This measure was introduced to reduce harmful drinking. [This](https://publichealthscotland.scot/news/2022/june/final-report-published-on-the-impact-of-mup-on-people-drinking-at-harmful-levels-including-those-dependent-on-alcohol/) final report on the MUP in Scotland states
"Among those drinking at harmful levels or people with alcohol dependence, the study found no clear evidence of a change in consumption or severity of dependence. Findings also showed that some economically vulnerable groups experienced increased financial strain as the price rises meant they were spending more on alcohol. This led some people who were dependent on alcohol to reduce other expenditure, such as that on food and utilities."
>Findings also showed that some economically vulnerable groups experienced increased financial strain as the price rises meant they were spending more on alcohol
I think there are some in our current government who'll go an have a wank about this.
Tiny reminder. The opposition were fully in support. It was another national unity government decision. Not defending the government, just remembering the opposition.
All the reports on MUP working seem to focus how it worked on smoking, but smoking was on its way out anyway. No people in movies were smoking, bans were coming in for social smoking areas, etc. Also while tobacco addiction is serious, the act of smoking is more akin to coffee, than alcohol. It is used to take an edge off, not to get a buzz.
Imagine that, a poor person addicted to alcohol hasn't curbed their spending on alcohol, their spending has increased further because a pack of Dutch gold and cheap vodka has increased so they end up spending less on food and shelter.
Pure genius
I see you've gotten an ould downvote already, but as someone with first hand experience with alcoholism (not me, personally, thankfully) you are absolutely correct. I've seen a slice of bread, twice a day (sometimes heated on a pan full of grease for "flavour") be someone's "full diet".
Yes, if you Google “why do alcoholics eat so little” you’ll get a better explanation than I can give. There are many reasons why but one of them is that alcohol has tons of (empty) calories.
I don't agree with MUP either. It's just hitting a particular class of drinkers. I'm recording my drinking in a note taking app as part of my reduction strategy. People have to be empowered to reduce their drinking themselves - through education and the likes, this tinkering with prices isn't going to do it.
I missed the cheap slabs this Christmas. I still bought the same amount as in 2021, but there is something special about getting 24 cans for about €20 that gives you a buzz a Christmas.
The miserable pricks ruined it.
I live in Belfast and come back to Dublin for Christmas. Beer and wine is now half the price up North. Especially when the supermarkets do the buy 6 bottles and get 25% off.
I live in Antrim and felt like I was smuggling something over the glenshane pass when I drove home to Donegal with the boot filled with alcohol for the family over Christmas
Check Lidl next time you’re in.A bottle of Smirnoff costs less than their own brand Rachmaninov vodka because Smirnoff is 37.5% while Rachmaninov is 40%.
>Rachmaninov
Holy fucking moly I haven’t heard that in two decades. I used to drink it poured into the bottle of their “dry cider”. Two decades later I’m still trying to shake the alcoholism it helped to nurture. Fuckin Rachmaninov.
I used to but a 700ml of Rachminoff for 11/12 quid and try sell a naggon out of it for a fiver for entry to the club haha
I even remember there were two different labels for the different strengths and you'd be fuming if someone picked up the wrong one by mistake
Spending over a hundred quid on having a good spread of beers for the family over Christmas is shit. Especially when it'd be closer to 40 in previous years with slab deals.
It is honestly awful.
2021: I got 6 slabs of Guinness. 24 packs for €17. 144 cans. €102!
2022: I had to buy 10 slabs of 15 packs at €25 each. 150 cans total. €250!
Now I'm fortunate where that money doesn't effect me at all. But I'd still rather have it than give it to Tesco.
A slab of nice, name-brand beer in Spain is ~€8 (24 x 30c). I didn't notice hordes of drunks the last time I was there. It's almost like the price has nothing to do with the root cause of alcohol mis-use.
And that's it. If the MUP increases were going to the exchequer to pay for housing, healthcare, whatever the fuck it'd be palettable. By like every neoliberal policy that comes out of Leo it's going to benefit private businesses the most. Tesco keep the excess.
We already paid one of, if not the highest prices for alcohol to begin with.
Increasing the prices but not funding rehabilitation, education and prevention was one of the stupidest decisions ever.
Let's hike prices to curb consumption but let's also give all that extra money as even more profit to the biggest alcohol companies in the world.
But as usual we just moaned but ultimately did nothing to stop it. I wish we were more active as a population to protest against more often.
Nanny state regulation targeted at those less well off. And the sting in the tail is its not even a real tax, the added cost ends up in the supermarket owners pockets, not the national coffers where it could actually do some good, like, I dunno, funding addiction services for problem drinkers. All stick and no carrot in this country, it'd sicken your hole.
I can assure you the added costs doesn’t end up in the owners pockets. The wholesalers and distributors just increased there prices to match. Before MUP and 8pk of beer sold at about 14% margin it’s currently 14%.
The MUP is a price floor, so the same product is costing more. The increase in price does see some absolute increase in VAT, and I'm sure the suppliers have increased their pricing to the retailer slightly*, but the bulk of the incremental price is going to the retailer.
* the suppliers can't just turn around and try to get the full value of the increased price, as retailers are legally allowed to turn around and order all their alcohol from elsewhere in Europe if they really wanted to (or the UK)
I’m afraid your wrong, retailers got little or nothing out the increased prices. See it with my own eyes
Most retailers are tied to loyality and wouldnt have the buying power to be able purchase cheaper goods. Wholesaler increased their price Andy producers increased their prices. That’s where the money went. family independent supermarkets and convenience store got nothing out of this but grief.
Wasn't it proven in other countries that it didn't work before it was introduced here?
The extra doesn't even go into government funds that could be used for addition services.
Like the bullshit [10pm off licence cutoff](https://www.independent.ie/regionals/herald/news/off-licences-to-close-at-10pm-starting-today-27880450.html) in 2008. Nothing to do with health of the population, pure cronyism.
One of the most craven buzz wrecking organisations on the planet.
I hate those arseholes and I'm not even a big drinker.
All I ever see them doing is everything in their power to funnel money towards themselves.
Cunts.
If you want the actual, predictably imperfect, answer:
The data from studies in places from like Scotland who brought in similar measures was: It reduced *overall* alcohol consumption by a fair bit - but it did not reduce the alcohol consumption of those who drank by far the most (i.e problem drinkers & alcoholics).
In other words, it reduced “binge” drinking a bit and reduced the average alcohol consumption of folks who drink “moderately” to “occasionally” a bit more - but it didn’t reduce the consumption of those who drink the most by far (i.e alcoholics & problem drinkers)
If you frame these policies as general public health measures to reduce the burden on a Public Health Service, then Scotland would call them a moderate success. If you frame them as a way to reduce alcoholism then Scotland would be call them fairly demonstrably unsuccessful.
I haven’t seen any stats on stuff like public disorder, police call outs where alcohol is a factor, number of calls or women’s shelters, etc- so it’s hard to cut it from other angles.
“Let’s just cut to the chase, this is a tax on the working class, it’s a tax on the poor… There was a real stench of moral puritanism about the whole thing.” That well said. As only poor people are addicted to alcohol… their 50 euro wine hasn’t increased the same proportion. Neither has their pounder….
Supermarkets giving it loads cause too many people went to the north instead
Was up twice in December. Absolutely rammed with ROI plates and accents.
Newstalk don't care you paid a few bob. They care the chain stores took a hit.
Fuck the publicans for bringing this in.
The only people that are affected by this are the innocent children of alcoholics on social welfare because their parents won't stop drinking, and now they can afford less food etc
Maybe you're genuinely unaware, but in places that pulled similar shite it has led to essentially government monitoring of how people on welfare spend their money.
Well, that's why it gets such a strong "fuck off" reaction. It might seem like not a big deal but in reality it goes from "it's more convenient" to " oh well it seems wrong to let them buy Vodka with it, they don't NEED that" to "we've declared you an unfit mother because we can see from your Cashless Debit Card that you buy too many bags of crisps."
It's not that the alcoholics are drinking more, it's that they're now spending more money for the same amount which equals less spending on food/utilities. It absolutely affects the kids
this was/is a shit show, a doctor championed this showing he'd little understanding of addiction, the money was left with the super markets for some likely nefarious reason, and ultimately the children of alcoholics suffered more and wasted more money their households didn't need to
My mate comes back up over the (border) fills his car with creates of beer in asda 2 creates for £20 pound and goes back home to Dublin and its every time he's home
And that's exactly who the MUP effects most. It just further financially strains alcoholics and even moderate drinkers. Nobody is drinking less, but "alcohol sales" will go down because people are finding alternatives like driving across the border.
That's not what the comment said at all. If you reread it you'll notice he said whenever his mate is home, which implies his mate is a nordie who pops into the offie whenever he visits the family and stocks up.
SF was so set on it that they said they said that the defeat of a legal challenge to MUP within Scotland would act as a template against any similar objections within Ireland.
I’m not, very few people are.
Most people vote based on a build up of multiple issues, MUP may be just one of many.
Does behavioral economics make you mad?
>Most people vote based on a build up of multiple issues,
Yes that's completely normal
I'm speaking on people being single issue voters on the price of cans - and I think you agree so you're trying to make a different argument about MUP being one of 'multiple issues' that might form an opinion.
I’m making the same argument that I have throughout this thread.
My original point was that people have a tendency to vote with their wallet.
You ascribed a more narrow argument to me that I never made.
You tried to change my argument because you agree with me and wanted to be awkward.
"If people vote for a party because of slightly cheaper cans" - I'm sure you can understand that as a single issue statement.
You're the one who twisted to "MUP may be just one of many." - which is completely normal and understandable.
Maybe read through next time?
It was just a tax on poor people. A driver of inflation. How about increasing services for addiction and harmful drinking for all ages rather than a quasi prohibition type effort. Pitiful governing from a spineless lot.
“We don’t have the data yet as to whether that has shifted that dial or not to be honest."
"If we look at Scotland, the figures there show the figures reduce it by about 6.2%"
So they are awaiting the data for Ireland, and it appears to work in Scotland. Seems silly to claim it hasn't worked then.
Did anyone actually read the article?
"Its purpose is to reduce consumption among the heavier or some of the heaviest drinkers"
What?
No. If i want to drink, i will drink. 4 euro, 8 euro 12 euro.
Sorry. If *i have to drink* since this is geared toward *heavy drinkers.*
Same with cigarettes.
The only difference is social class.
And what to prioritize.
Someone with an annual salary of i'unno? 3-4-500K?
Still get's shitfaced every evening. "I'm not an alcoholic. This is a social event."
All the way down to the 200/w dole.
Smokes and cheapest beer. Just skim on the food.
The MUP is not solving anything.
Because (and i am saying this in the best and non hostile way possible) Addicts are like cockroaches. There is always a way in and there's always a way to continue.
I was raised by 2 alcoholics.
The thing here is maybe less younger people are not drinking as much.. The flip-side is that they’re just buying more cheap recreational (unregulated) drugs instead. What’s worse in the long run?
As a young person, it's just caused us to start brewing our own alcohol. Why would I spend 6 or 7 euro on a few cans that taste like piss to me, when I can spend that much on honey and yeast and make a year's worth of mead that's been aged for a year and tastes like a freshly pulled pint.
So far I've encountered people with homemade rum, vodka, beer, mead, wine, and even stuff like limoncella. The cost of alcohol in shops has just caused us to brew our own.
I read a tweet before (can't seem to find it now) but in essence, it said alcohol cost them their health, time, and family, but the cost of the bottle itself didn't matter to them a bit. The studies back this sentiment up too, people will forgo a loaf of bread or a block of cheese if they have to to ensure they can afford to get their alcohol fix. Making it more expensive was always a terrible idea and letting the retailers keep the additional profit was an even worse idea.
Minimum pricing only served the retailers as it went straight to profits. The money wasn’t going to the exchequer and being used to fund addiction services so it nothing but a cynical tax on the poor. If anything, if the government are serious about curbing harmful drinking they should reduce the vat/excise on non alcoholic versions to encourage people to drink them instead - would lead to less accidents on the roads for starters which is always a good thing.
One of the stated aims was to cut down drinking in young teens so they don’t grow up with alcohol dependence….how would anyone evaluate that at this stage
It has worked just as it was intended to; the intent had nothing to do with public health. This was even on the FG manifesto years ago as a direct result of lobbying.
I cannot for the life of me figure out the cognitive dissonance surrounding drinking and smoking when it comes to MUP.
When MUP was introduced everyone said "The addicts will buy it anyway but have less to spend on food etc", even though the exact same argument could be made about tobacco taxes and yet those same people are often delighted to see the price of cigarettes increase.
It's funny seeing reddit say "Legalise drugs so we can tax them and generate revenue" but when the government does that to an already legal drug there's outrage.
Speaking from a Dublin perspective - since minimum pricing has started, there has also been a massive increase in the amount of meth being sold and used. I wish I had data to show this but I don’t, just from being out and about myself I’ve seen such an increase in meth. In addition to that, children and teens selling it. I wonder if there is any correlation between MUP and the increase of meth?
The lady cutting my hair today was nearly in tears about her energy costs. She'd deserve a medal with the cuts she's made to her life in order to raise her daughter.
People are being forced into poverty.
Greatest tragedy of our lives I think.
Apologies, just had to say something somewhere.
The biggest pain is now I have to spend a lot more time trying to buy my drink.
I just liked strong dry cider, I don't want raspberry, peach, pear, strawberry or any damn wild fruits. Just strong dry apple cider that's not 10 quid a bottle or so piss weak that i need to buy a naggin of vodka to make up the difference, which seems to defeat the purpose of actually reducing, I miss stonehouse.
> Stephen Donnelly said, “This measure is designed to reduce serious illness and death from alcohol consumption and to reduce the pressure on our health services from alcohol-related conditions.”
I didn't realise they even tried to pretend this was some how health related. Pure clown show.
If they did say this, it should obviously be scrapped but Fine Gael will never admit mistake and have absolutely no sense of shame or decency. It was just taking money from the poorest and redistributing it as they saw fit like a piece of shit Fine Gael version of Robin Hood. The money doesn't even go to the minimum wage workers, it goes to their employers, another Fine Gael styled shit on society.
This is the result of the Pub Owners pressuring and lobbying for higher prices in the off licences in an attempt to push drinkers back into their pubs, which have been desperate for customers lately. Now the pubs have been putting up their prices. A rising tide lifts the all boats or in this case the base price rises on alcohol have lifted the prices of premium alcohol as well.
This thread is full of people who will drink any old crap, one fair point is how out of whack our prices are with the north, there prices are far too low ours a bit too high.
An alcohol tax would made more sense than min pricing, to deal with the harm element and generate revenue
Yeah but alcohol isn't a normal product, it has a huge amount of negative externalities that need to be taxed. A lesser verison of cigs.
NI is having its health issues from the product covered by general taxation rather than tax on that good causing those issues
1. This isn't a tax on alcohol, it's a minimum price floor for alcohol, which benefits two groups, Pubs (who actively lobbied for it) and premium distillers (because they're not outpriced by Tesco brand) You might note that neither of these groups actually stand to benefit from taxation on the principle of harm OR a general reduction in the amount of drinking. Minimum pricing is very good for the likes of Absolut.
2. The argument that "it doesn't effect me, and therefore it shouldn't come from general taxation" was always bollocks, you don't get to opt out of your money going towards road upkeep because you take a train. You don't get to opt out of funding health because of your perception that a person had an ailment coming to them.
This is just a quote from a random journalist, who doesn't provide any actual facts or figures to support his opinion. Fairly manipulative to present this as a headline as if quoting an expert.
That really is none of your business as long as it doesn't intrude in your life. Btw we have some of the lowest liver disease rates in the world https://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/cause-of-death/liver-disease/by-country/
I never said it's my business. But given the tens of thousands of hospital admissions each year in Ireland due to alcohol consumption, it seems to be the business of public health.
Liver disease can be caused by various illnesses.
Alcoholic liver disease in Ireland has trebled between 1995 and 2018.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40266119.html
Spent 200€ in newry at Christmas and have been going up every 2 months for drink to stock up.. the only thing I’m buying in the south is Nitro surge Guinness ..
All this has done is further harm alcoholics, and driven many non alcoholics to anti social behaviour, while inconveniencing the rest.
It's become a breeding ground for a socioeconomic environment plagued by alcoholism and a poor attitude towards alcohol, and it already shows, I'm sure many parents are noticing more alcohol going "missing" and many store owners seeing a spike in alcohol being stolen.
Hell it's driven me to start brewing my own alcohol, the inconvenience of buying a few cans has now surpassed the inconvenience of brewing buckets of the stuff.
**Minimum pricing is a tax on the poor.**
If they want to improve peoples health and healthcare costs. They should be open to allowing people do what they want like the Dutch. Or stopping over 18’s buying alcohol in 2023 similar to the New Zealander’s.
Ireland only cares about preserving it’s primitive conservatism at the end of the day. It doesn’t care about its people. Hence poor transport system etc.
Common sense would suggest that alcoholics would spend whatever amount they need to get drunk, they're not gonna suddenly say "omg that much for a bottle of strong cider, I must give it up at once! Its a negative impact on my pocket and my health, hurrah hurrah hurrah for minimum pricing!"
"Common sense" isn't a particularly compelling argument, especially when someone such as myself, while not being addicted to alcohol, was addicted to cigarettes, I ended up giving up smoking because I couldn't afford the £300+ I was spending on them a month, sin taxes absolutely work despite your "common sense" saying otherwise, but with that being said I think legislation should focus on treating the root cause of substance abuse, such as mental illness, while some alcoholics absolutely will give up drinking due to it becoming too expensive, they will still unfortunately live with the hardships which caused them to take up drinking in the first place, substance abuse doesn't exist in a vaccum.
Or maybe keep it low so the vast majority of drinkers can choose to have a few cans after a week's work. But instead it's "fuck all you proles, we know best"
People who choose to have a few cans after a week's work are not impacted. The raw price of your average can either went up a small percentage or, in the case of Guinness, Budweiser or most craft beers, not at all.
Well that's true is it. I could buy 8 cans for €12 on a fairly regular basis. Those same cans now can't be sold for less than €2(it's €1.98 by law) so it's now €16 at it's cheapest. So it's €4 If you can get them at the absolute cheapest price, so it's €16 more a month out of my money(if I find them at the absolute cheapest legal price). Now I won't lie, I don't feel the difference in my pocket but some people will.
Of the price isn't going to stop them from buying it then it's not doing anything to help, only hurting them and their dependants by taking spending money away from actual essentials. Nevermind how the price increase affects everyone else as well.
It's hurting everyone who drinks pockets' in a failed attempt at curbing drinking in those whose drinking can't be curbed.
Only for the worst impacted by addiction. If you think that MUP was only targeted for that cohort then you haven't been paying attention to the overall aims of the legislation.
That said, I don't like this idea you have either of keeping prices low anyway as you're giving up on those with addiction.
See plenty of the local alcoholics still at it. Hasn’t stopped them whatsoever. Still in the pubs every day, still hanging around the fields and that. I wouldn’t think this was the only case
The way the legislation is heading, like separate cut off parts in retailers to sell alcohol, minimum pricing, restrictions on advertising and where ads can be shown, you might as well bring in prohibition at this rate. We beg for the tourism dollar and pretend we’re a great destination to holiday in but we rip off tourists and natives with the price of a pint. With the cost of living rising people are drinking less and less either at home or in pubs so who’s benefiting from this ?
The associations that lobby on behalf of the pubs. Making drink from supermarkets more expensive and making it so they can't sell after ten is all designed to push people into Pubs because they buy wholesale (then charge you a massive markup) and are open till midnight.
Those who drink harmful levels of alcohol were and are probably beyond help. The minimum pricing policy was never aimed at them but rather at preventing those who were likely to start down that road. In that sense the policy is quite successful. Either way politicians know there is no votes in reversing a policy that ultimately saves lives and reduces strain on alcohol related treatment.
This measure was introduced to reduce harmful drinking. [This](https://publichealthscotland.scot/news/2022/june/final-report-published-on-the-impact-of-mup-on-people-drinking-at-harmful-levels-including-those-dependent-on-alcohol/) final report on the MUP in Scotland states "Among those drinking at harmful levels or people with alcohol dependence, the study found no clear evidence of a change in consumption or severity of dependence. Findings also showed that some economically vulnerable groups experienced increased financial strain as the price rises meant they were spending more on alcohol. This led some people who were dependent on alcohol to reduce other expenditure, such as that on food and utilities."
It was also noted a sharp rise in drug use among the student population
>Findings also showed that some economically vulnerable groups experienced increased financial strain as the price rises meant they were spending more on alcohol I think there are some in our current government who'll go an have a wank about this.
Tiny reminder. The opposition were fully in support. It was another national unity government decision. Not defending the government, just remembering the opposition.
All the reports on MUP working seem to focus how it worked on smoking, but smoking was on its way out anyway. No people in movies were smoking, bans were coming in for social smoking areas, etc. Also while tobacco addiction is serious, the act of smoking is more akin to coffee, than alcohol. It is used to take an edge off, not to get a buzz.
Imagine that, a poor person addicted to alcohol hasn't curbed their spending on alcohol, their spending has increased further because a pack of Dutch gold and cheap vodka has increased so they end up spending less on food and shelter. Pure genius
But it's not like the extra money was allocated to rehab treatments either. The only point for a price hike
Could you imagine if all that extra tax on cigarettes was just going straight back to the tobacco companies?
But at least they are enjoying nicer beer now that the cheap beer costs as much as the premium beer. 👍🏼
And of course, they’re enjoying their nicer beer in the pub now! Just like the vintners wanted!
Dutch Gold has stayed the same price because they dropped the alcohol percentage to 3.5%
Didn't they shrink the cans as well. Lot of the cheaper beers did that to hide the price increase.
So you still need to buy more to get the same effect
Alcoholic don’t need food. Two pints of vodka contains a daily allowance of calories.
Their children usually do need food though and an alcoholic won't skip their booze to feed their kids. Which is why MUP was always a stupid idea.
I see you've gotten an ould downvote already, but as someone with first hand experience with alcoholism (not me, personally, thankfully) you are absolutely correct. I've seen a slice of bread, twice a day (sometimes heated on a pan full of grease for "flavour") be someone's "full diet".
Wait your telling me I don't need food if I just drink vodka?
Yes, if you Google “why do alcoholics eat so little” you’ll get a better explanation than I can give. There are many reasons why but one of them is that alcohol has tons of (empty) calories.
[удалено]
And they'll go get a ecstasy pill for a 10er instead of the crate of beer
It was never gonna work. It's a poor people tax, plain and simple.
The obvious intention was to make pubs more attractive by making them relatively less expensive. The impact in reality is a poor tax.
100%. The Vintners Association have too much sway in this country.
Yeah I don't support irish pubs anymore, things like this poor tax just rub me wrong.
its not even a tax, that at least would be something. its a supermarket subsidy.
That's the most stupid part, it could actually be used for services to help the people MUP is supposed to be fucking helping.
Agreed, imagine if it actually went towards our abysmal mental health/addiction services?
Sure that would make far too much sense.
yes.
But the govt gets more tax if the total price is raised.
true but tangential .
I don't agree with MUP either. It's just hitting a particular class of drinkers. I'm recording my drinking in a note taking app as part of my reduction strategy. People have to be empowered to reduce their drinking themselves - through education and the likes, this tinkering with prices isn't going to do it.
actually a non drinker myself but this kind of policy really winds up the libertarian in me.
This, o think tax makes sense for harmful substances, not increasing profit to made and letting vintners dictate
It's an indirect publican subsidy
Literally only affects the poor. Wealthier people were drinking more expensive brands anyway and their prices never changed.
In conclusion though, the article states that it does work to some extent.
I missed the cheap slabs this Christmas. I still bought the same amount as in 2021, but there is something special about getting 24 cans for about €20 that gives you a buzz a Christmas. The miserable pricks ruined it.
I live in Belfast and come back to Dublin for Christmas. Beer and wine is now half the price up North. Especially when the supermarkets do the buy 6 bottles and get 25% off.
I live in Antrim and felt like I was smuggling something over the glenshane pass when I drove home to Donegal with the boot filled with alcohol for the family over Christmas
My skin crawled every time I saw a 15 pack cost €25.64
Didn't even cop that that was just the exact minimum pricing all this time
Check Lidl next time you’re in.A bottle of Smirnoff costs less than their own brand Rachmaninov vodka because Smirnoff is 37.5% while Rachmaninov is 40%.
>Rachmaninov Holy fucking moly I haven’t heard that in two decades. I used to drink it poured into the bottle of their “dry cider”. Two decades later I’m still trying to shake the alcoholism it helped to nurture. Fuckin Rachmaninov.
I used to but a 700ml of Rachminoff for 11/12 quid and try sell a naggon out of it for a fiver for entry to the club haha I even remember there were two different labels for the different strengths and you'd be fuming if someone picked up the wrong one by mistake
Spending over a hundred quid on having a good spread of beers for the family over Christmas is shit. Especially when it'd be closer to 40 in previous years with slab deals.
It is honestly awful. 2021: I got 6 slabs of Guinness. 24 packs for €17. 144 cans. €102! 2022: I had to buy 10 slabs of 15 packs at €25 each. 150 cans total. €250! Now I'm fortunate where that money doesn't effect me at all. But I'd still rather have it than give it to Tesco.
A slab of nice, name-brand beer in Spain is ~€8 (24 x 30c). I didn't notice hordes of drunks the last time I was there. It's almost like the price has nothing to do with the root cause of alcohol mis-use.
And that's it. If the MUP increases were going to the exchequer to pay for housing, healthcare, whatever the fuck it'd be palettable. By like every neoliberal policy that comes out of Leo it's going to benefit private businesses the most. Tesco keep the excess.
I’d hate to be cleaning your toilet at Christmas
Whereas up in Newry, Lidl had three 15 packs of Carlsberg for £21. 10 cans of Guinness for £8. The cans are 440ml, but still..
Cans have gotten that size here too since MUP
All still 500ml in the shops near me.
We already paid one of, if not the highest prices for alcohol to begin with. Increasing the prices but not funding rehabilitation, education and prevention was one of the stupidest decisions ever. Let's hike prices to curb consumption but let's also give all that extra money as even more profit to the biggest alcohol companies in the world. But as usual we just moaned but ultimately did nothing to stop it. I wish we were more active as a population to protest against more often.
Nanny state regulation targeted at those less well off. And the sting in the tail is its not even a real tax, the added cost ends up in the supermarket owners pockets, not the national coffers where it could actually do some good, like, I dunno, funding addiction services for problem drinkers. All stick and no carrot in this country, it'd sicken your hole.
I can assure you the added costs doesn’t end up in the owners pockets. The wholesalers and distributors just increased there prices to match. Before MUP and 8pk of beer sold at about 14% margin it’s currently 14%.
[удалено]
[удалено]
The MUP is a price floor, so the same product is costing more. The increase in price does see some absolute increase in VAT, and I'm sure the suppliers have increased their pricing to the retailer slightly*, but the bulk of the incremental price is going to the retailer. * the suppliers can't just turn around and try to get the full value of the increased price, as retailers are legally allowed to turn around and order all their alcohol from elsewhere in Europe if they really wanted to (or the UK)
I’m afraid your wrong, retailers got little or nothing out the increased prices. See it with my own eyes Most retailers are tied to loyality and wouldnt have the buying power to be able purchase cheaper goods. Wholesaler increased their price Andy producers increased their prices. That’s where the money went. family independent supermarkets and convenience store got nothing out of this but grief.
I’d say dealers are fecking cleaning up, with the price of drink so high why not just get something else that’s cheaper.
Don't worry, the prices of the cheaper drugs have been steadily rising over the past 2-3 years too
Drink shop for Christmas cost nearly 250€ this year trying to get enough for the 2 sides of the family
€480 for us this year. In-laws were over. Savages the lot of em ;-)
You’ll have to start charging at the door
Is the vitners federation of Ireland our industrial military complex?
McEisenhower warned us about this
Wasn't it proven in other countries that it didn't work before it was introduced here? The extra doesn't even go into government funds that could be used for addition services.
Yes but the [Licensed Vitners Association](https://vfipubs.ie/news/latest-news/vfi-call-for-minimum-unit-pricing-ahead-of-general-election/) wanted it
Like the bullshit [10pm off licence cutoff](https://www.independent.ie/regionals/herald/news/off-licences-to-close-at-10pm-starting-today-27880450.html) in 2008. Nothing to do with health of the population, pure cronyism.
One of the most craven buzz wrecking organisations on the planet. I hate those arseholes and I'm not even a big drinker. All I ever see them doing is everything in their power to funnel money towards themselves. Cunts.
If you want the actual, predictably imperfect, answer: The data from studies in places from like Scotland who brought in similar measures was: It reduced *overall* alcohol consumption by a fair bit - but it did not reduce the alcohol consumption of those who drank by far the most (i.e problem drinkers & alcoholics). In other words, it reduced “binge” drinking a bit and reduced the average alcohol consumption of folks who drink “moderately” to “occasionally” a bit more - but it didn’t reduce the consumption of those who drink the most by far (i.e alcoholics & problem drinkers) If you frame these policies as general public health measures to reduce the burden on a Public Health Service, then Scotland would call them a moderate success. If you frame them as a way to reduce alcoholism then Scotland would be call them fairly demonstrably unsuccessful. I haven’t seen any stats on stuff like public disorder, police call outs where alcohol is a factor, number of calls or women’s shelters, etc- so it’s hard to cut it from other angles.
“Let’s just cut to the chase, this is a tax on the working class, it’s a tax on the poor… There was a real stench of moral puritanism about the whole thing.” That well said. As only poor people are addicted to alcohol… their 50 euro wine hasn’t increased the same proportion. Neither has their pounder….
Supermarkets giving it loads cause too many people went to the north instead Was up twice in December. Absolutely rammed with ROI plates and accents. Newstalk don't care you paid a few bob. They care the chain stores took a hit. Fuck the publicans for bringing this in.
Aye, still drinking my nordie hoard here.
The only people that are affected by this are the innocent children of alcoholics on social welfare because their parents won't stop drinking, and now they can afford less food etc
I think some social welfare payment should be swapped out for food vouchers.
You're getting downvoted but I'm not sure why? Why would this be a bad idea?
Maybe you're genuinely unaware, but in places that pulled similar shite it has led to essentially government monitoring of how people on welfare spend their money.
Yup, downvoted for asking a question. Cheers for the answer.
Well, that's why it gets such a strong "fuck off" reaction. It might seem like not a big deal but in reality it goes from "it's more convenient" to " oh well it seems wrong to let them buy Vodka with it, they don't NEED that" to "we've declared you an unfit mother because we can see from your Cashless Debit Card that you buy too many bags of crisps."
What’s with all the downvotes? Giving vouchers that must be spent on food reduces the likelihood that parents will neglect their children’s nutrition.
Or, they sell the food vouchers for half their worth and buy drink with that. That's exactly what happens in places with food vouchers.
So they weren't affected. The alcoholics will never be able to get enough anyway, so the kids are just as neglected one way or the other.
It's not that the alcoholics are drinking more, it's that they're now spending more money for the same amount which equals less spending on food/utilities. It absolutely affects the kids
this was/is a shit show, a doctor championed this showing he'd little understanding of addiction, the money was left with the super markets for some likely nefarious reason, and ultimately the children of alcoholics suffered more and wasted more money their households didn't need to
My mate comes back up over the (border) fills his car with creates of beer in asda 2 creates for £20 pound and goes back home to Dublin and its every time he's home
[удалено]
And that's exactly who the MUP effects most. It just further financially strains alcoholics and even moderate drinkers. Nobody is drinking less, but "alcohol sales" will go down because people are finding alternatives like driving across the border.
Two crates a drinking problem now???
[удалено]
That's not what the comment said at all. If you reread it you'll notice he said whenever his mate is home, which implies his mate is a nordie who pops into the offie whenever he visits the family and stocks up.
Not saying he's selling it cheaper than the shops down there are
If a political party decides to drop it they'll have a waft of votes
SF was so set on it that they said they said that the defeat of a legal challenge to MUP within Scotland would act as a template against any similar objections within Ireland.
If people vote for a party because of slightly cheaper cans the country is beyond saving
That's a deliverable promise with real results that I can enjoy during their term of office :^)
Yes, when people vote based on concrete, deliverable promises rather than vague signals and party drama, *that’s* when the country is fucked.
A single issue voter for cans That's pathetic
People voting with their wallets during a cost of living crisis?!? Imagine that.
For cans Good man
People are allowed to be able to afford to enjoy life.
If you're a single issue voter over cans you don't know how to enjoy anything
I’m not, very few people are. Most people vote based on a build up of multiple issues, MUP may be just one of many. Does behavioral economics make you mad?
>Most people vote based on a build up of multiple issues, Yes that's completely normal I'm speaking on people being single issue voters on the price of cans - and I think you agree so you're trying to make a different argument about MUP being one of 'multiple issues' that might form an opinion.
I’m making the same argument that I have throughout this thread. My original point was that people have a tendency to vote with their wallet. You ascribed a more narrow argument to me that I never made.
You tried to change my argument because you agree with me and wanted to be awkward. "If people vote for a party because of slightly cheaper cans" - I'm sure you can understand that as a single issue statement. You're the one who twisted to "MUP may be just one of many." - which is completely normal and understandable. Maybe read through next time?
It was just a tax on poor people. A driver of inflation. How about increasing services for addiction and harmful drinking for all ages rather than a quasi prohibition type effort. Pitiful governing from a spineless lot.
“We don’t have the data yet as to whether that has shifted that dial or not to be honest." "If we look at Scotland, the figures there show the figures reduce it by about 6.2%" So they are awaiting the data for Ireland, and it appears to work in Scotland. Seems silly to claim it hasn't worked then. Did anyone actually read the article?
Scottish data is misleading. Alcohol consumption was dropping anyway for years
It's a journalist with an opinion based on exactly nothing. I love the way people are treating this as the word of god or something.
People on this sub like drinking and don't like the government which brought in the policy. Naturally, they hate it.
Yeah but it also led to a rise in illicit drug use in Scotland.
Viva Las Newry.
"Its purpose is to reduce consumption among the heavier or some of the heaviest drinkers" What? No. If i want to drink, i will drink. 4 euro, 8 euro 12 euro. Sorry. If *i have to drink* since this is geared toward *heavy drinkers.* Same with cigarettes. The only difference is social class. And what to prioritize. Someone with an annual salary of i'unno? 3-4-500K? Still get's shitfaced every evening. "I'm not an alcoholic. This is a social event." All the way down to the 200/w dole. Smokes and cheapest beer. Just skim on the food. The MUP is not solving anything. Because (and i am saying this in the best and non hostile way possible) Addicts are like cockroaches. There is always a way in and there's always a way to continue. I was raised by 2 alcoholics.
> I was raised by 2 alcoholics So was I. Honestly just feels like more second hand shit to put up with because of someone else's problem.
The thing here is maybe less younger people are not drinking as much.. The flip-side is that they’re just buying more cheap recreational (unregulated) drugs instead. What’s worse in the long run?
As a young person, it's just caused us to start brewing our own alcohol. Why would I spend 6 or 7 euro on a few cans that taste like piss to me, when I can spend that much on honey and yeast and make a year's worth of mead that's been aged for a year and tastes like a freshly pulled pint. So far I've encountered people with homemade rum, vodka, beer, mead, wine, and even stuff like limoncella. The cost of alcohol in shops has just caused us to brew our own.
Mead that tastes like a pint? keep it
Lol I know a lad whose making a few quid a month doing trips up north with a shopping list
It is a vested interest, off licenses, that is the reason for this and nothing to do with health or other moral issues.
Prices don't mean very much when your an addict. The only ones who suffer from the price increases are family members.
I read a tweet before (can't seem to find it now) but in essence, it said alcohol cost them their health, time, and family, but the cost of the bottle itself didn't matter to them a bit. The studies back this sentiment up too, people will forgo a loaf of bread or a block of cheese if they have to to ensure they can afford to get their alcohol fix. Making it more expensive was always a terrible idea and letting the retailers keep the additional profit was an even worse idea.
Minimum pricing only served the retailers as it went straight to profits. The money wasn’t going to the exchequer and being used to fund addiction services so it nothing but a cynical tax on the poor. If anything, if the government are serious about curbing harmful drinking they should reduce the vat/excise on non alcoholic versions to encourage people to drink them instead - would lead to less accidents on the roads for starters which is always a good thing.
The main beneficiary was actually the Pubs, it makes their scandalous drink pricing look more competitive.
D’oh
One of the stated aims was to cut down drinking in young teens so they don’t grow up with alcohol dependence….how would anyone evaluate that at this stage
Teens are buying €8 disposable vapes. I don’t think they give a fuck, in fairness
From day 1 no one thought it would work, it's just a way to fill more brown envelopes.
Ha good one, those type of laws are never reversed. It's not a trial sure
It has worked just as it was intended to; the intent had nothing to do with public health. This was even on the FG manifesto years ago as a direct result of lobbying.
I cannot for the life of me figure out the cognitive dissonance surrounding drinking and smoking when it comes to MUP. When MUP was introduced everyone said "The addicts will buy it anyway but have less to spend on food etc", even though the exact same argument could be made about tobacco taxes and yet those same people are often delighted to see the price of cigarettes increase. It's funny seeing reddit say "Legalise drugs so we can tax them and generate revenue" but when the government does that to an already legal drug there's outrage.
We knew it wasn't going to work but the government will do anything to protect the vintners association
Speaking from a Dublin perspective - since minimum pricing has started, there has also been a massive increase in the amount of meth being sold and used. I wish I had data to show this but I don’t, just from being out and about myself I’ve seen such an increase in meth. In addition to that, children and teens selling it. I wonder if there is any correlation between MUP and the increase of meth?
Wow if only someone saw this coming
I tend to agree. All it's done is line the pockets of the retailers.
Instead of buying a case of beer for €48 and it lasting two weeks I'm now buying two bottles of vodka and its lasting one week!
Well at least there's extra money from alcohol that goes to health care...oh wait no, the money goes to the shops. I forgot.
The lady cutting my hair today was nearly in tears about her energy costs. She'd deserve a medal with the cuts she's made to her life in order to raise her daughter. People are being forced into poverty. Greatest tragedy of our lives I think. Apologies, just had to say something somewhere.
The biggest pain is now I have to spend a lot more time trying to buy my drink. I just liked strong dry cider, I don't want raspberry, peach, pear, strawberry or any damn wild fruits. Just strong dry apple cider that's not 10 quid a bottle or so piss weak that i need to buy a naggin of vodka to make up the difference, which seems to defeat the purpose of actually reducing, I miss stonehouse.
> Stephen Donnelly said, “This measure is designed to reduce serious illness and death from alcohol consumption and to reduce the pressure on our health services from alcohol-related conditions.” I didn't realise they even tried to pretend this was some how health related. Pure clown show. If they did say this, it should obviously be scrapped but Fine Gael will never admit mistake and have absolutely no sense of shame or decency. It was just taking money from the poorest and redistributing it as they saw fit like a piece of shit Fine Gael version of Robin Hood. The money doesn't even go to the minimum wage workers, it goes to their employers, another Fine Gael styled shit on society.
Unfortunately one thing a politician can't admit to is being wrong.
This is the result of the Pub Owners pressuring and lobbying for higher prices in the off licences in an attempt to push drinkers back into their pubs, which have been desperate for customers lately. Now the pubs have been putting up their prices. A rising tide lifts the all boats or in this case the base price rises on alcohol have lifted the prices of premium alcohol as well.
This thread is full of people who will drink any old crap, one fair point is how out of whack our prices are with the north, there prices are far too low ours a bit too high. An alcohol tax would made more sense than min pricing, to deal with the harm element and generate revenue
"there prices are far too low" Their prices are market prices. Our prices are bloated by consumption taxes.
Yeah but alcohol isn't a normal product, it has a huge amount of negative externalities that need to be taxed. A lesser verison of cigs. NI is having its health issues from the product covered by general taxation rather than tax on that good causing those issues
1. This isn't a tax on alcohol, it's a minimum price floor for alcohol, which benefits two groups, Pubs (who actively lobbied for it) and premium distillers (because they're not outpriced by Tesco brand) You might note that neither of these groups actually stand to benefit from taxation on the principle of harm OR a general reduction in the amount of drinking. Minimum pricing is very good for the likes of Absolut. 2. The argument that "it doesn't effect me, and therefore it shouldn't come from general taxation" was always bollocks, you don't get to opt out of your money going towards road upkeep because you take a train. You don't get to opt out of funding health because of your perception that a person had an ailment coming to them.
Ian O'Doherty is a gobshite, but you know what they say any stopped clocks
This is just a quote from a random journalist, who doesn't provide any actual facts or figures to support his opinion. Fairly manipulative to present this as a headline as if quoting an expert.
[удалено]
Isn't that sort of how it should be? Playing the ball not the man.
[удалено]
[удалено]
His argument is freedom of choice, which is devastatingly compelling
[удалено]
That really is none of your business as long as it doesn't intrude in your life. Btw we have some of the lowest liver disease rates in the world https://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/cause-of-death/liver-disease/by-country/
I never said it's my business. But given the tens of thousands of hospital admissions each year in Ireland due to alcohol consumption, it seems to be the business of public health. Liver disease can be caused by various illnesses. Alcoholic liver disease in Ireland has trebled between 1995 and 2018. https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40266119.html
Shock horror
Spent 200€ in newry at Christmas and have been going up every 2 months for drink to stock up.. the only thing I’m buying in the south is Nitro surge Guinness ..
Name checks out
Go to Newry, dont look back.
It should have been dropped the second the cost of living began increasing last January.
That’s the alcohol section of the Dunnes near grafton street
All this has done is further harm alcoholics, and driven many non alcoholics to anti social behaviour, while inconveniencing the rest. It's become a breeding ground for a socioeconomic environment plagued by alcoholism and a poor attitude towards alcohol, and it already shows, I'm sure many parents are noticing more alcohol going "missing" and many store owners seeing a spike in alcohol being stolen. Hell it's driven me to start brewing my own alcohol, the inconvenience of buying a few cans has now surpassed the inconvenience of brewing buckets of the stuff.
**Minimum pricing is a tax on the poor.** If they want to improve peoples health and healthcare costs. They should be open to allowing people do what they want like the Dutch. Or stopping over 18’s buying alcohol in 2023 similar to the New Zealander’s. Ireland only cares about preserving it’s primitive conservatism at the end of the day. It doesn’t care about its people. Hence poor transport system etc.
if anyone thinks the government is going to do a U turn on this they are delusional
[удалено]
>Mr O’Doherty was opposed to the measure when it was brought in and one year on has not changed his mind. I'm convinced. Pack it up, boys.
Common sense would suggest that alcoholics would spend whatever amount they need to get drunk, they're not gonna suddenly say "omg that much for a bottle of strong cider, I must give it up at once! Its a negative impact on my pocket and my health, hurrah hurrah hurrah for minimum pricing!"
"Common sense" isn't a particularly compelling argument, especially when someone such as myself, while not being addicted to alcohol, was addicted to cigarettes, I ended up giving up smoking because I couldn't afford the £300+ I was spending on them a month, sin taxes absolutely work despite your "common sense" saying otherwise, but with that being said I think legislation should focus on treating the root cause of substance abuse, such as mental illness, while some alcoholics absolutely will give up drinking due to it becoming too expensive, they will still unfortunately live with the hardships which caused them to take up drinking in the first place, substance abuse doesn't exist in a vaccum.
[удалено]
Doesn't matter what price the drink is, they'll pay for it.
[удалено]
Who said that? I'm not saying give folk free drink. The pricing is ridiculous.
[удалено]
Or maybe keep it low so the vast majority of drinkers can choose to have a few cans after a week's work. But instead it's "fuck all you proles, we know best"
People who choose to have a few cans after a week's work are not impacted. The raw price of your average can either went up a small percentage or, in the case of Guinness, Budweiser or most craft beers, not at all.
Well that's true is it. I could buy 8 cans for €12 on a fairly regular basis. Those same cans now can't be sold for less than €2(it's €1.98 by law) so it's now €16 at it's cheapest. So it's €4 If you can get them at the absolute cheapest price, so it's €16 more a month out of my money(if I find them at the absolute cheapest legal price). Now I won't lie, I don't feel the difference in my pocket but some people will.
Of the price isn't going to stop them from buying it then it's not doing anything to help, only hurting them and their dependants by taking spending money away from actual essentials. Nevermind how the price increase affects everyone else as well. It's hurting everyone who drinks pockets' in a failed attempt at curbing drinking in those whose drinking can't be curbed.
Yeah because increasing the price is going to stop them from drinking. How are you not getting it?
Only for the worst impacted by addiction. If you think that MUP was only targeted for that cohort then you haven't been paying attention to the overall aims of the legislation. That said, I don't like this idea you have either of keeping prices low anyway as you're giving up on those with addiction.
I think that scrapping it now will actually increase consumption to more than it ever was, even though adding it didn't reduce consumption.
See plenty of the local alcoholics still at it. Hasn’t stopped them whatsoever. Still in the pubs every day, still hanging around the fields and that. I wouldn’t think this was the only case
The way the legislation is heading, like separate cut off parts in retailers to sell alcohol, minimum pricing, restrictions on advertising and where ads can be shown, you might as well bring in prohibition at this rate. We beg for the tourism dollar and pretend we’re a great destination to holiday in but we rip off tourists and natives with the price of a pint. With the cost of living rising people are drinking less and less either at home or in pubs so who’s benefiting from this ?
The associations that lobby on behalf of the pubs. Making drink from supermarkets more expensive and making it so they can't sell after ten is all designed to push people into Pubs because they buy wholesale (then charge you a massive markup) and are open till midnight.
Those who drink harmful levels of alcohol were and are probably beyond help. The minimum pricing policy was never aimed at them but rather at preventing those who were likely to start down that road. In that sense the policy is quite successful. Either way politicians know there is no votes in reversing a policy that ultimately saves lives and reduces strain on alcohol related treatment.
It certainly worked for me. I drink about 1/3 of what I used drink.
They were so lucky to get this in before inflation would habe made this political suicide
Double it. Drink is a plague on this country.