|
U-Know! Forum » Just heard on the radio... |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
Ziggypop 300 posts |
Edited Sep 30, 2009, 19:59
Sep 30, 2009, 19:55
|
||
|
I truly believe that every "caring" policy where raising taxation is concerned is a smokescreen and is aimed at clawing money back off of the poorest in society..Cynical? well mabey I am. I'd like to point at another piece of legislation that came in a couple of years ago to show my point..It was to help the poor from being taken advantage of by slum landlords (oh yeah they do know alot about slum landlords as quite a few of them are slum landlords) Briefly, they were saying that people were being crammed into housing and made a law that only 4 people could share a bathroom and kitchen if there were more than 4 people then the others had to leave or the landlord would be fined. Wow how caring...Sounds like they are really looking after people. Now here's my point- No one lives like that unless their finance dictates they do. The landlords charged the same rent on the house so instead of splitting the extortionate rent with say six people 4 people paid more. The people that had to leave the house were not offered any help or other accomodtion so some became homeless.. Others(in fours)went into the worst properties.. Who won? the slum landlords..
|
|||
Squid Tempest 8761 posts |
Sep 30, 2009, 20:20
|
||
|
duckbreath wrote: Your views seems crazy to me - the evidence suggests hundreds of lives, in the most deprived parts of the country, will be saved by this - what are they supposed to do? http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2009/09/28081626 The government has said it wants to bring down the alcohol-death rate which is six times the national average and puts Scotland in a bad light every time it is repeated in the papers and on tv. The government is obvioulsy desperate to lose the sick man of europe image. I don't think the libertarian and social conspiracy arguments will be taken very seriously, or hold much water in this case. And so the politicians drink a toast, in champagne naturally, to clawing back more cash off the poor while appearing righteous at the same time. A masterstroke. Yours, Mr Cynical
|
|||
sanshee 1080 posts |
Edited Sep 30, 2009, 20:32
Sep 30, 2009, 20:31
|
||
|
So you can't see any contradiction in the SNP sending out the 'health message' through sponsoring football ('Active Nation Scottish Cup' - I mean purlease), a national sport which wouldn't exist without rather visible alcohol sponsorship? Seen any Rangers/Celtic shirts lately? You still think the SNP do 'joined up thinking'? Me, I think it's indicitive of everything that's wrong with this lot. Salmond's agenda is to be the King of Scotland. He wants his name daubed everywhre and anywhere possible. He's a power merchant of the worst kind He's a bigot and he gleefully accepts donations from this pile of shit. http://usproxy.bbc.com/2/hi/uk_news/612409.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6462119.stm I'm actually scared at the prospect of them ever getting anywhere. You still think they're an ok lot? Not me. x
|
|||
|
duckbreath 254 posts |
Edited Sep 30, 2009, 21:41
Sep 30, 2009, 21:40
|
||
|
What has the Scottish Government to do with who sponsors Rangers and Celtic? I never said I thought they were an ok lot - Have a go at them for Souter hypocrisy, Donald Trump etc fine by me... But -independent- researchers say linking alcohol units to price will reduce health inequality. Very straightforward and unsurprising finding that raising the price decreases demand. The Scottish government doesn't sell booze so won't see any of the profits, they don't get to keep the extra tax which will go to the UK treasury who won't alter the Scottish allocation based on this. Choose to believe a conspiracy if you want but the facts don't support it.
|
|||
|
Ziggypop 300 posts |
Edited Sep 30, 2009, 21:45
Sep 30, 2009, 21:42
|
||
|
Squid Tempest wrote: duckbreath wrote: Your views seems crazy to me - the evidence suggests hundreds of lives, in the most deprived parts of the country, will be saved by this - what are they supposed to do? http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2009/09/28081626 The government has said it wants to bring down the alcohol-death rate which is six times the national average and puts Scotland in a bad light every time it is repeated in the papers and on tv. The government is obvioulsy desperate to lose the sick man of europe image. I don't think the libertarian and social conspiracy arguments will be taken very seriously, or hold much water in this case. And so the politicians drink a toast, in champagne naturally, to clawing back more cash off the poor while appearing righteous at the same time. A masterstroke. Yours, Mr Cynical It's interesting to see that "not all alcohol will be affected" Yeah the Champagne that they drink would be my guess... I'm still very interested to know how they reach such results..How they work these stats out..or do we just take what they tell us on .gov sites as fact? I
|
|||
|
duckbreath 254 posts |
Edited Sep 30, 2009, 22:01
Sep 30, 2009, 22:00
|
||
|
My understanding is that all alcohol will be affected because there will be a minimum price per unit but that some drinks in reality won't be affected by this because they already are more expensive than the proposed unit price minimum. I think it will mostly affect high-alcohol content cheap booze like tonic wine, super strength lager, cheap spirits etc. Might also affect some discount deals. This is the actual report where they describe the modelling. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2009/09/24131201/4
|
|||
|
sanshee 1080 posts |
Edited Oct 01, 2009, 15:24
Oct 01, 2009, 15:20
|
||
|
duckbreath wrote: What has the Scottish Government to do with who sponsors Rangers and Celtic? Eh, the fact that they have invested 2m in 'forwarding the health message' through amongst others Rangers and Celtic (as I've already illustrated) whose sponsors are Carling. They make 'alcohol'. Doh! duckbreath wrote: I never said I thought they were an ok lot - Have a go at them for Souter hypocrisy, Donald Trump etc fine by me... But -independent- researchers say linking alcohol units to price will reduce health inequality. Based on one University study, just like the existence of WMD was. duckbreath wrote: Choose to believe a conspiracy if you want but the facts don't support it. Conspiracy? I never said that. Facts? What facts? Ever heard the phrase lies, damn lies and statistics? Anyway, let's make this the new way to deal with anyone with any dependancy (the main target here surely) - charge em more for it, Wonderful thinking. Increase the misery coz they deserve it, right? Don't even bother with things like increasing support services, just make em pay more, show em the hard way. When a hardened addict can no longer afford their fix, what do they do usually? Smart one, crime may go up now. And at the same time when it comes to violece realted stuff the govt gets off the hook in doing its actual job - policing the streets better (for trouble makers). Anyway, the Souter thing ain't just about hypocrisy, it's the kind of people Salmond was to be associated with. Dangerous to say the least. And yes the Trump thing, now bullying people into giving up their homes to make way for em all to play f*cking high end toff golf. And you seen the state of Edinburgh recently? They're talking about clearing away all the Tram 'works' for Hogmanay then bringing it all out again!! Incompetent beyond. x
|
|||
|
Squid Tempest 8761 posts |
Oct 01, 2009, 15:29
|
||
|
sanshee wrote: duckbreath wrote: I never said I thought they were an ok lot - Have a go at them for Souter hypocrisy, Donald Trump etc fine by me... But -independent- researchers say linking alcohol units to price will reduce health inequality. Based on one University study, just like the existence of WMD was. duckbreath wrote: Choose to believe a conspiracy if you want but the facts don't support it. Conspiracy? I never said that. Facts? What facts? Ever heard the phrase lies, damn lies and statistics? Anyway, let's make this the new way to deal with anyone with any dependancy (the main target here surely) - charge em more for it, Wonderful thinking. Increase the misery coz they deserve it, right? Don't even bother with things like increasing support services, just make em pay more, show em the hard way. When a hardened addict can no longer afford their fix, what do they do usually? Smart one, crime may go up now. And at the same time when it comes to violece realted stuff the govt gets off the hook in doing its actual job - policing the streets better (for trouble makers). Well put sanshee, that pretty much sums up what I think about it too.
|
|||
|
duckbreath 254 posts |
Edited Oct 01, 2009, 20:43
Oct 01, 2009, 20:37
|
||
|
sanshee wrote: duckbreath wrote: What has the Scottish Government to do with who sponsors Rangers and Celtic? Eh, the fact that they have invested 2m in 'forwarding the health message' through amongst others Rangers and Celtic (as I've already illustrated) whose sponsors are Carling. They make 'alcohol'. Doh! So they are hypocrits because they sponsor a competition which contains some teams who have taken sponsorship cash from breweries? A bit tenuous? Motherwell FC are sponsored by a DIY firm you'll be accusing the government of being prejudiced against the homeless next. sanshee wrote: duckbreath wrote: I never said I thought they were an ok lot - Have a go at them for Souter hypocrisy, Donald Trump etc fine by me... But -independent- researchers say linking alcohol units to price will reduce health inequality. Based on one University study, just like the existence of WMD was. Guess I walked into that one - you're right and a wonderful reason to discredit any research evidence that doesn't support you from now onwards. 'Tis conspiracy theory reasoning. Ignore the report just bring up WMD. It isn't one study by the way. I notice you haven't actually quoted any other counter-evidence, just the late night radio phone in stuff you've said about how it's bound to push up crime because the alcoholics will be forced to steal to pay for their drink. The effects on crime were part of the research btw.
|
|||
|
sanshee 1080 posts |
Oct 02, 2009, 14:27
|
||
|
Ok, we'll have to just disagree. Thanks for the barny anyway. Got my bottle for tommorrow this morning (got a babysiiter - YES!), went shopping after I dropped the wean off. Had to hang around for an hour mind, seeing as I'd be a crazy thug/mental case to want to buy the stuff 'before' 10am. ;-) x
|
| Pages: 6 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| U-Know! Forum Index | |
