkpagandeath wrote: »

What's trolling about saying you have made something up ? maybe look up the word trolling. Because my opinion does not fit your omg everyone is drinking and beating there kids whataboutary ?

Peter gets 186 euros on a thursday. Peter buys a few bottles of vodka and gives whats left to Mary who buys food for everyone for the week. Then the government brings in a minimum pricing for alcohol and Peters vodka now costs more than before. Does Mary have more money for the domestic shopping or less money for the domestic shopping?

My name is URL

I guess more people will turn to drinking the auld hand sanitiser now!

http://www.thejournal.ie/addicts-drinking-hand-sanitiser-to-get-alcohol-fix-292329-Dec2011/

darkpagandeath

syklops wrote: »

Peter gets 186 euros on a thursday. Peter buys a few bottles of vodka and gives whats left to Mary who buys food for everyone for the week. Then the government brings in a minimum pricing for alcohol and Peters vodka now costs more than before. Does Mary have more money for the domestic shopping or less money for the domestic shopping?

Peter and Mary don't exist this is a hypothetical. Do you have any figures or are you going to continue to base an argument on something that has been fabricated ? I have supplied figures in other posts. That say Ireland is in the middle for alcohol consumption in the EU not Top (That's trotted out constantly to say were all alcoholics) and the 2nd most expensive country to purchase it.

syklops

My name is URL wrote: »

I guess more people will turn to drinking the auld hand sanitiser now!

http://www.thejournal.ie/addicts-drinking-hand-sanitiser-to-get-alcohol-fix-292329-Dec2011/

Dont really understand the reason for the hypodermic needle in an article about alcohol.

From the article:

He said often they have economic reasons for this, such as the fact they may not have acccess to social welfare.

Or another economic reason being that alcohol is f^%king expensive in this country?

Grandeeod

This is absolutely nothing more than protecting the pub trade. Look closely at what has happened over the last few years. The proposal to launch cafe bars was shafted. Off license hours were cut. Happy hours were banned. The abuse of alcohol continued. Now we are returning to price fixing a concept that was rejected by Labor heads many years ago. Think Gilmore. The vintners are running this show in an attempt to force drinkers into pubs.

keeponhurling

So what will the minimum price of a pint be ?

syklops

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Peter and Mary don't exist this is a hypothetical. Do you have any figures or are you going to continue to base an argument on something that has been fabricated ? I have supplied figures in other posts. That say Ireland is in the middle for alcohol consumption in the EU not Top (That's trotted out constantly to say were all alcoholics) and the 2nd most expensive country to purchase it.

Can you calm down a little, I think you will find we are on the same side. Bringing in a minimum price for alcohol will make it more expensive, and as my hypothetical demonstrated will result in wives having less money in their domestic budgets ultimately resulting in hungry children and leading to more social problems.

I am for the reduction on the duty of alcohol. Not an increase and very much against the bringing in of a minimum price.

Having lived in eastern europe for a number of years I also know the Irish are not the heaviest drinkers in Europe.

The funny thing is the majority of my drinking is done in pubs but despite this I can't stand paying anymore than a euro a can even though I pay at least four times that in the pub for a pint.

It used to be 24 can for 20 euro, now the best is 24 for 24 but I think the days for 1 euro a can will be gone for good if this legislation gets brought in.

darkpagandeath

syklops wrote: »

Can you calm down a little, I think you will find we are on the same side. Bringing in a minimum price for alcohol will make it more expensive, and as my hypothetical demonstrated will result in wives having less money in their domestic budgets ultimately resulting in hungry children and leading to more social problems.

I am for the reduction on the duty of alcohol. Not an increase and very much against the bringing in of a minimum price.

Having lived in eastern europe for a number of years I also know the Irish are not the heaviest drinkers in Europe.

I am quite calm i was simply pointing out the whataboutary. You will find The government is using the same reasoning putting up the price of alcohol. If the European figures say were in the middle for consumption and 2nd most expensive how can the government then say we have a massive problem with drink ? That's basically saying most people drink responsibly and we have like a couple of thousand alcoholics drinking loads. If that's the case then why not invest in treatment and prevention instead of just going them alcoholics have ruined it for everyone now everyone has to pay more.

syklops

Whats whataboutery?

Sh1tbag OToole

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

In the next referendum they are running they should tag on a vote asking the people do they support the minimum pricing of alcohol.

No lad this is a representative democracy. This means we pick our poison from 3-4 showers of gobsh1te career politicians and do what we're told for the next 5 years

have2flushtwice

moonshine! bring it back!

flutered

have2flushtwice wrote: »

moonshine! bring it back!

its still around

flutered

undercost selling by the muntibles is costing the state two fortunes.

darkpagandeath

darkpagandeath wrote: »

So you reported it to the HSE the child neglect then ? or are you just making it up. It’s always the same my sisters brothers cousin knows a scanger who drinks and takes drugs i think there kids are being neglected to. Figures please not whataboutary and made-up nonsense.

Reporting such events are generally ignored. I know someone who reported a woman who spent all her money on alcohol and drugs and sent her kids to school with no breakfast and nothing packed for lunch. In the evening they'd get a few crackers or one if those really cheap Dunnes currys. Multiple reports were made and it took 4 years before the HSE or anyone else did anything about it. The kids were put into care for a few months while the mother cleaned herself up. She got the kids back and was back drinking and doing drugs less than a week after. 5 years later and complaints are still being made yet the kids are still with their mother who will spend 150 euro on a hair cut but won't buy breakfast cereal for her children. If the kids are lucky there'll be a loaf of bread and some milk bought on dole day and that's about it b

darkpagandeath

Deleted User wrote: »

Reporting such events are generally ignored. I know someone who reported a woman who spent all her money on alcohol and drugs and sent her kids to school with no breakfast and nothing packed for lunch. In the evening they'd get a few crackers or one if those really cheap Dunnes currys. Multiple reports were made and it took 4 years before the HSE or anyone else did anything about it. The kids were put into care for a few months while the mother cleaned herself up. She got the kids back and was back drinking and doing drugs less than a week after. 5 years later and complaints are still being made yet the kids are still with their mother who will spend 150 euro on a hair cut but won't buy breakfast cereal for her children. If the kids are lucky there'll be a loaf of bread and some milk bought on dole day and that's about it b

So the HSE has failed then. What has the price of drink got to do with that ? If the price went up she would have still been drinking taking drugs and so on.

Cienciano

biko wrote: »

I'm willing to pay whatever a pint cost in the Dáil bar, nothing more.

This is one of the things that make me mad. The poxy dail bar. Everyone knows that raising the price won't make a difference, it's the mentality we have towards it. Surely abolishing the dail bar would set a good example that we don't need alcohol to function?
I reckon any TD that suggests this will get laughed out of Leinster House.

Sand

I don't know anyone who makes decisions on how much they will drink based on how much they can afford. Most people drink far, far, far less than they what they can afford (though some still far more than they should) so they'll just continue drinking just as much whatever the price is. They'll just have slightly less left over for any other discretionary spending.

And regardless of whatever the minimum price is, it will still be a hell of a lot cheaper than what the pubs are charging.

darkpagandeath

darkpagandeath wrote: »

So the HSE has failed then. What has the price of drink got to do with that ? If the price went up she would have still been drinking taking drugs and so on.

It's git nothing to do with it, just your post implied that those stories were made up. i was merely pointing out that reporting to the HSE wasn't a solution in most cases and that was cases if neglect are common and most will happily turn a blind eye.

Hootanany

I suppose they have to pay for the teachers so that is why.

Dravokivich

goose2005 wrote: »

But even if you only consume a small amount, this will chip away at your resources even more.

Yeah, I'm against this price fixing.

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

In the next referendum they are running they should tag on a vote asking the people do they support the minimum pricing of alcohol.

A spoilt vote is only measured as a spoilt votes. Any comments never seem to be reported on, as far as I've seen.

keeponhurling wrote: »

So what will the minimum price of a pint be ?

I reckon pricing will likely be on the units of alcohol as opposed to the quantity of the beverage.

Sand wrote: »

I don't know anyone who makes decisions on how much they will drink based on how much they can afford. Most people drink far, far, far less than they what they can afford (though some still far more than they should) so they'll just continue drinking just as much whatever the price is. They'll just have slightly less left over for any other discretionary spending.

And regardless of whatever the minimum price is, it will still be a hell of a lot cheaper than what the pubs are charging.

That would be me, I tick that box. But I do not want to have to pay more, purely because it was lobbied for, by an industry group looking to close out other interested parties. It's artificially manipulating the market and then looking to stigmatise me as an Alco because I think its not fair, unjust and market demand does not require it. If a Gov is to get involved in such a thing, it should only be to aid or stimulate the market, but this concept is destructive to the market. It's taking the incentive away from those companies who do have adapted and succeeded in the market and it has the gall to tell us it's for our own good.

Capt'n Midnight

Just a reminder that it's the first second increase in excise duty on a pint since 1994. (All of it in the last year)

Since then apart from minor changes in the VAT rate all the changes have come from industry / distributors / publicans.

It sucks but it was a hell of a long time coming.


Over the years there've been a lot of publicans in the Dail.

Atlantic Dawn

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Just a reminder that it's the first increase in excise duty on a pint since 1994.

No there was an increase in last years budget too of 10 cent also...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_budget,_2013

syklops

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

No there was an increase in last years budget too of 10 cent also...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_budget,_2013

And the duty on wine was increased in the previous budget.

Amirani

Artful_Badger wrote: »

You cant make decisions based on how it will affect addicts who will neglect their children to get their fix.

Can you not? Why are you supporting the legislation then? What business of yours is it what quantity of alcohol non-addicts drink?

SeanW

uch wrote: »

How exactly ?

Artful_Badger wrote: »

Fixed.

This sounds like a kind of "Sin tax" where the government raises the price of something ... primarily because it likes 'governing,' I expect in this case.

As to where people on low income come in; from Wikipedia:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sin_tax wrote:

1) Critics of sin tax argue that it is a regressive tax in nature and discriminates against the lower classes, since taxation of a product such as alcohol or cigarettes does not account for ability to pay, therefore poor people pay a greater amount of their income as tax.
2) Sin taxes are not normally value added in nature meaning that expensive, high-quality products more likely to be purchased by the wealthy will have the tax comprise a much smaller proportion of its final purchase price, thus ensuring that the lower classes pay a much greater proportion of their lower income in tax.

On point 1) the alcohol price controls are going to disproportionately affect the poor by their very existance, assuming those with less money drink the same amount of alcohol as those with more money. Person on minimum wage that buys a six pack of beer, will pay proportionally more of their income in sin taxes (dramatically so) than a middle class or wealthy person who purchases the same drink.
Point 2 is closely related to point 1: further regressive is the fact that the kind of alcohol does not matter: A six-pack of beer or cheap vodka will attract the same attention (i.e. cost) as the kind of champaigne the D4 heads drink.
Actually, since it's a minimum price per unit, its even worse than that: a cheaper drink will be raised in price by a large magnitude, while a rich persons drink will not be affected at all in any way.

So yes, price engineering in this context is regressive, planned either explicitly to hurt the poor, OR because the career politicians we have just don't care about those with less money than them ... either frankly would be commensurate with the class of leader that we have not just in this country but our international government in Brussels.

syklops

SeanW wrote:

This sounds like ...

Excellent post.

P_1

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Just a reminder that it's the first increase in excise duty on a pint since 1994.

Since then apart from minor changes in the VAT rate all the changes have come from industry / distributors / publicans.

It sucks but it was a hell of a long time coming.


Over the years there've been a lot of publicans in the Dail.

Eh hasn't the excise duty on a pint been long considered as one of the 'old reliables' that is pretty much guaranteed to go up in each budget?

Sh1tbag OToole

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Reporting such events are generally ignored. I know someone who reported a woman who spent all her money on alcohol and drugs and sent her kids to school with no breakfast and nothing packed for lunch. In the evening they'd get a few crackers or one if those really cheap Dunnes currys. Multiple reports were made and it took 4 years before the HSE or anyone else did anything about it. The kids were put into care for a few months while the mother cleaned herself up. She got the kids back and was back drinking and doing drugs less than a week after. 5 years later and complaints are still being made yet the kids are still with their mother who will spend 150 euro on a hair cut but won't buy breakfast cereal for her children. If the kids are lucky there'll be a loaf of bread and some milk bought on dole day and that's about it b

That is awful. I thought it was all sunshine and lollipops for children in this country these days, being ferried around in a 132-D Lexus and all.

Its nice to think that something like a minimum price for booze or a maximum price for haircuts would help but i doubt thats the case