Minimum alcohol pricing is nigh

KungPao · 04-05-2021 1:59pm

FileNotFound wrote: »

Was a contentious one but it was well discussed and the justifications for it were presented for everyone to see.

I supported the move as a smoker at the time. The impact on non smokers in pubs was undeniable so we chose to hit the few to save the many.

This time we hit the many to compensate the few.

I smoked then too. Sure it was the end of an era and an adjustment, but we all knew it made sense and long before then, smoking was banned from planes, buses, shopping centres, inside work places (bar the staff room) so it was a logical progression. Martin gets way too much credit for it.

But I don’t believe now as drinker, I’ll happily pay more for a can of beer and think ‘jeez, what were we thinking ‘only’ paying €1.30 for a can of Karpackie?’

And Paddy the gambler who also likes a drink will still be getting plastered anyway, he won’t care. Just his kids can forget about getting FIFA 22 for their birthdays. Paddy needs his medicine.

VinLieger · 04-05-2021 1:59pm

ecoli3136 wrote: »

All those low-volume consumers of alcohol just decided they weren't going to put up with this anti-competitive intervention in the free-market and went mad on the smack did they?

Ohh look a straw man, this thread hasn't had one of them in a while.

tjhook · 04-05-2021 2:01pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Thats not a case of the gift set being cheaper, more a case of the regular bottle being more expensive. 31 euros for Tullamore Dew is shocking. Its 25 in SuperValu. About 22 in Tesco.

Yes, I agree.

But it does appear that a "gift set" has no legal requirement to be more (or as) expensive than the alcoholic product alone. Which opens the possibility that an imaginative brand could package a €18 bottle of gin with something like glasses or mixer at the MUP of €22. Thus maintaining a gap between basic and premium brands, and minimising the loss to the consumer.

Whether or not they have any motivation to do so is another question... I won't hold my breath but you never know.

VinLieger · 04-05-2021 2:02pm

KungPao wrote: »

And Paddy the gambler who also likes a drink will still be getting plastered anyway, he won’t care. Just his kids can forget about getting FIFA 22 for their birthdays. Paddy needs his medicine.

More like the kids can get used to having a chipper 7 nights a week instead of 2-3... ohh whats that suddenly the diabetes and obesity epidemic in our children has gotten worse? Well at least they cant walk down the alcohol aisle in a supermarket cus that would lead to real problems......

ShamNNspace · 04-05-2021 2:04pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Segment on the news just now saying Cannabis is much more dangerous than previously thought, especially for younger brains.

Everyone ignoring the fact MUP makes weed more attractive.

It would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic.

RTE where the(ir) truth matters

04-05-2021 2:05pm

I disagree, the "drinking problems" are myths from the government.

VinLieger wrote: »

Ohh look a straw man, this thread hasn't had one of them in a while.

Pfff.

You're the one attempting to link MUP with "skyrocketing" drug use (in Scotland).

Hey. Look. I don't really care about this change so I'm going to leave the thread to people who do. Good luck with it.

jimmycrackcorm · 04-05-2021 2:07pm

I disagree, the "drinking problems" are myths from the government.

Deleted User wrote: »

Which will make the local drug dealer look like better value as a result. It's really as though the government haven't considered that aspect of it at all. Madness. :rolleyes:

ecoli3136 wrote: »

No you're right the only choices are cheaper drink or everyone will take illegal drugs instead.

VinLieger wrote: »

What happened in Scotland after MUP was introduced? Drug use skyrocketed across the board.

Where are the facts to back this up? There just seems to be a general assumption that this is the case whereas it appears not to be, and an increase in drug use is minimal.

Mr. teddywinkles · 04-05-2021 2:19pm

Drug use will be cheaper. Good on yis. Pack of thickos running the gaff.

04-05-2021 2:32pm

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Where are the facts to back this up?

It's common sense. If Joe Soap has access to alcohol and drugs, and suddenly the price of one of those products increases, the alternative looks a lot more appealing.

Personally, I don't really drink (about a can a month if you averaged it out across a year) and I've never touched drugs in any form. However, I can still see the obvious transition from one to the other that many people will make. Especially those in their teens who can now get off their tits for a fraction of the price than alcohol.

Drug use is widely accepted in Irish society, despite the damage it does. People will turn to it fairly fast, in my opinion.

Capt'n Midnight · 04-05-2021 2:39pm

KungPao wrote: »

“It all seems very sensible” to them. Unbelievable.

No mention of the poor being affected, because **** them. Only heavy drinkers and young people who seek ‘cheap’ drink.

Some neck.

TBH if you are reading the Irish Times you probably won't be affected by MUP in the same that people who are aren't at that end of the socio-economic scale.

ReturnOfThe · 04-05-2021 2:47pm

I disagree, the "drinking problems" are myths from the government.

The levels of "mouth foaming" from the alcohol users in this thread lends more credence to the argument for MUP than any scientific study could.
Follow the science and what the health professionals are saying and what most of you deep down already know.
There is a reason we have a sugar tax, a carbon tax etc..gentle fiscal nudges away from practices which cost us more in the long run.
Hopefully only the first in a series of measures to be deployed in the years ahead to address our nation's dependancy on alcohol.

dubrov · 04-05-2021 2:54pm

Well we have a long history already of increasing the price of alcohol in Ireland.

Has it been effective at improving our relationship with alcohol?

Maybe it's time to look at other angles (see advertising/sponsorship)

FileNotFound · 04-05-2021 2:56pm

ReturnOfThe wrote: »

The levels of "mouth foaming" from the alcohol users in this thread lends more credence to the argument for MUP than any scientific study could.
Follow the science and what the health professionals are saying and what most of you deep down already know.
There is a reason we have a sugar tax, a carbon tax etc..gentle fiscal nudges away from practices which cost us more in the long run.
Hopefully only the first in a series of measures to be deployed in the years ahead to address our nation's dependancy on alcohol.

Yeah we have sugar tax because some fatties can't control their eating - not at all comparable to carbon tax (a now ringfenced fund being used to offset emmission based damage to the environment - Also note these are taxes)

Your jump that comments provides more evidence than a scientific study adds no credence to the credibility of your argument. Of course not having open public discourse on the issue has not helped us understand it all.

If you are anti drinking I guess thats a blinkered mindset you have - some of us are adults and can enjoy a drink safely while living healthy lives.

The major issues here is that the fiscal policy employed gives nothing to revenue - provides no positive enforcement or long term improvement - merely makes a few drinks more expensive for everyone.

And has been driven by a few people who's minds are warped by experiences specific to individuals in their lives. If i grew up with an alco in the family I may have a hardline view - but then when has a hardline view worked well?

KrustyUCC · 04-05-2021 2:57pm

ReturnOfThe wrote: »

The levels of "mouth foaming" from the alcohol users in this thread lends more credence to the argument for MUP than any scientific study could.
Follow the science and what the health professionals are saying and what most of you deep down already know.
There is a reason we have a sugar tax, a carbon tax etc..gentle fiscal nudges away from practices which cost us more in the long run.
Hopefully only the first in a series of measures to be deployed in the years ahead to address our nation's dependancy on alcohol.

Follow the science lol

The exact same bottle of whiskey will now be over €10 dearer over the border than here

Is the same bottle of whiskey is 45% more harmful in Dundalk than Newry?

You can get a bottle of scotch for €6.59 in Germany

Same bottle would be 235% dearer here under MUP

We're already the second dearest in Europe

This will just be more price gouging

FileNotFound · 04-05-2021 2:58pm

dubrov wrote: »

Well we already have a long history already of increasing the price of alcohol in Ireland.

Has it been effective at improving our relationship with alcohol?

Maybe it's time to look at other angles (see advertising/sponsorship)

Yup the old under 3 quid Guinness - long gone and no difference to how many i'd drink.

Also budget tax increase at least allows any increase to be used to fund something positive - this is merely a hack to suit a few mental cases.

odyssey06 · 04-05-2021 3:08pm

We have the 2nd highest alcohol prices in the EU in this country.

During 2020, pubs, restaurants, events etc were shut down for considerable periods.
Alcohol consumption dropped 6%.

People were purchasing cheaper alcohol in supermarkets & off licences relative to what would be pub and restaurants and event prices.

The faulty logic of MUP suggests this should have increased.
It did not, which suggests alcohol is price inelastic and MUP will not impact consumption.

Amirani · 04-05-2021 3:23pm

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Where are the facts to back this up? There just seems to be a general assumption that this is the case whereas it appears not to be, and an increase in drug use is minimal.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-48853004

Drug deaths in Scotland have been rising for a number of years, but have accelerated in more recent years. The page you linked says exactly that to, did you not read it yourself?

PopePalpatine · 04-05-2021 3:31pm

ReturnOfThe wrote: »

The levels of "mouth foaming" from the alcohol users in this thread lends more credence to the argument for MUP than any scientific study could.
Follow the science and what the health professionals are saying and what most of you deep down already know.
There is a reason we have a sugar tax, a carbon tax etc..gentle fiscal nudges away from practices which cost us more in the long run.
Hopefully only the first in a series of measures to be deployed in the years ahead to address our nation's dependancy on alcohol.

From the looks of things we also need an MUP for boot polish.

04-05-2021 3:51pm

ecoli3136 wrote: »

TBH that's for cooking with.

Wine Snob Alert!

Just because its cheap does not mean it's sh1te.

tjhook · 04-05-2021 3:56pm

I think at this stage MUP is a done deal. The next question is how is its effectiveness going to be measured?

If alcohol consumption goes down in the coming year, does it prove MUP works?

If alcohol consumption goes up does it mean MUP works but more is needed?

A kind of "heads I win, tails you lose"?

KrustyUCC · 04-05-2021 4:02pm

Exactly if consumption goes up increase MUP it's not working

If consumption goes down increase MUP it's working

Either way MUP will increase particularly if the North eventually brings it in

FileNotFound · 04-05-2021 4:09pm

KrustyUCC wrote: »

Exactly if consumption goes up increase MUP it's not working

If consumption goes down increase MUP it's working

Either way MUP will increase particularly if the North eventually brings it in

Did the change from 11.30pm to 10.00pm finish ever have an actual impact?

I do not think i have ever seen a study reviewing its impact - positive or negative.

This will be much the same - brought in - new norm - then the anti drink fruits can start inventing the next scheme.

If only they would relax with a drink or 2 they might find some pleasure in life.

Fandymo · 04-05-2021 4:14pm

tjhook wrote: »

I think at this stage MUP is a done deal. The next question is how is its effectiveness going to be measured?

If alcohol consumption goes down in the coming year, does it prove MUP works?

If alcohol consumption goes up does it mean MUP works but more is needed?

A kind of "heads I win, tails you lose"?

Its being going down steadily since the start of the new millenium. We're mid table in Europe for alcohol consumption, and falling.

ShamNNspace · 04-05-2021 4:14pm

^^^ the findings, statistics call them what you will, will be twisted and bent to fit whatever agenda suits, the average Joe and Mary will be ones who foot the bill in the end

KrustyUCC · 04-05-2021 4:16pm

FileNotFound wrote: »

Did the change from 11.30pm to 10.00pm finish ever have an actual impact?

I do not think i have ever seen a study reviewing its impact - positive or negative.

This will be much the same - brought in - new norm - then the anti drink fruits can start inventing the next scheme.

If only they would relax with a drink or 2 they might find some pleasure in life.

The only change it made was that people had to buy alcohol earlier in the day

I still think it's mad that you can't get a bottle of wine etc before lunch on a Sunday

Contrast that to Krakow, Barcelona, Madrid, Paris where you can go on a night out and get a few beers on the way home as well

VinLieger · 04-05-2021 4:18pm

tjhook wrote: »

I think at this stage MUP is a done deal. The next question is how is its effectiveness going to be measured?

If alcohol consumption goes down in the coming year, does it prove MUP works?

If alcohol consumption goes up does it mean MUP works but more is needed?

A kind of "heads I win, tails you lose"?

The thing those for MUP will never admit to is alcohol consumption has dropped to 2/3 of what it was in 2005 in a year over year decline so if that trend simply continues they will just falsely claim MUP was responsible.

Also the Irony is that alcohol consumption has decreased for the entire time they have claimed alcohol was getting cheaper.... try to get them to square that circle

PTH2009 · 04-05-2021 4:23pm

It's all a load of bollocks. Basically making targets of Alcoholics and students 'lads because ye can't behave yourselves on cheap drink were putting the price up, that will show you'

Government will make a killing with the tax from this

VinLieger · 04-05-2021 4:25pm

PTH2009 wrote: »

Government will make a killing with the tax from this

How is this misinformation still going around? There will be a neglible increase in taxes from this as its a minimum price cap not a tax hike, the vast vast majority of the new hiked prices will go to the shops and the alcohol producers.

FileNotFound · 04-05-2021 4:28pm

VinLieger wrote: »

How is this misinformation still going around? There will be a neglible increase in taxes from this as its a minimum price cap not a tax hike, the vast vast majority of the new hiked prices will go to the shops and therefore the alcohol producers.

I'd say its more assumption than misinformation - assumed that any increase will mean monies generated are used to fight the issues.

But unlike sugar and carbon taxes this one doesn't equate as you rightly point out.

Personally that makes less sense to me - all we are doing is damaging market competition and impacting the everyday person who is not an alco.

odyssey06 · 04-05-2021 4:28pm

PTH2009 wrote: »

It's all a load of bollocks. Basically making targets of Alcoholics and students 'lads because ye can't behave yourselves on cheap drink were putting the price up, that will show you'
Government will make a killing with the tax from this

The only Government that'll be making a killing from it will be Her Majesty's Government, unless Stormont enacts the same folly.

And they came for the alcoholics and the students first... my concern is that eventually they will ratchet up MUP so the prices are the same as pubs across the board.

Macy0161 · 04-05-2021 4:29pm

Yes, they could at least argue justification if it was going to help those with issues.

VinLieger · 04-05-2021 4:42pm

Macy0161 wrote: »

Yes, they could at least argue justification if it was going to help those with issues.

If the entirety of the new price increase was a ring fenced tax hike going towards treatment etc I literally wouldn't have a problem and tbh would welcome it.

FileNotFound · 04-05-2021 4:51pm

VinLieger wrote: »

If the entirety of the new price increase was a ring fenced tax hike going towards treatment etc I literally wouldn't have a problem and tbh would welcome it.

Ditto to that - Never love tax increases but when they are put aside to get a job done i can get behind them.

This is pure nonsense though

buried · 04-05-2021 5:04pm

VinLieger wrote: »

If the entirety of the new price increase was a ring fenced tax hike going towards treatment etc I literally wouldn't have a problem and tbh would welcome it.

This is exactly it. A easy cash grab from some of the most vulnerable in society. All in order to keep the greasy gold plated pensions for another section of our society, a section who if they had to survive in a actual functional and productive real economy, would be dead in a ditch long ago.

ThunbergsAreGo · 04-05-2021 5:06pm

FileNotFound wrote: »

Did the change from 11.30pm to 10.00pm finish ever have an actual impact?

I do not think i have ever seen a study reviewing its impact - positive or negative.

This will be much the same - brought in - new norm - then the anti drink fruits can start inventing the next scheme.

If only they would relax with a drink or 2 they might find some pleasure in life.

I got a nagin for the train instead of after, only real change...

dirkmeister · 04-05-2021 5:14pm

Rte.ie said there was “only” a 6.6% in consumption in their article this morning.

Since when is it their job to decide what’s a good or bad rate of consumption?!?

odyssey06 · 04-05-2021 5:26pm

The Sunday Independent had an opinion piece challenging the assumptions behind MUP (paywalled alas!)

https://www.independent.ie/opinion/comment/minimum-unit-pricing-of-alcohol-may-well-prove-acostly-solution-40378369.html

Tony EH · 04-05-2021 5:48pm

FileNotFound wrote: »

Who is really driving all this - I mean there must be a group of lunatics somewhere behind the scenes, those sad sorry types that have few to no friends and hate anything anyone does that may constitute having fun.

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

Alcohol Action Ireland

The "Independent" (almost entirely government funded) charity

I don't believe that it's that simple.

ThunbergsAreGo · 04-05-2021 6:21pm

Tony EH wrote: »

I don't believe that it's that simple.

So what is it?

04-05-2021 6:39pm

there's a definite cultural problem in Ireland with alcohol that could definitely do with changing.

an over-reliance culturally on it due to a general lack of imagination and pure laziness in my opinion and cultural acceptance of excessive drinking and indeed encouragement of it.

this is even evident in the cultural norms present where being excessively drunk is "great craic" and hangovers are even celebrated.

the Irish vintners association would have you believe that the only fun to be had in Ireland was in a pub when in fact most of them are very uncomfortable and crappy places which you could only put up with if you're at least half-pissed.

one of the few good things to come out of the pandemic might be an adjustment of the Irish relationship with the pub

but going at the problem by increasing the off-trade price when it's already only behind Finland in the EU is not a good solution

it's a classic Irish type of solution though.

p.s. the two poll options are complete cack

Mecrab · 04-05-2021 6:39pm

Will I still be able to get 4 cans of pratsky for a 5er?

KrustyUCC · 04-05-2021 6:41pm

1st January 2022 apparently for MUP

KrustyUCC · 04-05-2021 6:43pm

Mecrab wrote: »

Will I still be able to get 4 cans of pratsky for a 5er?

No you won't

€1.66 a can so €6.63 for a 4 pack

Garibaldi? · 04-05-2021 6:45pm

KrustyUCC wrote: »

1st January 2022 apparently for MUP

Time to start brewing your own folks! Should be nicely matured by then!:D

thomas 123 · 04-05-2021 6:47pm

Of all the problems we have in this country ...

Gambling ads rammed down our throats on RTE, now I can’t even pre drink thinking I got a bit of value on my slab once a year.

FileNotFound · 04-05-2021 6:49pm

KrustyUCC wrote: »

No you won't

€1.66 a can so €6.63 for a 4 pack

And that will be round up to a clean 7.00 just for good measure. So a 40% increase in your cost.

Tony EH · 04-05-2021 7:02pm

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

So what is it?

I don't know.

But I certainly don't think it's down to a relatively tiny special interest group pulling the strings of all the major parties.

This was put forth by FG as a measure to appease publican pressure to get people to stop drinking at home and into pubs more. Over the years it then became a "health" issue, but we all know that's baloney and just a smoke screen. And I also think that there will be an increase in duty on alcohol in the near future too, as part of the MUP scam. Maybe not in the next budget, but in one soon after.

But like everything else that happens in Ireland, I suspect that this measure will probably come down to a desired financial outcome.

jimmycrackcorm · 04-05-2021 7:04pm

I disagree, the "drinking problems" are myths from the government.

Deleted User wrote: »

It's common sense. If Joe Soap has access to alcohol and drugs, and suddenly the price of one of those products increases, the alternative looks a lot more appealing.

Personally, I don't really drink (about a can a month if you averaged it out across a year) and I've never touched drugs in any form. However, I can still see the obvious transition from one to the other that many people will make. Especially those in their teens who can now get off their tits for a fraction of the price than alcohol.

Drug use is widely accepted in Irish society, despite the damage it does. People will turn to it fairly fast, in my opinion.

That's not what the research into the post-Scottish introduction I linked says. so it isn't common sense. The vast majority of people who drink have no interest in drugs. People who do use drugs as a substitute are already using anyway - they might do some more but that's not the same as suggesting widespread replacement.

Someone who drinks a bottle of wine every night won't suddenly turn to drugs as an alternative.

ThunbergsAreGo · 04-05-2021 7:10pm

Tony EH wrote: »

I don't know.

But I certainly don't think it's down to a relatively tiny special interest group pulling the strings of all the major parties.

This was put forth by FG as a measure to appease publican pressure to get people to stop drinking at home and into pubs more. Over the years it then became a "health" issue, but we all know that's baloney and just a smoke screen. And I also think that there will be an increase in duty on alcohol in the near future too, as part of the MUP scam. Maybe not in the next budget, but in one soon after.

But like everything else that happens in Ireland, I suspect that this measure will probably come down to a desired financial outcome.

That is very true, though they do have an influence.

Can see Feank Feighnan has come out very on the side of this on Twitter. It won't go well for him.

Economics101 · 04-05-2021 7:10pm

Tony EH wrote: »

This was put forth by FG as a measure to appease publican pressure to get people to stop drinking at home and into pubs more. /QUOTE]

'Twas ever thus, the power of the publicans over politicians in Ireland

Minimum alcohol pricing is nigh

Comments