Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Minimum alcohol pricing is nigh

1…163164166168169…324

Comments

  • #4952
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    the beer revolu wrote: »
    Fr. Tod, are you a publican or a furloughed barman?
    Neither.

    Just someone who finds all this drama with people getting up in arms about the price of off license booze amusing.

    I certainly think we need to redefine our relationship with alcohol, especially with regard to young people who have the potential to become the problem drinkers of the future, but as I've said here more than once I don't think MUP is a great option to do that.


  • #4953
    tjhook
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 759 ✭✭✭tjhook


    Now that pubs are closed, the average price of a unit of alcohol purchased in the state is lower. But alcohol sales are down - even though with the pubs closed, there are still plenty of locations to obtain alcohol.

    It's not clear to me that increasing the price will also lead to a reduction in consumption. Especially among the relatively small group of people who have a serious problem.

    What's the desired end result of this law? That those with an alcohol addiction will drink just as much as ever, but pay more for it, and those without a problem drink less? That's the most that can be hoped for with this legislation. At least if health is the motivation.

    If health is really a concern, there'd be enforcement of:

    4.—(1) A licensee shall not, on the licensed premises—
    (a) supply, or permit any person to supply, intoxicating liquor—
    (i) to a drunken person, or
    (ii) to any person for consumption by a drunken person;
    (b) permit a drunken person to consume intoxicating liquor;
    (c) permit drunkenness to take place in the bar; or
    (d) admit any drunken person to the bar.

    For some reason, the publican lobbies (and their political backers) aren't pushing for enforcement of that health measure already in legislation. Maybe those groups so concerned for our health just aren't aware of it...


  • #4954
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,131 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    the beer revolu wrote: »
    Did anyone hear the Muppet of a doctor on NewsTalk with Mark Cagney on The Hard Shoulder Yesterday?

    He was allowed to completely make stuff up without being challenged and no alternative view was offered.
    He claimed that back in the 80s the mainstream beers were "around 3.5%", whereas now they are 5% and over. While it's difficult to find historic ABV in beer, I have no doubt that the above is completely false.
    Mainstream beers in the 80s were afaik, 4.3(perhaps stout was 3.8%) and mainstream beer is still 4.3%. He then went on to claim that wine in the 80's was 7 or 8 %!
    Completely made up stuff, and completely unchallenged.

    I'm tempted to complain to the BAI but I most likely can't be arsed.

    i dont remember stout ever being 3.8%. it was always 4.2 as long as I remember. The only beer i remember being 3.8 was smithwicks. draught lagers were 4.3-4.4 and still are.


  • #4955
    the beer revolu
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,028 ✭✭✭✭the beer revolu


    Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »
    Neither.

    Just someone who finds all this drama with people getting up in arms about the price of off license booze amusing.

    I certainly think we need to redefine our relationship with alcohol, especially with regard to young people who have the potential to become the problem drinkers of the future, but as I've said here more than once I don't think MUP is a great option to do that.

    I can agree that Ireland had a troubled relationship with alcohol.

    I just wish we could have a grown up conversation about it and not be fed lies and opinions as fact. And this pub alcohol good/ home alcohol bad is such a crock of shlt.

    I also can't help noticing that the regions with higher pricing and more restrictions (Ireland, UK, Scandinavia, Finland, Iceland) seem to have more unhealthy relationships with alcohol than regions with cheaper prices and more availability (Spain, France, Portugal, Germany), which appear to have less problems. Why is this never properly discussed?


  • #4956
    the beer revolu
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,028 ✭✭✭✭the beer revolu


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    i dont remember stout ever being 3.8%. it was always 4.2 as long as I remember. The only beer i remember being 3.8 was smithwicks. draught lagers were 4.3-4.4 and still are.

    I think there was a time when mainstream stouts were weaker than mainstream lagers. But either way, that doctor was talking through his hoop, unchallenged.


  • Advertisement
  • #4957
    odyssey06
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,399 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    the beer revolu wrote: »
    I think there was a time when mainstream stouts were weaker than mainstream lagers. But either way, that doctor was talking through his hoop, unchallenged.

    I don't think you would have gotten a red wine at 7-8% in the 80s. I think it was more 11-13% range where now 12-15% range is typical.
    You might have gotten some German 'hock' type white wines coming in at 8-10% but not totally sure.

    Nobody challenged the pro_MUP side on the 11 euro bottle of Irish whiskey in Dunnes which is no such thing (Drombeg liqueur).

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • #4958
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    the beer revolu wrote: »
    I can agree that Ireland had a troubled relationship with alcohol.

    I just wish we could have a grown up conversation about it and not be fed lies and opinions as fact. And this pub alcohol good/ home alcohol bad is such a crock of shlt.

    I also can't help noticing that the regions with higher pricing and more restrictions (Ireland, UK, Scandinavia, Finland, Iceland) seem to have more unhealthy relationships with alcohol than regions with cheaper prices and more availability (Spain, France, Portugal, Germany), which appear to have less problems. Why is this never properly discussed?

    The idea that that the southern European countries have less problems can be disputed by a report I posted here or somewhere else a long time ago, and I'm not going looking for it now.

    Essentially more alcohol related deaths in those countries tend to be as a result of liver cancers etc, brought on by the longer term effects of alcohol use over a longer period of time.

    Where as more alcohol related deaths in Ireland tend to be a result of injury that are related to alcohol use, road accidents, assault, misadventure etc.

    So while the southern European relationship with alcohol is different than ours it's not necessarily a better relationship health wise.

    Edit : Here is the post actually
    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=104552791&postcount=902

    Germany worse off than Ireland for liver cirrhosis and cancer but less so for injury.
    Portugal the same for injury but more for cancer and cirrhosis.
    Spain less for injury, the same for the other two.
    No data for France or Italy.


  • #4959
    YFlyer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,712 ✭✭✭YFlyer


    Why is Sunday time crap?


  • #4960
    KrustyUCC
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭KrustyUCC


    the beer revolu wrote: »
    Did anyone hear the Muppet of a doctor on NewsTalk with Mark Cagney on The Hard Shoulder Yesterday?

    He was allowed to completely make stuff up without being challenged and no alternative view was offered.
    He claimed that back in the 80s the mainstream beers were "around 3.5%", whereas now they are 5% and over. While it's difficult to find historic ABV in beer, I have no doubt that the above is completely false.
    Mainstream beers in the 80s were afaik, 4.3(perhaps stout was 3.8%) and mainstream beer is still 4.3%. He then went on to claim that wine in the 80's was 7 or 8 %!
    Completely made up stuff, and completely unchallenged.

    I'm tempted to complain to the BAI but I most likely can't be arsed.

    That was Dr Chris Luke


  • #4961
    elperello
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 18,233 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    KrustyUCC wrote: »
    That was Dr Chris Luke

    Just by coincidence I brought some stuff down from the attic that was put in old cardboard boxes and stored in 2009.

    Some of the boxes had contained Stella Artois 33cl bottles.

    They were 5.2%, the Stella Artois I am drinking now is 4.8%.


  • Advertisement
  • #4962
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,131 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    elperello wrote: »
    Just by coincidence I brought some stuff down from the attic that was put in old cardboard boxes and stored in 2009.

    Some of the boxes had contained Stella Artois 33cl bottles.

    They were 5.2%, the Stella Artois I am drinking now is 4.8%.

    the reduced the ABV for the UK market (that we are included in) in 2008. the rest of the world still gets the proper 5.2% stuff.


  • #4963
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 96,302 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    https://phys.org/news/2021-04-price-food-decision-alcohol-uk.html
    They found a 1% increase in alcohol retail price meant a reduction of 0.25% in alcohol consumption. This was less of an impact than anticipated.

    More significantly, they found a 1% increase in the price of food translated into a 1% decrease in alcohol consumption.
    My take from this is that MUP would only affect people who don't have enough money for decent food. So there may be health consequences either way.

    It can't be stressed often enough this won't affect anyone who buys premium brands and not one extra cent will go to health. All it will do is take money from the poor and give it to the supermarkets and wholesalers/distributors.


  • #4964
    brightspark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,637 ✭✭✭brightspark


    Capt'n Midnight wrote: »
    https://phys.org/news/2021-04-price-food-decision-alcohol-uk.html
    My take from this is that MUP would only affect people who don't have enough money for decent food. So there may be health consequences either way.

    It can't be stressed often enough this won't affect anyone who buys premium brands and not one extra cent will go to health. All it will do is take money from the poor and give it to the supermarkets and wholesalers/distributors.

    It will increase the premium brand prices, most of the cheaper brands are also made by the big name companies, purely there for a price differential.

    Companies tend to sell at three levels, cheap for those who only worry about price, mid-range for those on a budget but want some level of quality, and premium who want something special. (Tesco have been doing this with almost everything for years).

    So when the cheap brands go up in price all the others will also to some degree.

    But you are correct it all goes to the supply chain. A tax increase would have been better.


  • #4965
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 39,760 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »
    and ignore the fact that pubs have remained closed while off licenses have not had a single new restriction placed on them over the period of the pandemic.

    Not true.

    Masks required, numbers limited, perspex screens at tills, provide hand sanitizer, same as other essential retail outlets.

    Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »
    Just someone who finds all this drama with people getting up in arms about the price of off license booze amusing.

    You find it amusing that a bunch of shysters and liars have all of our political parties lapping up their BS and the media afraid to say boo to them?

    Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »
    Edit : Here is the post actually
    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=104552791&postcount=902

    Germany worse off than Ireland for liver cirrhosis and cancer but less so for injury.
    Portugal the same for injury but more for cancer and cirrhosis.
    Spain less for injury, the same for the other two.
    No data for France or Italy.

    Actual figures would be useful, a crayoned-in map isn't really.
    While Portugal is "one colour worse" than us on two measures, what is the actual difference? It may be substantial, it may be very small. Also different countries record illness in different ways, and some more accurately than others, so data is not always directly comparable.

    More importantly, how does their alcohol consumption compare to ours?

    France and Italy missing from the data is a massive omission.

    I'm partial to your abracadabra
    I'm raptured by the joy of it all



  • #4966
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 39,760 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    the beer revolu wrote: »
    Did anyone hear the Muppet of a doctor on NewsTalk with Mark Cagney on The Hard Shoulder Yesterday?
    Completely made up stuff, and completely unchallenged.

    I'm tempted to complain to the BAI but I most likely can't be arsed.

    PLEASE complain. Lying over the airwaves on a matter of public policy cannot ever be let go unchallenged.

    https://www.bai.ie/en/viewers-listeners/complaints/

    I'm partial to your abracadabra
    I'm raptured by the joy of it all



  • #4967
    SleetAndSnow
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,756 ✭✭✭SleetAndSnow


    https://twitter.com/oconnellhugh/status/1386065290576924673?s=19

    Minimum Alcohol Pricing really is nigh now


  • #4968
    kenmc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,299 ✭✭✭kenmc


    So when mup has no tangible affect, what will they do next? Muppets.


  • #4969
    beerguts
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 273 ✭✭beerguts


    The government are just going to give a boost to the black market in illegal distilleries with this minimum pricing.
    Imagine the problems we will have when there will be clusters of people getting violently sick/blind or even die due to poorly distilled alcohol. We already have this with intravenous drug users and the unscrupulous people that deliver sub standard products to them.
    Also we will see cross border shopping increase with people stocking up in Newry/Enniskillen for there booze. So that will be a loss to the exchequer.
    That's my take on it anyways because an alcoholic will still get their drink no matter what and from what I see the under 30s now are very light drinkers and rather use drugs when out enjoying themselves.


  • #4970
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,763 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    kenmc wrote:
    So when mup has no tangible affect, what will they do next? Muppets.

    More personal responsibility talk, and the like, I suspect, which will also fail


  • #4971
    Pintman Paddy Losty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,913 ✭✭✭Pintman Paddy Losty


    I disagree, the "drinking problems" are myths from the government.
    It's about time. The fact that people can stock up on crates of cheap beer needs to stop. Supermarkets selling 24 cans of Guinness for less than a euro a can. It's outrageous and no wonder that we had disgraceful scenes of crowds of young people in states of extreme drunkenness this weekend.


  • Advertisement
  • #4972
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,763 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »
    It's about time. The fact that people can stock up on crates of cheap beer needs to stop. Supermarkets selling 24 cans of Guinness for less than a euro a can. It's outrageous and no wonder that we had disgraceful scenes of crowds of young people in states of extreme drunkenness this weekend.

    pricing wont prevent or alter complex social issues


  • #4973
    listermint
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 34,291 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »
    It's about time. The fact that people can stock up on crates of cheap beer needs to stop. Supermarkets selling 24 cans of Guinness for less than a euro a can. It's outrageous and no wonder that we had disgraceful scenes of crowds of young people in states of extreme drunkenness this weekend.

    Oh the naivety is strong in this one.


    If only there wasn't so many varied of examples of how prohibition works so well..


  • #4974
    Macy0161
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,827 ✭✭✭Macy0161


    kenmc wrote: »
    So when mup has no tangible affect, what will they do next? Muppets.
    Say the mup is too low I imagine.


  • #4975
    machiavellianme
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 14,018 ✭✭✭✭machiavellianme


    Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »
    It's about time. The fact that people can stock up on crates of cheap beer needs to stop. Supermarkets selling 24 cans of Guinness for less than a euro a can. It's outrageous and no wonder that we had disgraceful scenes of crowds of young people in states of extreme drunkenness this weekend.

    Yeah because charging 7 euro a pint will stop people from doing the same thing :rolleyes:

    Save boards.ie by subscribing: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/



  • #4976
    jester77
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,264 ✭✭✭✭jester77


    Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »
    It's about time. The fact that people can stock up on crates of cheap beer needs to stop. Supermarkets selling 24 cans of Guinness for less than a euro a can. It's outrageous and no wonder that we had disgraceful scenes of crowds of young people in states of extreme drunkenness this weekend.

    Hard to tell if you are being sarcastic, but as someone who hasn't lived in Ireland for over 20 years, that sounds very expensive for a locally mass produced beer. Here in Germany I can get locally produced beer at a fraction of that, and people are not out of control :eek:


  • #4977
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,763 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    jester77 wrote: »
    Hard to tell if you are being sarcastic, but as someone who hasn't lived in Ireland for over 20 years, that sounds very expensive for a locally mass produced beer. Here in Germany I can get locally produced beer at a fraction of that, and people are not out of control :eek:

    those you see are not, those you dont......


  • #4978
    Ohmeha
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,277 ✭✭✭Ohmeha


    SleetAndSnow wrote: »
    https://twitter.com/oconnellhugh/status/1386065290576924673?s=19

    Minimum Alcohol Pricing really is nigh now
    Now they are peddling out preventing covid as their latest desperate excuse to introduce this just in time for when the pubs re-open to sell pints with the inevitable euro or two price increase for the pleasure

    The media are also contributing to this government scam by peddling the 'cheap alcohol' lie on their headlines


  • #4979
    maestroamado
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,425 ✭✭✭maestroamado


    Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »
    It's about time. The fact that people can stock up on crates of cheap beer needs to stop. Supermarkets selling 24 cans of Guinness for less than a euro a can. It's outrageous and no wonder that we had disgraceful scenes of crowds of young people in states of extreme drunkenness this weekend.

    For me our drink culture is because we have absolutely nothing for our young folk to do after dark when people want to be out.
    We need to create a different social model if we want to get away for the drink culture.
    I have this conversation all the time and people say people say they will not go to these places.
    My reply is they are not there to go to, i am talking about recreational indoor sports, games etc, it would have to be Government led, we also would have an insurance issue as soon as a place would open.
    There is alot more to this than the price of drink.


  • #4980
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Hotblack Desiato wrote: »
    ........

    Actual figures would be useful, a crayoned-in map isn't really.
    While Portugal is "one colour worse" than us on two measures, what is the actual difference? It may be substantial, it may be very small. Also different countries record illness in different ways, and some more accurately than others, so data is not always directly comparable.

    More importantly, how does their alcohol consumption compare to ours?

    France and Italy missing from the data is a massive omission.
    The whole report is in my linked post.
    You'll get more detail in that than just the maps.


  • Advertisement
  • #4981
    KrustyUCC
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭KrustyUCC


    Brilliant plan from the government

    Introduce MUP when the North is practically fully open

    That's bound to make trips over the border even more of a draw


Advertisement