http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/jan/0 ... or-alcohol

That's as idiotic as those teachers that punish the whole class because of a few morons...

As a contributor to the teetotal thread, I have no issue with this at all .

Now, being serious, I have to say I kind of agree with it in general terms. Anyone selling say a can of beer for less than 50p is using it as a loss-leader to get people into their shop. Given they're not doing it for charity, that means they are putting the price of other goods up to maintain their overall profit levels. And honesty, I can't think of a great justification why those of us who don't drink should be subsidising those who do, given the general cost to society of alcohol use as it stands - I can't imagine the people buying the 50p cans of lager are your discerning, social drinker. Strikes me they're much more the 'get [LIFTED], throw up in the street, possibly have a fight and end up in casualty' types. And I don't see why their excesses should be made easier, frankly.

I don't know about a minimum price but I'd got for a regulation that no alcohol shoudl be sold for less than cost.

Jon

The Department of Health seems to be enjoying a lot of clout at the moment. They even managed to convince the Home Office to issue new guidance to local authorities on new mandatory and discretionary conditions that can be applied to licences issued under the Licensing Act 2003 (See the "Safe. Sensible. Social. Selling Alcohol Responsibly" consultation). The new conditions are coming in on the back of the Policing and Crime Act 2009.

They're talking about 50p per unit of alcohol.

So a can of beer ~ £1
A bottle of red wine ~ £5
A bottle of spirits ~ £14

That means doubling current prices. If they do that, I'm going to march on parliament with a flaming torch and I expect a million people to follow me.


*edited due to bad maths*

It's one of those things I'd leave to the market to decide - if I want to buy Tesco's vodka to save a bit of money or prefer it over Smirnoff I should be able to within the market, I'm already being taxed in the normal way for everything a country needs before you get to whatever schemes the politicians can dream up.

I don't even drink, I just think this is a load of BS and the thin end of the wedge

Well what I drink typically costs at least £2 per pint, sometimes £3 so it wouldn't affect me much. It would mean the end of cheapish spirits though.

We're talking supermarket prices, not bar prices??

What I drink costs £2 in a supermarket!

Quality cider does not cometh cheap!

If they do this, surely it would be logical to add 50p to every X grams of sugar in soft drinks (to help pay for obesity treatments on the NHS) and 50p to every Xmg of tar in cigarettes (to help pay for treatments to smokers on the NHS) or something?

I don't drink often, when I drink I enjoy the taste of what I'm drinking and rarely drink to get drunk (perhaps once or twice a year).

I drink Wood's old navy rum at home. A bottle will last me around a year, but at 40 units a bottle, it's going to be a minimum of £20, then add the retailers bit on top, it'll be ridiculous!

How about making the country a nice place to live again, then people wouldn't need to hide at the bottom of a bottle.

It's typical government hypocritical buls h i t, an addicted population is easier to control.

first smoking then obesity now alcohol
all under the headline NHS savings
i wonder what's next …

My money's on food. "No treatment for you, you fat salt eater!".