Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Subscriber invigorate
    Only 1 F in Uckfield
    28 Nov '12 23:56
    The UK government is proposing put a minimum price of 45p (80cents) per unit.

    Making the cheapest possible bottle of wine £4.38 $7.20

    This is not a tax, just a statutory level of pricing.

    Part of me thinks this will punish the poor.
    Part of me thinks it will improve the health of the nation, and reduce problems of alcoholism especially amongst younger, price sensitive drinkers.
    Part of me thinks the nanny state is interfering.
    Part of me thinks that my more expensive wine will also become more expensive to maintain the differential.
    Part of me thinks it will make British drinks producers less competitive.

    What do you think?
  2. Standard member spruce112358
    Democracy Advocate
    29 Nov '12 03:10
    Originally posted by invigorate
    The UK government is proposing put a minimum price of 45p (80cents) per unit.

    Making the cheapest possible bottle of wine £4.38 $7.20

    This is not a tax, just a statutory level of pricing.

    Part of me thinks this will punish the poor.
    Part of me thinks it will improve the health of the nation, and reduce problems of alcoholism especially amongst ...[text shortened]...
    Part of me thinks it will make British drinks producers less competitive.

    What do you think?
    Price controls! How retro!

    Maybe they should more usefully pass a law that water will not freeze until 30 deg. F -- that would save millions in road maintenance costs and reduce accidents.
  3. Subscriber kmax87
    You've got Kevin
    29 Nov '12 09:21 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by invigorate
    The UK government is proposing put a minimum price of 45p (80cents) per unit.

    Making the cheapest possible bottle of wine £4.38 $7.20

    This is not a tax, just a statutory level of pricing.

    Part of me thinks this will punish the poor.
    Part of me thinks it will improve the health of the nation, and reduce problems of alcoholism especially amongst ...[text shortened]...
    Part of me thinks it will make British drinks producers less competitive.

    What do you think?
    It could price illegal drugs out of the market, if those who take illegal drugs consider wine to be a staple drug they have to have before anything else.....

    or

    It could price illegal drugs further into the market as people weigh up the reduced differential in prices and are more willing to lash out for a good bit of gear
  4. 29 Nov '12 10:28 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by invigorate
    The UK government is proposing put a minimum price of 45p (80cents) per unit.

    Making the cheapest possible bottle of wine £4.38 $7.20

    This is not a tax, just a statutory level of pricing.

    Part of me thinks this will punish the poor.
    Part of me thinks it will improve the health of the nation, and reduce problems of alcoholism especially amongst ...[text shortened]...
    Part of me thinks it will make British drinks producers less competitive.

    What do you think?
    a heavier tax reduction for low alcohol beers would be a start. i would then give a further reduction for low alcohol beers sold by the barrel to pubs. a sliding scale of tax that would put the cost of high alcoholic 'shots' and 'cocktails' up to an astronomical level would see people head to their locals rather than city centers. people will be able to afford to drink often but the levels of alcohol they consume will drop dramatically. people will return to feeling giddy at the end of a night rather than puking and fighting. people returning to their locals might even help foster a local sense of community.
  5. 29 Nov '12 10:35
    Originally posted by invigorate
    Part of me thinks it will make British drinks producers less competitive.
    How does that work? Are you saying that people will be more likely to choose a foriegn brand because they all cost the same now?
    Surely the sellers will still want to push the local brand (if it is supplied for less) as they will be making more profit on it.

    My view regarding the whole idea is to do a scientific study on the results and see what the effects are. If it causes people to drink less, then I would probably judge it a good thing, though I would like to see what other side effects there are too.
  6. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    29 Nov '12 10:37
    Can't the price of alcohol be kept to a minimum by simply outsourcing its production to some sort of sweatshop operations overseas?
  7. 29 Nov '12 11:30
    Originally posted by invigorate
    The UK government is proposing put a minimum price of 45p (80cents) per unit.

    Making the cheapest possible bottle of wine £4.38 $7.20

    This is not a tax, just a statutory level of pricing.

    Part of me thinks this will punish the poor.
    Part of me thinks it will improve the health of the nation, and reduce problems of alcoholism especially amongst ...[text shortened]...
    Part of me thinks it will make British drinks producers less competitive.

    What do you think?
    The "poor" need food water and shelter.
    These are basic necessities for anyone who is poor.

    The poor do not need alcohol.

    Alcohol is a luxury. It is not a necessity.

    As with any luxury, if you price them out of reach of a certain part of the community,
    then they cannot buy them.

    Is this a good thing?

    I don't know, It may help to improve the health and welfare of some, while at the
    same time denying taxes to the Government.

    Then you have another group of people who will buy alcohol anyway,
    no matter what price it is and if they do that, then someone else in the family
    may go without a necessity.
  8. Subscriber Proper Knob
    Cornovii
    29 Nov '12 11:32
    Originally posted by invigorate
    The UK government is proposing put a minimum price of 45p (80cents) per unit.

    Making the cheapest possible bottle of wine £4.38 $7.20

    This is not a tax, just a statutory level of pricing.

    Part of me thinks this will punish the poor.
    Part of me thinks it will improve the health of the nation, and reduce problems of alcoholism especially amongst ...[text shortened]...
    Part of me thinks it will make British drinks producers less competitive.

    What do you think?
    I see a couple of points here in trying to get alcohol consumption down -

    1. Supermarkets don't pay VAT on alcohol hence the huge price differential between them and pubs/bars. Get that sorted and it would be a start.

    2. One of the major changes in alcohol over the last 20 years has been the invention of 'alcopops'. I remember when i was a growing up trying to force myself to get through cans of Hofmeister of an evening, it was horrendous. Alcohol back then, which is 17 years ago, tasted horrible and nasty, Now it can be knocked back like it's nothing more than sugary pop.

    I have to laugh at the rhetoric coming out of the government about what they call 'pre-loading'. This idea of drinking cheap alcohol before going out on the town. My friends and i did that when we were kids back when alcohol was no where near as expensive in bars/clubs as it is today. My mum tells me she also did it as well. The idea that this is something new is simply ridiculous.
  9. 29 Nov '12 12:07
    Originally posted by Proper Knob
    I see a couple of points here in trying to get alcohol consumption down -

    1. Supermarkets don't pay VAT on alcohol hence the huge price differential between them and pubs/bars. Get that sorted and it would be a start.

    2. One of the major changes in alcohol over the last 20 years has been the invention of 'alcopops'. I remember when i was a growing ...[text shortened]... ells me she also did it as well. The idea that this is something new is simply ridiculous.
    one thing i noticed was back i were'a'lad (90's) nightclubs didnt open until late. they had a big (usually packed) dance floors and little space for sitting and drinking. people went to dance all night.

    towards the end of my late night out days (early 00's) nightclubs had become bar/nightclub hybrids, open early, with a tiny dance floor and lots of space for sitting and drinking. people went to drink all night. there were still a few old fashioned large nightclubs out of town, but there popularity was waning.

    in the 90's beer was cheap, spirits expensive. both sexes mainly drank beer/cider. in the 00's beer became expensive wine and spirits became cheap.
    so you end up with men and woman drinking spirits solidly from 8pm to 3am. apposed to the 90's drinking beer/cider from 8pm to 12pm then 3 hours of dancing and sobering up (or for some people switching to other drugs).
  10. Standard member spruce112358
    Democracy Advocate
    29 Nov '12 14:47
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    How does that work? Are you saying that people will be more likely to choose a foriegn brand because they all cost the same now?
    Surely the sellers will still want to push the local brand (if it is supplied for less) as they will be making more profit on it.

    My view regarding the whole idea is to do a scientific study on the results and see what the e ...[text shortened]... robably judge it a good thing, though I would like to see what other side effects there are too.
    No, if we allow our employees in Parliament to start wasting their time dreaming up ways to control prices -- trust me, that is the politician's internet porn. They will never stop jacking off over it and they will never do anything useful again.

    The price of things is a property determined by the market, i.e. all of us -- in a highly democratic fashion -- people voting with their shillings. There is NOTHING a politician can do to improve the model.

    "Things cost too little," is like saying "Things don't weigh enough; let's make everything heavier. Then we all get stronger with lifting exercises." Complete nonsense.
  11. Subscriber invigorate
    Only 1 F in Uckfield
    29 Nov '12 15:29 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    [b]How does that work?
    I was thinking If the price increase lowered demand, then drinks producers could not generate economies of scale, therefore costs per unit would rise. Assuming they were more heavily dependent on the UK than foreign firms.
  12. Standard member spruce112358
    Democracy Advocate
    29 Nov '12 16:34
    Originally posted by invigorate
    I was thinking If the price increase lowered demand, then drinks producers could not generate economies of scale, therefore costs per unit would rise. Assuming they were more heavily dependent on the UK than foreign firms.
    Let's force a lower price for blowjobs. Consumers will be happier.
  13. 29 Nov '12 16:40
    A minimum price is a bad idea. Taxation to cover the added societal costs of alcohol abuse is fine by me, though educating the public should be done in a better way than they do it here in Finland.
  14. 29 Nov '12 16:41
    Originally posted by invigorate
    I was thinking If the price increase lowered demand, then drinks producers could not generate economies of scale, therefore costs per unit would rise. Assuming they were more heavily dependent on the UK than foreign firms.
    That explanation doesn't really add up to me. Not only will they start making higher profits (per drink), but if demand drops then produce less or export. I really don't see how this affects competitiveness internationally though.
  15. 29 Nov '12 16:42
    Originally posted by spruce112358
    The price of things is a property determined by the market,
    I'm afraid I am not a capitalist so I say what is 'proper' to you is not 'proper' to me.