redsquirrel
This Machine Kills Progressives
So if the racist alcohol policies of the Australian government "worked" what then? Oh well it's crap but it's the only realistic option? No booze for Aboriginal communities, they can't be trusted with it.
Scotland to establish minimum unit price for alcohol
- Thread starter Sunset Tree
- Start date
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Isn't said powerful business lobby going to be rubbing its hands at this? It is very likely to result in an increased net spend on alcohol and increased profits for alcohol makers and sellers. Cartels and price-fixing are illegal for a reason. Among other things, this measure hands them more money, taken from predominantly poorer people. There's no getting away from the fact that this measure targets the poor, who will be the only people to be hit by it significantly.
lazythursday
Well-Known Member
So the reason the alcohol lobby has spent the last five years fighting this tooth and nail, through the courts etc, is their concern for the poor? No, concern for their profits.
planetgeli
There's no future in England's dreaming
First, everything you say about alcohol addiction applies to ‘street drug’ addiction, and I’d argue against any similar sort of intervention being applied or allowed in the way provision is suggested by these breathalysers. The duty to collectively manage addiction should be through state funded drug services and the NHS. Though of course, such addiction management would be heavily outweighed by sensible changes to drug legislation and Nixon’s ridiculous war on drugs if only those in power had the balls to act as such.
The point RD2003 was making is that no, we do not have the right to interfere with what people choose, wisely or not, to put in their bodies. We only have the right, as a state (because that is how things are enacted), to publically reduce harm by whatever information we can put out there. The war on drugs has never been about harm minimisation, it’s always been about punishing the user. And bugger anyone who gets hurt in the crossfire too. So some of us find it hard to swallow that we are expected to believe this new provision might have anything to really do with helping wider society, the families et al who get hurt too by alcohol and all it’s attendant problems. Rather, it seems like more punitive measures against users. Instead of taking on the corporations themselves.
The MUP is a tax on the poor.
No left wing person here is arguing for people to be allowed to behave how they like no matter the impact on others. The argument is that the measures being taken are being taken against the end user, not the corporation supplier. And the end user who is most affected will be working class. Whether that be by the MUP, the breathalyser or whatever.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Fag companies fought the advertising ban. Net result of the ban on advertising for cigarettes was an increase in tobacco company profits.
Not all brewers oppose minimum pricing. Tennents, for instance, support it.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
But that would affect responsible middle class drinkers. It's the poor and feckless that are the problem.
It would be massively politically unpopular among people who vote to increase taxes. Far easier to target those without a voice.
lazythursday
Well-Known Member
FFS. Most poor people do not drink Frosty Jack. Most product prices will be unaffected by the MUP. An increase in general alcohol taxation would affect more poor people than the MUP will.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
I'm not advocating a raise in tax. Lots of poor people drink Strongbow, and Tennents, and cheaper brands of whiskey or gin, and various brands of Polish lager, and supermarket own-brand saver stuff. It's not just Frosty Jack that's affected, not by a very long way. As a worked example, Sainsbury's Basics Bitter will go up in price by 64%.
bimble
floofy
General alcohol tax is calculated so that its higher duty paid the stronger the drink (ABV). I don't know this.
Tax on shopping and services: Alcohol and tobacco duties - GOV.UK
Tax on shopping and services: Alcohol and tobacco duties - GOV.UK
planetgeli
There's no future in England's dreaming
Most people who drink Frosty Jack (and the rest affected by this) are poor.
Most people challenged by a breathalyser in a Cardiff Spar will be poor.
These things are attacks on the poor.
Funnily enough, most people who live in social housing, most people in shit jobs, most people who have had a shit education were or are poor, people who earn shit wages or no wages are poor, and people with few prospects are poor. Interventions in these areas would be true sustenance for the poor. The opposite of an attack.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
I can see there being a metric of harm reduction produced showing the 'success' of the policy, and in a couple of years it being rolled out across the UK as a public health measure with cross-party support. The fact that it produced that particular (narrow) measure of harm reduction by making poor people even poorer while barely touching most other people will barely be discussed, precisely because it barely touches other people. It is gaining momentum as a 'common sense' measure, and it will receive little opposition due in large part to the prejudices of those who won't be affected by it about those who will. Victory to the puritans!
weepiper
I fix the machines that fight climate change
Excise duty is reserved to Westminster. The Scottish Parliament doesn't have the power to do that.
DexterTCN
Troy and Abed in the morning
Can't comment on Cardiff but you're wrong about Scotland. We give free higher education, cancel the bedroom tax, and offer free nursery places, bus travel for the old and many other things which benefit the poor much more than the well off. It isn't an attack on anyone.
Many Scots for a long time have wanted to address our relationship with alcohol and this isn't the first measure taken. They appear to be having positive results, seems like a good idea.
If it works, cool. You'll 'adopt' it.
It's easier for smaller administrations to try things out.
planetgeli
There's no future in England's dreaming
Yeah. Remind me how the Poll Tax went?
weepiper
I fix the machines that fight climate change
You're not blaming that one on us? It was imposed on us by Thatcher before the Scottish Parliament existed.
Bahnhof Strasse
Met up with Hannah Courtoy a week next Tuesday
If the general tax on alcohol was increased in the way it has been on fags it would hit all boozers not just the poorest. I just bought three bottles of red to go with my curry and waste Sunday night, they cost £8 each, if that was £48 rather than £24 I would have bought less wine tonight. Australia is taking that approach with fags, already 20 tabs is nearly £20 and the government wants that to be £40 (equivalent in Ozzie$ obviously). That probably will work, some people will bankrupt themselves and some will source black market fake and/or smuggled fags, most people will stop, cos they have to.
If that approach was taken with booze it would probably work too, whilst closing every pub, bar, restaurant, cafe, independent convenience store etc. etc...booze is so entrenched in to our lives that the very nature of our society would need to change if a serious effort was to be made to reduce consumption.
But this isn’t about that, it’s the middle classes hypocritically moralising to the poor to rid the streets of Rab C Nesbits who lower the tone and make one feel vaguely threatened whilst on one’s way to a drinks party.
If that approach was taken with booze it would probably work too, whilst closing every pub, bar, restaurant, cafe, independent convenience store etc. etc...booze is so entrenched in to our lives that the very nature of our society would need to change if a serious effort was to be made to reduce consumption.
But this isn’t about that, it’s the middle classes hypocritically moralising to the poor to rid the streets of Rab C Nesbits who lower the tone and make one feel vaguely threatened whilst on one’s way to a drinks party.
Last edited:
planetgeli
There's no future in England's dreaming
Good grief. No. I’m not. How much can you miss the point by?
Dexter claimed “it’s easier for small administrations to try things out”.
Which in itself misses the point that it isn’t about small administrations trying things out, but about things being tried out on the poor. Like the Poll Tax was. Which is why I mentioned it.
weepiper
I fix the machines that fight climate change
The Poll Tax was tried out on all of us in Scotland, not just the poor.
bimble
floofy
what Bahnhof Strasse said.
planetgeli
There's no future in England's dreaming
So why do you think Scotland was chosen in preference to the Home Counties?
weepiper
I fix the machines that fight climate change
Because we didn't have the power of numbers to vote them out as a reaction to it of course
you never been to Edinburgh, or the West End of Glasgow, or Aberdeen? We're not all poverty stricken up here you know. We just don't have the representation to change the Westminster government by ourselves.
Bahnhof Strasse
Met up with Hannah Courtoy a week next Tuesday
That is his point. (As I read it)
planetgeli
There's no future in England's dreaming
Plus Scotland, at that time and until very recently, had higher levels of general poverty than England. Hence it being tested on the poor. (The Poll Tax). No one is saying everyone in Scotland was, or is, poor. But feel free to infantilise my argument as such.
This is a tax being tested on the poor. A tax that hits the poor because, not only of income, but how that income is spent. A moralising tax to hit the Rab C Nesbits, as Bahnhof Strasse said.
This is a tax being tested on the poor. A tax that hits the poor because, not only of income, but how that income is spent. A moralising tax to hit the Rab C Nesbits, as Bahnhof Strasse said.
UnderOpenSky
baseline neural therapy
Really? How much do you think 12 cans of lager like Fosters will cost after this.
By my fag packet calculations the ale I drink would just be affected and that's certainly not the cheapest beer in shop or what I drank for most of my life.
weepiper
I fix the machines that fight climate change
You're being quite hostile. It's a bit unnecessary. And as has been repeatedly pointed out, it's not a tax. It's targeted at the nastiest companies that are viciously exploiting the poor by 'free choice'. It aims to price them out of the market. The right to be able to afford to drink yourself to death isn't a right you should want to defend.
redsquirrel
This Machine Kills Progressives
Over the weekend Channel 4 news had a piece about how plastics were harming sealife, the main (only really) suggestion put forward about how to deal with this issue was to extend the tax on plastic bags to other "one-use"* plastics. So the application of another regressive tax/price increase like this one. And if you don't think there'll be more coming down the road then I've got a bridge to sell you.
I agree that the social harm caused by problem drinking needs to be tackled, I agree that the environmental harm caused by pollution needs to be tackled but applying more and more regressive taxes should not be the way to do that. And accepting them because "they work" and there is no alternative is a dangerous path to go down. After booze plastics, after plastics sugary foods, after foods cigarettes (again), etc etc. Where does it stop?
*Utterly idiotic name, 99% of people used their plastic shopping bags more than once, 99% of people use plastic bottles more than once.
I agree that the social harm caused by problem drinking needs to be tackled, I agree that the environmental harm caused by pollution needs to be tackled but applying more and more regressive taxes should not be the way to do that. And accepting them because "they work" and there is no alternative is a dangerous path to go down. After booze plastics, after plastics sugary foods, after foods cigarettes (again), etc etc. Where does it stop?
*Utterly idiotic name, 99% of people used their plastic shopping bags more than once, 99% of people use plastic bottles more than once.
redsquirrel
This Machine Kills Progressives
OK, it may not be an actual tax but an enforced price increase. But lets not beat around the bush, effectively this is a (regressive) tax who's proceeds go straight to business.
DexterTCN
Troy and Abed in the morning
That was a Westminster policy by tories.
However my point stands, it's not against the poor. As I pointed out with the other policies being implemented. And about Scotland's relationship with alcohol.
But anyway...squirrel's going on about how it's for business when the business involved went to court for 5 years to stop it.
redsquirrel
This Machine Kills Progressives
Are you going to seriously claim that a flat tax/pricing increase like this doesn't hurt the poor more than the rich?
Even if it wasn't against them (and I don't entirely accept that I think there's a nasty class undertone to the whole thing) the poor will feel the effects more than the rich.
Even if it wasn't against them (and I don't entirely accept that I think there's a nasty class undertone to the whole thing) the poor will feel the effects more than the rich.
The extra profits that come out the increase price go where?
Similar threads
