Scotland Hopes to Implement Minimum Unit Pricing on Alcohol Sales

[channonc 466]

I'm all for regulating controlled substances to a degree. I think purity levels should be disclosed and in some cases capped to prevent needless deaths. I'm also ok with taxing these things to a degree, they aren't needed for everyday life. Those taxes could then (and should be in my opinion) directed into the healthcare system to help defraying the costs of healthcare due to alcoholism and drug abuse.

That being said, I lived for a decade in a county in Maryland where the County, not the state, controlled the alcohol and liquor. Alcohol (beer, wine, spirits) had to be bought from the county liquor store. The county was the only entity allowed to buy from the distributors. Yes, this included bars/restaurants. Bars and restaurants were stuck with the county options for what to sell and at what prices. In otherwords, the restaurant was buying the six pack from the county liquor store at the same price as I was. In practice, this became an absurd way to do business. Chain grocery stores, drug stores, etc. were prohibited from selling alcohol of any kind except at one store location in the County. Mom and pop grocery stores could buy beer/wine from the county and resell it, as long as they only had one store location. Prices were crazy high, and all it did was force people to drive into DC or VA to make alcohol purchases at a much cheaper rate and with a much wider selection.

I'm not convinced the above proposal does anything to curb alcohol abuse other than to create more black markets. I think the focus should instead be on regulating consumer awareness. For example, I support having ABV % on all labels, and support efforts to make the standard food labeling mandatory on alcohol labels as well. I think I should know what I am consuming, how many calories it is, and ingredients. It may not change my buying habits, but I think it is healthy all around for consumers to be well educated about products they purchase.

[aujeff11 6,243]

I'm all for regulating controlled substances to a degree. I think purity levels should be disclosed and in some cases capped to prevent needless deaths. I'm also ok with taxing these things to a degree, they aren't needed for everyday life. Those taxes could then (and should be in my opinion) directed into the healthcare system to help defraying the costs of healthcare due to alcoholism and drug abuse.

That being said, I lived for a decade in a county in Maryland where the County, not the state, controlled the alcohol and liquor. Alcohol (beer, wine, spirits) had to be bought from the county liquor store. The county was the only entity allowed to buy from the distributors. Yes, this included bars/restaurants. Bars and restaurants were stuck with the county options for what to sell and at what prices. In otherwords, the restaurant was buying the six pack from the county liquor store at the same price as I was. In practice, this became an absurd way to do business. Chain grocery stores, drug stores, etc. were prohibited from selling alcohol of any kind except at one store location in the County. Mom and pop grocery stores could buy beer/wine from the county and resell it, as long as they only had one store location. Prices were crazy high, and all it did was force people to drive into DC or VA to make alcohol purchases at a much cheaper rate and with a much wider selection.

I'm not convinced the above proposal does anything to curb alcohol abuse other than to create more black markets. I think the focus should instead be on regulating consumer awareness. For example, I support having ABV % on all labels, and support efforts to make the standard food labeling mandatory on alcohol labels as well. I think I should know what I am consuming, how many calories it is, and ingredients. It may not change my buying habits, but I think it is healthy all around for consumers to be well educated about products they purchase.

More educational awareness isn't enough to stop heavy drinkers from drinking like a fish. They don't care about ingredients and labels. Let's be realistic about that. The heavy drinkers have to be persuaded to not drink via other means. Raising the price floor is a damn good start. Adding increasing additional taxes as the alcohol content level goes up is another way, or could be used in combination.

[maxwere 82]

I'm all for regulating controlled substances to a degree...

Does that count as a double negative?

[channonc 466]

I'm all for regulating controlled substances to a degree. I think purity levels should be disclosed and in some cases capped to prevent needless deaths. I'm also ok with taxing these things to a degree, they aren't needed for everyday life. Those taxes could then (and should be in my opinion) directed into the healthcare system to help defraying the costs of healthcare due to alcoholism and drug abuse.

That being said, I lived for a decade in a county in Maryland where the County, not the state, controlled the alcohol and liquor. Alcohol (beer, wine, spirits) had to be bought from the county liquor store. The county was the only entity allowed to buy from the distributors. Yes, this included bars/restaurants. Bars and restaurants were stuck with the county options for what to sell and at what prices. In otherwords, the restaurant was buying the six pack from the county liquor store at the same price as I was. In practice, this became an absurd way to do business. Chain grocery stores, drug stores, etc. were prohibited from selling alcohol of any kind except at one store location in the County. Mom and pop grocery stores could buy beer/wine from the county and resell it, as long as they only had one store location. Prices were crazy high, and all it did was force people to drive into DC or VA to make alcohol purchases at a much cheaper rate and with a much wider selection.

I'm not convinced the above proposal does anything to curb alcohol abuse other than to create more black markets. I think the focus should instead be on regulating consumer awareness. For example, I support having ABV % on all labels, and support efforts to make the standard food labeling mandatory on alcohol labels as well. I think I should know what I am consuming, how many calories it is, and ingredients. It may not change my buying habits, but I think it is healthy all around for consumers to be well educated about products they purchase.

More educational awareness isn't enough to stop heavy drinkers from drinking like a fish. They don't care about ingredients and labels. Let's be realistic about that. The heavy drinkers have to be persuaded to not drink via other means. Raising the price floor is a damn good start. Adding increasing additional taxes as the alcohol content level goes up is another way, or could be used in combination.

But like drug addicts, heavy drinkers will not stop drinking because it gets more expensive. Black markets become more prevalent, homebrews and bootleggers increase, and it becomes a recipe for other organized crime. We have seen this happen time and again with other vices. We can look to Alaska to teach us some of these lessons involving booze.

Perils of Prohibition: Alaska's Failed War on Booze

I'm all for regulating controlled substances to a degree...

Does that count as a double negative?

Indeed it is.

[aujeff11 6,243]

I'm all for regulating controlled substances to a degree. I think purity levels should be disclosed and in some cases capped to prevent needless deaths. I'm also ok with taxing these things to a degree, they aren't needed for everyday life. Those taxes could then (and should be in my opinion) directed into the healthcare system to help defraying the costs of healthcare due to alcoholism and drug abuse.

That being said, I lived for a decade in a county in Maryland where the County, not the state, controlled the alcohol and liquor. Alcohol (beer, wine, spirits) had to be bought from the county liquor store. The county was the only entity allowed to buy from the distributors. Yes, this included bars/restaurants. Bars and restaurants were stuck with the county options for what to sell and at what prices. In otherwords, the restaurant was buying the six pack from the county liquor store at the same price as I was. In practice, this became an absurd way to do business. Chain grocery stores, drug stores, etc. were prohibited from selling alcohol of any kind except at one store location in the County. Mom and pop grocery stores could buy beer/wine from the county and resell it, as long as they only had one store location. Prices were crazy high, and all it did was force people to drive into DC or VA to make alcohol purchases at a much cheaper rate and with a much wider selection.

I'm not convinced the above proposal does anything to curb alcohol abuse other than to create more black markets. I think the focus should instead be on regulating consumer awareness. For example, I support having ABV % on all labels, and support efforts to make the standard food labeling mandatory on alcohol labels as well. I think I should know what I am consuming, how many calories it is, and ingredients. It may not change my buying habits, but I think it is healthy all around for consumers to be well educated about products they purchase.

More educational awareness isn't enough to stop heavy drinkers from drinking like a fish. They don't care about ingredients and labels. Let's be realistic about that. The heavy drinkers have to be persuaded to not drink via other means. Raising the price floor is a damn good start. Adding increasing additional taxes as the alcohol content level goes up is another way, or could be used in combination.

But like drug addicts, heavy drinkers will not stop drinking because it gets more expensive. Black markets become more prevalent, homebrews and bootleggers increase, and it becomes a recipe for other organized crime. We have seen this happen time and again with other vices. We can look to Alaska to teach us some of these lessons involving booze.

Perils of Prohibition: Alaska's Failed War on Booze

I'm all for regulating controlled substances to a degree...

Does that count as a double negative?

Indeed it is.

Who would go to the black market for such a small difference? If the price floor is 8 dollars. Do you really think the heavy drinkers are going to start making their own( which costs more money than 8 dollars) just because their Busch light went from 6 to 8 or whatever? There would not be an epidemic of crime. The beauty of the price floor is that it only affects the cheapest and strongest drinks. Unlike adding taxes, the price floor would only target the heaviest drinkers, and the cheapest beverages, allowing the moderate drinkers to be mostly left alone.

[channonc 466]

I'm all for regulating controlled substances to a degree. I think purity levels should be disclosed and in some cases capped to prevent needless deaths. I'm also ok with taxing these things to a degree, they aren't needed for everyday life. Those taxes could then (and should be in my opinion) directed into the healthcare system to help defraying the costs of healthcare due to alcoholism and drug abuse.

That being said, I lived for a decade in a county in Maryland where the County, not the state, controlled the alcohol and liquor. Alcohol (beer, wine, spirits) had to be bought from the county liquor store. The county was the only entity allowed to buy from the distributors. Yes, this included bars/restaurants. Bars and restaurants were stuck with the county options for what to sell and at what prices. In otherwords, the restaurant was buying the six pack from the county liquor store at the same price as I was. In practice, this became an absurd way to do business. Chain grocery stores, drug stores, etc. were prohibited from selling alcohol of any kind except at one store location in the County. Mom and pop grocery stores could buy beer/wine from the county and resell it, as long as they only had one store location. Prices were crazy high, and all it did was force people to drive into DC or VA to make alcohol purchases at a much cheaper rate and with a much wider selection.

I'm not convinced the above proposal does anything to curb alcohol abuse other than to create more black markets. I think the focus should instead be on regulating consumer awareness. For example, I support having ABV % on all labels, and support efforts to make the standard food labeling mandatory on alcohol labels as well. I think I should know what I am consuming, how many calories it is, and ingredients. It may not change my buying habits, but I think it is healthy all around for consumers to be well educated about products they purchase.

More educational awareness isn't enough to stop heavy drinkers from drinking like a fish. They don't care about ingredients and labels. Let's be realistic about that. The heavy drinkers have to be persuaded to not drink via other means. Raising the price floor is a damn good start. Adding increasing additional taxes as the alcohol content level goes up is another way, or could be used in combination.

But like drug addicts, heavy drinkers will not stop drinking because it gets more expensive. Black markets become more prevalent, homebrews and bootleggers increase, and it becomes a recipe for other organized crime. We have seen this happen time and again with other vices. We can look to Alaska to teach us some of these lessons involving booze.

Perils of Prohibition: Alaska's Failed War on Booze

I'm all for regulating controlled substances to a degree...

Does that count as a double negative?

Indeed it is.

Who would go to the black market for such a small difference? If the price floor is 8 dollars. Do you really think the heavy drinkers are going to start making their own( which costs more money than 8 dollars) just because their Busch light went from 6 to 8 or whatever? There would not be an epidemic of crime. The beauty of the price floor is that it only affects the cheapest and strongest drinks. Unlike adding taxes, the price floor would only target the heaviest drinkers, and the cheapest beverages, allowing leaving the moderate drinkers to be mostly left alone.

I think it becomes a slippery slope. Once the floor is created, then there is always someone advocating to increase it, make it more prohibitive, etc.