observer Posted January 9, 2010 Report Share Posted January 9, 2010 Watched some members of the public interviewed on the news, as to how much they would be prepared to pay for booze, if taxes were increased to deter binge drinking - if they were an average sample it would seem Alister has got lots of scope for a tax take - one of them said he'd still be drinking if it was five times the price! Perhaps he was an alki though! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LymmParent Posted January 9, 2010 Report Share Posted January 9, 2010 Keep telling you that won't work. No matter what the price, people who are reckless with drink will be reckless with drink. It's in their nature and after a few drinks, they'll pay anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted January 9, 2010 Report Share Posted January 9, 2010 If they were to prosecute the binge drinkers instead of persecuting the sensible drinkers I would agree, but in typical Nu Labour (we know better) fashion, it will be a two footed lunge that will raise more taxes and achieve bugger all as a result. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
safeway56 Posted January 9, 2010 Report Share Posted January 9, 2010 I heard one of these anti-booze loonies claim the other day that the maximum safe intake of alcohol is 2 pints per week. This means that myself and all my relatives and friends are raving alcoholics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tod Posted January 9, 2010 Report Share Posted January 9, 2010 Why are you a loonie to be anti booze? I would have thought the loonies are the ones crawling along the city centre streets absolutely bladdered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
safeway56 Posted January 9, 2010 Report Share Posted January 9, 2010 For every blind drunk idiot on the streets there are thousands of others enjoying social drinking with friends and family. Surely it would be wrong to penalise all these people for the odd fool who is rolling drunk in the gutter ? The anti-booze loonies are also the same people who are anti-everything else as well...Cars, fags, planes, coal etc etc. They are extremely interested in controlling all of our lives. Total control is their ultimate goal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted January 9, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 9, 2010 My point was, that in a era of austerity, when Gov will be looking to tax everything in sight; boozers appear to present an ideal cash cow, just like smokers and drivers - until perhaps the black market provides an alternative! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Kennedy Posted January 9, 2010 Report Share Posted January 9, 2010 Keep telling you that won't work. No matter what the price, people who are reckless with drink will be reckless with drink. It's in their nature and after a few drinks, they'll pay anything. Exactly. Look at all the tax on cigs, people still smoke....they just spend less on other things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inky pete Posted January 9, 2010 Report Share Posted January 9, 2010 .....and bring thousands of the things back from holidays. I don't know of a single pub where it's not possible to buy cheap fags off someone (usually a non-smoker) who's just back from somewhere and is looking to make their EasyJet fare back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted January 9, 2010 Report Share Posted January 9, 2010 f they were to prosecute the binge drinkers instead of persecuting the sensible drinkers I would agree, but in typical Nu Labour (we know better) fashion, it will be a two footed lunge that will raise more taxes and achieve bugger all as a result. Nice attack on Labour Baz, But I think the Tory party are planning to do the same Does that now make it a good idea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Kennedy Posted January 9, 2010 Report Share Posted January 9, 2010 ............ and it is Lib Dem policy to reduce the legal drinking age for alcohol to just 16. Politics aside A Gin Tax was introduced in the 1700s to curb excessive drinking....it clearly failed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted January 10, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 10, 2010 As I said, drinkers, like smokers and drivers, will provide an almost inexhaustable cash cow for Government - if a bottle of Whisky was increased to ?50, we'd still pay it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted January 10, 2010 Report Share Posted January 10, 2010 Not me pal. haven't drunk whisky for years Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted January 10, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 10, 2010 Or Rum for the benefit of you jolly Tars! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evil Sid Posted January 10, 2010 Report Share Posted January 10, 2010 well in answer to the the question asked. i would be willing to pay the same price as they do in the bar in the house of commons. come to think of it as my taxes(when i was working) pay the politicians wages then i guess i already am Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.