hibs.net Messageboard

 

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 106
  1. #31
    I've had a wee look at how it will impact my wallet and it's nothing. I drink only on a Friday and Saturday, admittedly above the recommended. I'll average a 70cl bottle of rum and a case of beer with maybe a few pints if we have a home game.

    Ironically I just ordered a delivery from Sainsbury's and Havana club has been reduced to £16 , happy days 😀


  2. Log in to remove the advert

  3. #32
    Testimonial Due Glory Lurker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Miles from in the know
    Posts
    2,395
    Okay then, small government proponents, what should be done instead?

  4. #33
    @hibs.net private member Speedy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    7,039
    Quote Originally Posted by bod View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I used to buy 3 bottles of wine every week when they were 3 for a tenner.Now that they’ve stopped that I’m down to 1 bottle a week ,now although I disagreed with the Scottish Government scrapping those kind of offers my health must be better for it
    Thinking about that, it's strange that a 70cl bottle of vodka is cheaper than two 35cls. Or a 24 pack of tennents is (was) cheaper than 6 four packs.

  5. #34
    @hibs.net private member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Posts
    8,559
    Quote Originally Posted by Glory Lurker View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Okay then, small government proponents, what should be done instead?
    First of all you need to be honest about the trends.

    The trend for alcohol use and abuse has been downwards for some time. The notion that this is an ever increasing problem is a false one.

    The you need to look at the age groups...alcohol abuse is much more common in older groups that younger ones. There appears to have been a real generational shift in that younger generations are clearly more informed than older ones re alcohol and are not wedded to it as older ones are.

    Then you need to look at where the problem lies. It’s very very clear in the map within the National Statistics link below that ‘Scotlands’ problem is really a Glasgow problem. In fact in large swathes of the country the hospitalisation rate is less than half that of Glasgow.

    Finally you need to look at the source of the problem. Deprivation levels are directly linked to alcohol health issues. 8 times as more likely in the most deprived areas compared to the least.

    Once you have done that you should target resources and policies on those areas and people. A blanket minimum price may well do that but it hardly smacks of a focussed approach.

    Trends (old but relevant and I don’t have time to find anything more recent tonight! ) http://www.wsta.co.uk/publications-u...-scotland/file

    Latest hospital stats: http://www.isdscotland.org/Health-To...RHS-Report.pdf

  6. #35
    @hibs.net private member Steve-O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Age
    36
    Posts
    20,063
    Quote Originally Posted by johnbc70 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Alcohol is one example, but the Scottish government show a distinct lack of trust in the people of Scotland. I am sure they have also changed the law so you can't get any deals like buy one get one free on bottles of wine etc. Punish the many because of the few. I have an app on my phone for my local pub which is a large chain, got a message saying I could get a free pint. Showed the voucher to the barman who then said it was not valid in Scotland due to the laws here.

    The named person is another example as pointed out above. Scotland is also apparently going to be tobacco free by 2034, so if you smoke I hope your making plans to emigrate. (Although never stopped one SNP MSP accepting hospitality from one of the largest tobacco companies)
    "Tobacco free" is probably not quite as it seems. In New Zealand they are aiming to be "smoke free" by 2025, but in fact the definition of 'smoke free' is that only 5 or 10% (can't recall which) of the population still smoke. It doesn't mean that cigarettes won't be available, but the culture will have changed to a point where only a very small number of people will still partake - that and cigarettes will be extremely expensive. Around 15 GBP for a pack of 20 here as I understand it now. Not sure how that compares with the UK.

    To be fair, given the amount of bevvying, trouble and health related problems in Scotland, it is hard to argue why the government should trust the population to manage it themselves? Yes of course not everyone goes mental on the drink, but compared to a lot of places around the world, it's clear Scotland has a bit of an affinity for drinking to excess.

    There's no minimum price here and you can still get some cheap booze, but compared to Scotland it'd be considered expensive. Some of the stuff I'm seeing on this thread in terms of pricing is crazy - 10 beers for 3.50?! That is pretty ludicrous when you think about it. Maybe I've just been away and paying expensive prices for too long!
    Last edited by Steve-O; 03-05-2018 at 03:33 AM.

  7. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by RyeSloan View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    First of all you need to be honest about the trends.

    The trend for alcohol use and abuse has been downwards for some time. The notion that this is an ever increasing problem is a false one.

    The you need to look at the age groups...alcohol abuse is much more common in older groups that younger ones. There appears to have been a real generational shift in that younger generations are clearly more informed than older ones re alcohol and are not wedded to it as older ones are.

    Then you need to look at where the problem lies. It’s very very clear in the map within the National Statistics link below that ‘Scotlands’ problem is really a Glasgow problem. In fact in large swathes of the country the hospitalisation rate is less than half that of Glasgow.

    Finally you need to look at the source of the problem. Deprivation levels are directly linked to alcohol health issues. 8 times as more likely in the most deprived areas compared to the least.

    Once you have done that you should target resources and policies on those areas and people. A blanket minimum price may well do that but it hardly smacks of a focussed approach.

    Trends (old but relevant and I don’t have time to find anything more recent tonight! ) http://www.wsta.co.uk/publications-u...-scotland/file

    Latest hospital stats: http://www.isdscotland.org/Health-To...RHS-Report.pdf
    Is it not the case that the Scottish Government brought in other measures, such as needing ID if under 25, that have had an impact on underage drinking and led to the trends you mention?

  8. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by johnbc70 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Alcohol is one example, but the Scottish government show a distinct lack of trust in the people of Scotland. I am sure they have also changed the law so you can't get any deals like buy one get one free on bottles of wine etc. Punish the many because of the few. I have an app on my phone for my local pub which is a large chain, got a message saying I could get a free pint. Showed the voucher to the barman who then said it was not valid in Scotland due to the laws here.

    The named person is another example as pointed out above. Scotland is also apparently going to be tobacco free by 2034, so if you smoke I hope your making plans to emigrate. (Although never stopped one SNP MSP accepting hospitality from one of the largest tobacco companies)
    I'd love to read more about this "tobacco free" Scotland you mention, got a link?

  9. #38
    @hibs.net private member johnbc70's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Age
    42
    Posts
    3,770
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Grieves View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I'd love to read more about this "tobacco free" Scotland you mention, got a link?
    http://www.healthscotland.scot/publications/review-of-creating-a-tobacco-free-generation-a-tobacco-control-strategy-for-scotland

    I am sure there are plenty of other articles and resources but this seems like it covers a lot.

  10. #39
    Coaching Staff Betty Boop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Sunny Leith
    Posts
    8,396
    A nonsense policy from the Nanny party.

  11. #40
    @hibs.net private member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Posts
    8,559
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Grieves View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Is it not the case that the Scottish Government brought in other measures, such as needing ID if under 25, that have had an impact on underage drinking and led to the trends you mention?
    Dunno but not according to the polis in 2014:

    Chief constable of Police Scotland Sir Stephen House, in a report to the Scottish Borders Licensing Board, said the number of crimes of underage purchasing of alcohol has dropped since retailers have been required to demand photo ID documents that prove would-be alcohol purchasers who look under 25 are at least 18 years of age.
    But it hadn’t stopped under-18s from drinking alcohol because adults buy it for them or give it to them.” he said.
    “However there is a move towards ‘agent purchase’ of alcohol and much less instances of children or young persons purchasing alcohol themselves.”

  12. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by johnbc70 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    So the Sainsburys own brand beer I used to buy is now no longer available, assume for same reasons as above. It was 10 250ml bottles for £3.50 but would now cost £5. It was pretty low alcohol content but must have had a unit per bottle.

    So I now actually have to buy more expensive and stronger beer if I fancy a drink.
    Same. Sainsbury's own brand lager was £1.10 for 4 cans on Monday, £1.85 on Tuesday and the wumman deciding whether I was 25 or more said it was probably going to be discontinued altogether. Watery pish admittedly (2%) but highly refreshing. I am likely to end up drinking some high-strength alternative like Skol. The government is pushing me into higher consumption of alcohol.

  13. #42
    Coaching Staff Sylar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Lanark
    Age
    32
    Posts
    14,298
    Gamer IDs

    Gamertag: sjmcg1304
    Quote Originally Posted by Betty Boop View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    A nonsense policy from the Nanny party.
    I agree and disagree with you.

    On it's own, it's a blunt instrument that's going to displace problems rather than resolve them. As a starting point, with supplementary policies and initiatives, it could be incredibly successful.

    Pricing to change behaviour has been demonstrated to be effective (carrier bags, coffee discounts for own-use vessels), so I fully understand them trying it. I can't say I've noticed any change in the price of the beer I typically drink at weekends (which aren't cheap, supermarket own-brand varieties), or in the odd bottle of wine that I buy when we've got friends etc coming around. But if it makes it financially unsustainable for people to buy bottles of ridiculously high alcohol garbage for pittence, it's a decent first step.

    We were involved in doing some analysis for the Scottish Government on the economic impacts of changing alcohol consumption that might be an interesting read for those who are so inclined:

    https://www.sbs.strath.ac.uk/economi...-in-the-UK.pdf

  14. #43
    @hibs.net private member CropleyWasGod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    21,419
    Quote Originally Posted by Sylar View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I agree and disagree with you.

    On it's own, it's a blunt instrument that's going to displace problems rather than resolve them. As a starting point, with supplementary policies and initiatives, it could be incredibly successful.

    Pricing to change behaviour has been demonstrated to be effective (carrier bags, coffee discounts for own-use vessels), so I fully understand them trying it. I can't say I've noticed any change in the price of the beer I typically drink at weekends (which aren't cheap, supermarket own-brand varieties), or in the odd bottle of wine that I buy when we've got friends etc coming around. But if it makes it financially unsustainable for people to buy bottles of ridiculously high alcohol garbage for pittence, it's a decent first step.

    We were involved in doing some analysis for the Scottish Government on the economic impacts of changing alcohol consumption that might be an interesting read for those who are so inclined:

    https://www.sbs.strath.ac.uk/economi...-in-the-UK.pdf
    If you're a weekend drinker, you won't notice any changes in prices until this weekend. It only came into effect on Tuesday.

    Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

  15. #44
    Coaching Staff Sylar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Lanark
    Age
    32
    Posts
    14,298
    Gamer IDs

    Gamertag: sjmcg1304
    Quote Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If you're a weekend drinker, you won't notice any changes in prices until this weekend. It only came into effect on Tuesday.

    Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk
    I did do our weekly shop last night and didn't notice any difference - I normally drink a couple of bottles of Leffe, and it was the same price when I picked them up yesterday as it was last week.

  16. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by johnbc70 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Alcohol is one example, but the Scottish government show a distinct lack of trust in the people of Scotland. I am sure they have also changed the law so you can't get any deals like buy one get one free on bottles of wine etc. Punish the many because of the few. I have an app on my phone for my local pub which is a large chain, got a message saying I could get a free pint. Showed the voucher to the barman who then said it was not valid in Scotland due to the laws here.

    The named person is another example as pointed out above. Scotland is also apparently going to be tobacco free by 2034, so if you smoke I hope your making plans to emigrate. (Although never stopped one SNP MSP accepting hospitality from one of the largest tobacco companies)
    I get and have some sympathy with the libertarian argument, but otoh, it would seem that from the evidence over many decades, the people of Scotland have shown they can't be trusted with drink. We really need an attitude shift and this might be a useful step in that direction. If it doesn't work it can be dropped.

    I had similar sympathy with the argument against the smoking ban, but with hindsight I think that worked out really well.

    Named person has absolutely f all to do with not trusting anyone, btw. All it does is give 1 out of potentially several people involved with a child's welfare the responsibility to be the primary point of contact. It's an organisational change so that the extreme cases don't fall through the cracks because everybody thought someone else was in the better position.

  17. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by Betty Boop View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    A nonsense policy from the Nanny party.
    A ridiculously knee jerk response from a blinkered view.

  18. #47
    @hibs.net private member CropleyWasGod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    21,419
    Quote Originally Posted by Sylar View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I did do our weekly shop last night and didn't notice any difference - I normally drink a couple of bottles of Leffe, and it was the same price when I picked them up yesterday as it was last week.
    Would Leffe be caught as part of the measures, though?

    Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

  19. #48
    Coaching Staff Sylar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Lanark
    Age
    32
    Posts
    14,298
    Gamer IDs

    Gamertag: sjmcg1304
    Quote Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Would Leffe be caught as part of the measures, though?

    Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk
    No, which I guess is my point. The type of beer I typically drink is already priced above the MUP.

    I understand that's not the case for everyone, but for folk like me that only drink very occasionally, and will spend a bit more on what they're drinking, they're unlikely to see a marked difference.

    So this notion that it "hammers everyone" just isn't quite correct.

  20. #49
    @hibs.net private member CropleyWasGod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    21,419
    Quote Originally Posted by Sylar View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    No, which I guess is my point. The type of beer I typically drink is already priced above the MUP.

    I understand that's not the case for everyone, but for folk like me that only drink very occasionally, and will spend a bit more on what they're drinking, they're unlikely to see a marked difference.

    So this notion that it "hammers everyone" just isn't quite correct.
    It's not correct at all.... which is my point :)

    Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

  21. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by johnbc70 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    http://www.healthscotland.scot/publications/review-of-creating-a-tobacco-free-generation-a-tobacco-control-strategy-for-scotland

    I am sure there are plenty of other articles and resources but this seems like it covers a lot.
    Cheers. So they're attempting to reduce smokers to <5% of the population by 2034 - sounds good to me

  22. #51
    Quote Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I get and have some sympathy with the libertarian argument, but otoh, it would seem that from the evidence over many decades, the people of Scotland have shown they can't be trusted with drink. We really need an attitude shift and this might be a useful step in that direction. If it doesn't work it can be dropped.

    I had similar sympathy with the argument against the smoking ban, but with hindsight I think that worked out really well.

    Named person has absolutely f all to do with not trusting anyone, btw. All it does is give 1 out of potentially several people involved with a child's welfare the responsibility to be the primary point of contact. It's an organisational change so that the extreme cases don't fall through the cracks because everybody thought someone else was in the better position.
    I agree that the smoking ban has been an unarguable success. It's not the comparable with the alcohol pricing changes though. It's more akin to just taxing tobacco prohibitively (which is also done). I wouldn't be surprised for some more restrictions to be put on the sale of alcohol to legal drinkers at some point in the future.

    BTW, slightly off-topic, but did 'named person' ever get implemented? I have a 10 year old and have never heard anything concerning him. If it's implemented, how do I go about finding out who the government has decided should be responsible for him (I could do with a babysitter!).

  23. #52
    Coaching Staff
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Antwerp
    Posts
    8,092
    Quote Originally Posted by Sylar View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    No, which I guess is my point. The type of beer I typically drink is already priced above the MUP.

    I understand that's not the case for everyone, but for folk like me that only drink very occasionally, and will spend a bit more on what they're drinking, they're unlikely to see a marked difference.

    So this notion that it "hammers everyone" just isn't quite correct.
    Leffe Blonde or Brown? I'm surprised it hasn't gone up tbh, given the 6.6% nature of it, but it's obviously quite highly priced anyway.

  24. #53
    Coaching Staff One Day Soon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    In hope
    Age
    53
    Posts
    7,363
    Quote Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I get and have some sympathy with the libertarian argument, but otoh, it would seem that from the evidence over many decades, the people of Scotland have shown they can't be trusted with drink. We really need an attitude shift and this might be a useful step in that direction. If it doesn't work it can be dropped.

    I had similar sympathy with the argument against the smoking ban, but with hindsight I think that worked out really well.

    Named person has absolutely f all to do with not trusting anyone, btw. All it does is give 1 out of potentially several people involved with a child's welfare the responsibility to be the primary point of contact. It's an organisational change so that the extreme cases don't fall through the cracks because everybody thought someone else was in the better position.

    I just see contradictions everywhere - or maybe I only imagine I do.

    I thought the smoking ban was an excellent idea - even though it is nanny state, but I'm not at all sure about the minimum pricing - particularly as it is nanny state. Confusing.

    Named person: as with all legislation part of the question is not simply what it is intended for and starts out as, but what it ends up being used for and who by. But that's a whole other debate.

    In this context you think the people of Scotland can't be trusted with drink. In another context you think they can be trusted with...everything. Which seems contradictory. I'm not trying to be snide btw.

    Bottom line, we need to dramatically change our lifestyles and health. It is ironic that we are surrounded by and grow some of the healthiest food in the world and we are crap at eating it. Fish in abundance, lots of oats and a huge berry industry. So we eat chips. I love chips. Confusing.

    What I do think is ridiculous is that it has taken seven years to get to this on minimum pricing - where it's right or wrong. Pity there couldn't have been a pilot area in the meantime to test it while the lawyers were making all their money.

  25. #54
    @hibs.net private member snooky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Down East
    Posts
    11,869
    Blog Entries
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by One Day Soon View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I just see contradictions everywhere - or maybe I only imagine I do.

    I thought the smoking ban was an excellent idea - even though it is nanny state, but I'm not at all sure about the minimum pricing - particularly as it is nanny state. Confusing.

    Named person: as with all legislation part of the question is not simply what it is intended for and starts out as, but what it ends up being used for and who by. But that's a whole other debate.

    In this context you think the people of Scotland can't be trusted with drink. In another context you think they can be trusted with...everything. Which seems contradictory. I'm not trying to be snide btw.

    Bottom line, we need to dramatically change our lifestyles and health. It is ironic that we are surrounded by and grow some of the healthiest food in the world and we are crap at eating it. Fish in abundance, lots of oats and a huge berry industry. So we eat chips. I love chips. Confusing.

    What I do think is ridiculous is that it has taken seven years to get to this on minimum pricing - where it's right or wrong. Pity there couldn't have been a pilot area in the meantime to test it while the lawyers were making all their money.

  26. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by One Day Soon View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I just see contradictions everywhere - or maybe I only imagine I do.

    I thought the smoking ban was an excellent idea - even though it is nanny state, but I'm not at all sure about the minimum pricing - particularly as it is nanny state. Confusing.

    Named person: as with all legislation part of the question is not simply what it is intended for and starts out as, but what it ends up being used for and who by. But that's a whole other debate.

    In this context you think the people of Scotland can't be trusted with drink. In another context you think they can be trusted with...everything. Which seems contradictory. I'm not trying to be snide btw.

    Bottom line, we need to dramatically change our lifestyles and health. It is ironic that we are surrounded by and grow some of the healthiest food in the world and we are crap at eating it. Fish in abundance, lots of oats and a huge berry industry. So we eat chips. I love chips. Confusing.

    What I do think is ridiculous is that it has taken seven years to get to this on minimum pricing - where it's right or wrong. Pity there couldn't have been a pilot area in the meantime to test it while the lawyers were making all their money.
    In the sense that I can't be trusted with chocolate biscuits*, so I take a decision not to buy them. I am the person best placed to know this and take the appropriate action to avoid the consequential fat *******isation that goes with a biscuit policy vacuum.


    * or chips, come to that.

  27. #56
    @hibs.net private member CropleyWasGod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    21,419
    Quote Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    In the sense that I can't be trusted with chocolate biscuits*, so I take a decision not to buy them. I am the person best placed to know this and take the appropriate action to avoid the consequential fat *******isation that goes with a biscuit policy vacuum.


    * or chips, come to that.
    Not everyone has that advantage, though. Successive initiatives have tried to get people to take appropriate action, and the problem remains.

    Sometimes, the State has to step in and say "enough. We're going to do things differently now".

  28. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Not everyone has that advantage, though. Successive initiatives have tried to get people to take appropriate action, and the problem remains.

    Sometimes, the State has to step in and say "enough. We're going to do things differently now".
    I was being a personification of Scotland there. Another failed rhetorical flourish, sigh. Someone should hide my keyboard for my own good.

  29. #58
    @hibs.net private member CropleyWasGod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    21,419
    Quote Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I was being a personification of Scotland there. Another failed rhetorical flourish, sigh. Someone should hide my keyboard for my own good.
    Ah, gotcha.

    You really have to lower your standards, JMS.

  30. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Ah, gotcha.

    You really have to lower your standards, JMS.
    Maybe I should dig out that bottle of El Dorado I've been saving.

  31. #60
    First Team Breakthrough
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by snooky View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    100%.
    I'm getting fed up taking a whipping for something I haven't done.
    Stuff all those little nerds with all their modelling, analysis and all the theoretical crap that goes with it.
    Rant over.
    \\\\\\\\\\\i am with you on this. I used to buy the best own label cider at Lidls. 4 cans @5% for £1.99 now £4.40. No longer worth it.

    90% plus of drinkers are sensible so in order to deter the 5% or so reduce everyone to the lowest common denominator.

    A classic Communist diktat. The government wins also by taking in more duty and VAT on the higher price. Suck on that too!

    ps This isn't a rant

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
hibs.net ©2012 All Rights Reserved