Minimum Alcohol cost lunacy
Another namby Government plan. I wonder when they might get involved in how much chocolate/fish and chips/sex etc etc we have. Of course it will need another few staff, the ministry of Alcohol pricing no doubt.The point is that its a regressive tax that targets the less well off,its even against the EU laws. If you are rich and swilling the champagne its no issue. It can hurt the pub trade causing unemployment and the death of the local. Where the smoking ban was a side issue in a pub, the price of alcohol is a direct attack on the business. Now 40p isn't going to make much difference, but once its in place it can and will be hiked by politicians trumpeting success as the number of regular drinkers falls they can add another 10p or so. Eventually it will be high enough that no one buys alcohol at all unless they are bankers, politicians or civil servants.
It fails to realise that it will likely result in an increase in imports of low price alcohol and no doubt the spread of stills. One thing you can be certain of, is that bigger prices will encourage backstreet entrepreneurs, just as they do with drugs. We already have seen an explosion caused by an illegal still being operated in a backstreet garage and killing two men.
Again, I go back to the real problem from alcohol. The cost is born by the taxpayer because of the waste of Police time. The Landlords don't care about the state of their customers. They booze them up then chuck them onto the street. Its no longer their problem as the taxpayer picks up the tab at no cost to the publican. It would certainly be a different matter if they owned the street and paid for their security. The more drunks they released, the higher the cost to the publican. If the area was in a syndicate, then other customers of restaurants and other businesses would have a way of complaining. As it is, the streets are a no mans land and the Police state funded so who cares ?
The hospitals pick up the tab for dangerously drunk people and those involved in fights, violence and road accidents. No responsibility is placed on the drunks by a costed, private health service. Again the Taxpayer picks up the tab and hospitals are over run with irresponsible people who are often violent to staff.
At home, drunken violence often ends in Police intervention and hospitalisation at a cost to the taxpayer.
The extra on alcohol won't harm the binge drinker ( who are in fact reducing anyway as are the number of younger drinkers according to surveys ). The impact will be to the responsible user and business owner.
By the way, I don't drink. Don't think any pub sells alcohol at less than 40p a unit, the real losers here are people who drink very cheap cider or buy drink in very cheap multi packs/offers from supermarkets.
Changing the price of cheap alcohol is certainly a lot cheaper than educating the masses, not that I'd claim its the better solution. Just another tax that hits the responsible people in society.
I'd rather people were charged for wasting NHS time and resources through drinking related injuries or illness. Fine them for wasting police time. It's all about personal responsibility as far as I'm concerned, something which is sorely lacking in society. Don't punish all drinkers with a blanket tax, target those at fault. Trouble is taxing drinkers is easier to do. Back to the home brew! Perfectly decent ale can be made at 50p a pint in the garage. Funny my wife said that. I used to do a lot of home brew several years ago, got really good at it and the house turned into a pub as the brew became very popular amongst friends. 80 pints used to go in a few days. I should have charged. Had co2 cylinders and was looking for a cooler before it dawned on me it was time to stop buying friends  How about not having to treat drunks?
Extreme I know but it seems more and more practical as time goes on. There are many treatments that the NHS does charge for. From small items like a Yellow fever vaccination to plastic surgery, crowns and implants, to IVF.
Why not include some sort of charge for Alcohol related treatment.? It is quite reasonable and would not be making a sudden change to the free service which has exceptions already.
It does not have to be the full cost but at least a contribution.
By the way, I do drink  Totally agree, it's simply a case of the government doing something so they are seen to be doing something.
As someone who mops up the effects of alcohol on a daily basis I can assure you that minimum pricing will do absolutely nothing to affect consumption levels. It never does, its just another tax. I think its a decent idea, even if it is just to make pubs seem relatively cheaper.
Will it make people drink less, maybe, but at least it isn't direct taxation (yet!).
I don't generally drink the stuff that will now be illegal so maybe I'm being blasé as I'm not directly effected by it.