Scotland to establish minimum unit price for alcohol

[Winot]

Anyone have any figures for alcohol problems in countries like Norway and Iceland where its relatively expensive?

I wonder what the reaction would be if governments there decided that to help out deprived drinkers they were going to provide them with cheap white cider.

 

[SpookyFrank]

I'm not saying our society doesn't lend itself to misery or that this is a panacea for all social ills, but that alcohol does not improve any of these social problems so the less drunk, the better for all.

Alcohol fixes nothing but it does help some people cope with what they can't fix. I have friends with mental illnesses who find that drinking to stay calm or get to sleep leaves them happier and more functional overrall than taking the chemical coshes prescribed to them by doctors.

I hate all the fake morality around drugs. As if there's a practical difference between a drug in a little white plastic bottle and a drug in a big heavy glass bottle. What's immoral is expecting people to survive on medication alone, while denying them access to treatments that might actually help them in the long term.

 

[NoXion]

Anyone have any figures for alcohol problems in countries like Norway and Iceland where its relatively expensive?

It's not a scientific survey by any means, but this link might give some insight:

Interesting that like in the UK, there seems to be a culture of "pre-drinking" before going out. Although of course those are not the kind of drinkers targeted by minimum pricing measures. Because really they target every drinker.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Where I work in leeds, half of the booze at the local offy is super strength "cider" at £1.00 a can - so you can get shit faced for a fiver. And people do - in spades. Alcoholism is a scourge of poor communities - i see it everyday - its an epidemic round here. This is a blunt measure - but if it can be shown to reduce some of the harm then id support it.

Poverty is the scourge of poor communities, alcoholism just one of many symptoms.

And as others have pointed out, you don't have to be poor to be an alcoholic. It's just that we are conditioned to judge the scruffy bloke buying four tins of K cider and ignore the school teacher buying a bottle of cherry brandy that has far more alcohol in it.

 

[Sunset Tree]

Why not tax the fuck out of the rich and spend some of that money on measures to tackle addiction, like funding more treatment centres*, yet there's no evaluation of such a proposal.

Individualised alcohol treatment may be less effective than reducing population level consumption. Addictions are quite difficult to 'treat' in a meaningful sense in through rehabs or whatever. You could pile so much money into that without reducing consumption to the same extent.

 

[Kaka Tim]

I doubt if the outcome will be as rosy as you claim, but here's hoping.
Are there any middle cass radicals among the BMA? I wouldn't know. But perhaps I was thinking of you (but again, I wouldn't know.)

Arguing that this measure might marginally reduce the harm that alcohol does in the poorest communities is hardly a rosy picture. And no - i am not a "middle class radical". I work in a community centre in very deprived area - many of the people i work with have serious problems with alcohol or have been damaged by it effect on people close to them (partners, parents, kids etc) . I cant see the easy availability of very cheap booze as a good thing.

Also many people have real problems with alcohol but are not addicted - rather they get utterly shit faced two or three times a week and this results in their lives becoming even more chaotic and causing damage to them and those close to them. Its this group who - i guess - might be helped by this measure.
A few years ago i would probably have opposed it for the same reasons as other posters - but seeing the damage that alcohol does to an entire community on a daily basis - people who are my friends - has changed my view. The booze bin selling white lighting at 99p a can is as much a parasite on the poor as the local pawn shop and the bookies - or the local smack dealers.
Yes these are symptoms rather than the causes of powerlessness, inequality and poverty - but lessening their effect makes the community better able to work together.

 

[Kaka Tim]

Poverty is the scourge of poor communities, alcoholism just one of many symptoms.

And as others have pointed out, you don't have to be poor to be an alcoholic. It's just that we are conditioned to judge the scruffy bloke buying four tins of K cider and ignore the school teacher buying a bottle of cherry brandy that has far more alcohol in it.

And you dont have to be an alcoholic to have your life ruined by it. And - as with drugs - it is poor communities that are blighted by it in a way that more affluent areas are not. Yes of course there are class based moral judgements going on - but fuck that - If you put a large number of people whose lives have been fucked in one area and then plonk a shop there selling white lightning at close to fuck all its going to have far more negative impact than waitrose having a 15% off deal on their high end whiskey brands.

 

[Pickman's model]

And you dont have to be an alcoholic to have your life ruined by it. And - as with drugs - it is poor communities that are blighted by it in a way that more affluent areas are not. Yes of course there are class based moral judgements going on - but fuck that - If you put a large number of people whose lives have been fucked in one area and then plonk a shop there selling white lightning at close to fuck all its going to have far more negative impact than waitrose having a 15% off deal on their high end whiskey brands.

so you're saying this is due to new towns and slum clearances.

 

[redsquirrel]

Individualised alcohol treatment may be less effective than reducing population level consumption. Addictions are quite difficult to 'treat' in a meaningful sense in through rehabs or whatever. You could pile so much money into that without reducing consumption to the same extent.

May? But treatment centres are merely one example, there are plenty of other tools that the extra funding could be used to support that would tackle alcohol addiction.

 

[redsquirrel]

I cant see the easy availability of very cheap booze as a good thing.

OK, but why tackle that through regressive taxation?

 

[Kaka Tim]

so you're saying this is due to new towns and slum clearances.

partly due to social housing being increasingly only available to the most desperate people (thus concentrating extreme poverty and it attendant ills in one area) and the creation of private rented slums for people on benefits.

 

[SpookyFrank]

And you dont have to be an alcoholic to have your life ruined by it. And - as with drugs - it is poor communities that are blighted by it in a way that more affluent areas are not. Yes of course there are class based moral judgements going on - but fuck that - If you put a large number of people whose lives have been fucked in one area and then plonk a shop there selling white lightning at close to fuck all its going to have far more negative impact than waitrose having a 15% off deal on their high end whiskey brands.

You're not crediting people with much in the way of agency are you? People choose to drink, they are not tricked into doing so by the mere availability of alcohol. Wherever people live, there will be someone selling drink in some form. If nobody was motivated to get shitfaced then special offers on shitface cider would make no difference to people's behaviour.

 

[Kaka Tim]

OK, but why tackle that through regressive taxation?

I guess its a simple measure that's easy to introduce. politically easier as well - as more affluent pissheads dont go for the frosty jack.

What alternative measures are their? (genuine question)

Oh - and not saying this is going to be a roaring success - but sometimes simple measures like this do have surprisingly positive results - the restrictions on the number of paracetamol people could buy in one go has caused a significant reduction in paracetamol overdoses.

 

[Pickman's model]

partly due to social housing being increasingly only available to the most desperate people (thus concentrating extreme poverty and it attendant ills in one area) and the creation of private rented slums for people on benefits.

tosh. what's causing problems isn't so much drinking (consumption has fallen by 18% since 2004 link) but the various measures taken which have led to fewer pubs and more people drinking at home, so often drinking alone. i remember a couple of years ago going to a pub near balham the night before it shut: to be replaced by an alcohol and drugs centre. while alcohol has been a social glue for millennia, the creation of a situation in which anomie is rife is bound to lead to problems. the destruction of community is, i submit, a greater cause of anti-social drinking than people's housing situations: not to mention the soul-destroying nature of much work.

 

[redsquirrel]

I guess its a simple measure that's easy to introduce. politically easier as well - as more affluent pissheads dont go for the frosty jack.

Well isn't part of the problem what I've bolded. If we accept this type of crap simply because it's easier for M(S)Ps then we are playing their game. Moreover, this type of measure helps open the door for the type of shit that I linked to - testing those on benefits, etc.

 

[Kaka Tim]

tosh. what's causing problems isn't so much drinking (consumption has fallen by 18% since 2004 link) but the various measures taken which have led to fewer pubs and more people drinking at home, so often drinking alone. i remember a couple of years ago going to a pub near balham the night before it shut: to be replaced by an alcohol and drugs centre. while alcohol has been a social glue for millennia, the creation of a situation in which anomie is rife is bound to lead to problems. the destruction of community is, i submit, a greater cause of anti-social drinking than people's housing situations: not to mention the soul-destroying nature of much work.

i didn't say that the housing situation has created problem drinking - rather that the concentration of the poorest and most desperate in one area means you have a high concentration of problem drinkers in that community - so you have social blight.
I take your point about the pubs closing and it leading to greater social isolation - but pub prices are significantly higher than the off licence - so maybe that had a dampener effect on problem drinking. And why are pubs closing? is that creating greater social isolation - or is greater social isolation making people less likely to go to the pub?
What i see is a lot of people with fucked lives looking for oblivion - and doing so in a way that only makes their situation worse.

 

[Pickman's model]

i didn't say that the housing situation has created problem drinking - rather that the concentration of the poorest and most desperate in one area means you have a high concentration of problem drinkers in that community - so you have social blight.
I take your point about the pubs closing and it leading to greater social isolation - but pub prices are significantly higher than the off licence - so maybe that had a dampener effect on problem drinking. And why are pubs closing? is that creating greater social isolation - or is greater social isolation making people less likely to go to the pub?
What i see is a lot of people with fucked lives looking for oblivion - but in a way that only makes their situation worse.

there are a number of reasons pubs shut, the smoking ban, the sites being more profitable as flats than pubs, the factors that make them dearer than they used to be - for example the minimum wage and increased taxes on alcohol not to mention the impending slaughter of pubs under new business rate plans. i don't know why you identify the poorest and most desperate with council tenants: having been a problem drinker living on a council estate i can tell you that there aren't so many problem drinkers there. you're swallowing something, my love, but it's not sweet tasting.

 

[pogofish]

They will have to have a hard border between Scotland and England and impose customs points to stop everyone driving south of the border snd stocking up on cheap cider from the nearest Lidl.

Maybe its time to review the provisions in the Act of Union about cross-border Alcohol trading - Up to now, its only been the English who broke the act that way but it could prove very awkward for an SNP government!

Unless that's their plan of course?

 

[killer b]

You're not crediting people with much in the way of agency are you? People choose to drink, they are not tricked into doing so by the mere availability of alcohol.

Not really sure about this tbh. I think the availability of cheap and easily accessible booze, and the way it's embedded in the fabric of british life does trick people into drinking, after a fashion.

People choose to use fixed odds betting terminals until they're evicted for non-payment of rent too, and they choose to run up massive debts on credit cards until the bailiffs come and take all their shit away. It's a wonderful happy world of choice we live in.

 

[nogojones]

Or it could turn out even worse because problem drinkers end up spending even more of their most-likely meagre income on drink (or as DotCommunist mentioned, they turn to Spice or smack) This idea that increasing prices will naturally lead to the rational response of cutting back on spending is pure Homo economicus bullshit.

If we're looking at public health measures I'll also be looking at properly regulating the illicit drug markets rather than the current free for all

 

[Pickman's model]

Not really sure about this tbh. I think the availability of cheap and easily accessible booze, and the way it's embedded in the fabric of british life does trick people into drinking, after a fashion.

yeh. an increasing number of people are being 'tricked' into not drinking.

dear

 

[Winot]

You're not crediting people with much in the way of agency are you? People choose to drink, they are not tricked into doing so by the mere availability of alcohol. Wherever people live, there will be someone selling drink in some form. If nobody was motivated to get shitfaced then special offers on shitface cider would make no difference to people's behaviour.

The trouble with the libertarian argument is that it can lead to a place in which people are denied healthcare as a result of lifestyle choices.

 

[Kaka Tim]

i don't know why you identify the poorest and most desperate with council tenants: having been a problem drinker living on a council estate i can tell you that there aren't so many problem drinkers there. you're swallowing something, my love, but it's not sweet tasting.

Because council tenancies are now only available to the poorest and most desperate. And i am not saying council estate = problem drinkers (i lived in a council tower bloc for ten years and there was not the same problems - although it was a lot more diverse, so that may have played into it).
Im basing my opinion on the area where i work - where you have a lot of council housing - much of it one/two bed tower blocs (so lots of people - often men - living on their own - plus transient population) plus a lot of low rent private lets - so lots of families on housing benefit in shit accommodation. Lots of people with mental and physical health problems, drug and alchohol problems, social isolation, lots of crime, chaotic families,lots of drug dealers, lots of youth delinquency - and has a shop stacked to the rafters with 99p cans of super strength cider. I dont see the latter as something that is an asset in that situation.

 

[Sunset Tree]

May? But treatment centres are merely one example, there are plenty of other tools that the extra funding could be used to support that would tackle alcohol addiction.

Population measures are often more effective than individual interventions. Also it's an upstream measure so hopefully helps stop the damage happening rather than intervening after someone has pickled their liver. What other tools would be as effective in reducing consumption?

 

[Pickman's model]

Because council tenancies are now only available to the poorest and most desperate.

yeh. and so only the poor and desperate live on council estates

 

[Kaka Tim]

yeh. and so only the poor and desperate live on council estates

no - there will be people with long standing tennancies - but to get a tenancy now you need to have "priority extra" - which means people who are - by definition - poor and desperate. I used to work in housing - this is not contentious - the ever decreasing availability of social housing (and private lets that take people on HB) has let to ever greater concentrations of poverty and deprivation with its attendant bingo card of social ills. Throw in in swinging benefit cuts, widespread use of the sanctions, low pay and shit like the bedroom tax and hey presto! you have created a sociologist's paradise.

 

[SpookyFrank]

The trouble with the libertarian argument is that it can lead to a place in which people are denied healthcare as a result of lifestyle choices.

I don't like libertarian arguments either. When I say people are making choices I'm not suggesting those choices aren't influenced by circumstance, quite the opposite if you read my other posts on this thread. I just don't think the pull factor of cheap shit drink is nearly as important as the various push factors making people want to get drunk in the first place.

Nobody who just went to the shop looking for something pleasant to wash down their dinner with is going to buy a four pack of special brew instead, no matter what price it's sold at. But sale price is the point at which you can get a lot of public attention and curry favour with the liberal hand-wringers via a simple intervention with no real effort or resources involved.

 

[Sunset Tree]

no - there will be people with long standing tennancies - but to get a tenancy now you need to have "priority extra" - which means people who are - by definition - poor and desperate. I used to work in housing - this is not contentious - the ever decreasing availability of social housing (and private lets that take people on HB) has let to ever greater concentrations of poverty and deprivation with its attendant bingo card of social ills. Throw in in swinging benefit cuts, widespread use of the sanctions, low pay and shit like the bedroom tax and hey presto! you have created a sociologist's paradise.

This is my experience. The list is so long that to reach the top of the list you need to have specific needs. When I was younger I waited about a year for the least desirable property you could imagine. The whole block was full of people who had previously been homeless, in prison, had drug or alcohol problems, mental health issues. And that was me getting fast-tracked into somewhere as a high priority due to homelessness. One of those flats that's been turned down by a few people so they offer it to the desperate.

Social housing is a great concept but the limited supply means it's hard to get into if you're just an ordinary worker.

 

[lazythursday]

I'd rather that this was part of a package of measures rather than implemented on its own, but overall I think it's a positive step. Yes, there's an argument that it focuses on poor alcoholics rather than middle class ones, but its the poor alcoholics who will will generally experience far more social and medical complications from their addiction.

I have a friend who is an alcoholic who regularly fucks himself right up with cheap cider. If he can only afford a four pack of lager instead he will be less likely to fall in the canal and nearly die of hypothermia.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Don't drink in a corral then.

Especially if there are already cattle in it.

Vicious bastards, those bovines.