Poverty in Ireland

odyssey06 said:
It's not ridiculous. It's not crazy. What's wrong with drinking at home??? I think you are the one with the problem, not the person picking up a bottle of wine to go with dinner.
Click to expand...
We can buy wine in Petrol Stations. Alcohol is an addictive substance and probably has more of a detrimental impact on society than all other drugs and addictive substances. You should have to go to an off licence to buy alcohol just as you should have to go to a tobacconist to buy tobacco. When seeking to overcome addiction the ubiquitous availability of the substance you are addicted to is a major factor in failure. Anyone who has ever been on a diet will know it's much harder to not eat the crisps in the press than the crisps in the shop.

odyssey06 said:
The proposition that we can cure poverty through these kind of restrictions of alcohol has no merit in any way shape or form.
Click to expand...
"Poverty" in the context of this discussion is a catch-all term used to describe a basket of issues which feed into each other and result in material and social deprivation.
The contention is that most of the material deprivation is a symptom of the social deprivation and the root causes include low educational outcomes, addiction, and a host of other factors. This results in a general inability to engage with, and therefore put value into and get value out of, mainstream society. The consequences for mainstream society is a social and economic ball and chain and the knowledge that a cohort of our fellow citizens are failing and being fail by societal norms.

Rather than sustaining that I think we should fix it. I contend that only throwing money at it not only doesn't work but in the longer terms is worse than doing nothing in that it helps to perpetuate the cycle. We need more carrot and more stick. Yes, it is social engineering but that's the function of a government and most of our taxation system.
Alcohol abuse is one of the many issues, nobody is suggesting otherwise, but we have to tackle them all.
 
odyssey06 said:
We need to normalise alcohol to show teenagers how to use it properly.
Not demonise it. Demonising it leads 16 year olds getting obliterated drinking in fields. Normalising means the 16 year has a glass of wine or beer with the family at Sunday lunch.
Click to expand...

I agree. I think you have somehow missed the point. I wasnt advocating prohibition. I am advocating that more efforts are made to instill responsibilty and to educate more about the consumption of alcohol.
I chose 18yrs as that is the current legal age to purchase it. Im not necessarily opposed to reducing that age, im just in favour of restricting the amount that can be consumed once the legal age (whatever that should be) is reached.
Currently, once you hit 18, you can drink till the cows come home. To me, thIs may be cause for alcoholic problems later in life.
 
Purple said:
The link should be between alcohol content and price, otherwise cheap beer becomes even more popular.
Click to expand...

I agree also. It is another deficiency in our laws. Not only, after turning 18, can vast amounts be purchased but vast amounts of any alcoholic drink regardless of its potency.

There is plenty of scientific material and guidelines from organistaion like WHO as to the reasonable limits to safe drinking. I think it is quite feasible for these limits to be applied to young people via card only purchases.
The legal age should be used as a stepping stone to mature responsible drinking.
 
Purple said:
Like N Plates on a car?
Click to expand...

That's kinda what I was getting at with the idea that 16 and 17 year olds should be able to get a few pints or glasses of wine in a controlled environment, maybe a pub that they are registered with and that their parents have ok'd.
I think they'd rather be in the pub socialising, or watching Sky Sports, than in a field.

I think that would be easier to enforce, police and less easy to get around, and has less overtones of nanny state than the debit card idea.

If you are talking about college age kids, look at the US, legal drinking age is 21 and there's no shortage of booze on campus, so that's why I can't see a debit card idea or off licence sales ban to under 21s working.
 
odyssey06 said:
If you are talking about college age kids, look at the US, legal drinking age is 21 and there's no shortage of booze on campus, so that's why I can't see a debit card idea or off licence sales ban to under 21s working.
Click to expand...

You are correct, by itself it wouldnt work. But it may act as a small step towards changing attitudes. Buy-in from the alcohol industry, some slick marketing, government programs all co-ordinating to induce a change in behaviour.
 
odyssey06 said:
It's already illegal for them to be sold full stop ... how's that ban working out?
17 year olds can evade that, they'll evade this idea.

The US tried the whole food stamps idea, so that welfare money wouldn't be blown on drink and drugs... did that work?

What might work is allowing 16 and 17 year olds to have drinks in a pub, just pints or wine, no spirits, so they are in a controlled environment instead of a field getting obliterated.
Click to expand...
It's illegal to speed in built up areas yet people still do it. Speed bumps are put in place to assist those people who 'forget' about the speed limits.

I don't see any issue with another measure to assist those who 'forget' that selling alcohol to underage teenagers is illegal.

Who is going to control the 16/17 year olds in pubs? The other people in the pubs are potentially part of our problematic drink culture as it is.
 
odyssey06 said:
That's kinda what I was getting at with the idea that 16 and 17 year olds should be able to get a few pints or glasses of wine in a controlled environment, maybe a pub that they are registered with and that their parents have ok'd.
Click to expand...
I don't think the legal age to buy drink or consume it in public should be below 18.
The health effects are greater on a young body and the potential to develop an addiction is also greater.
 
PGF2016 said:
It's illegal to speed in built up areas yet people still do it. Speed bumps are put in place to assist those people who 'forget' about the speed limits.

I don't see any issue with another measure to assist those who 'forget' that selling alcohol to underage teenagers is illegal.

Who is going to control the 16/17 year olds in pubs? The other people in the pubs are potentially part of our problematic drink culture as it is.
Click to expand...

A pub is the most controlled place in terms of access to alcohol... there is a barman. There is no barman... no control in a field of 16 year olds. I have never seen someone refused a drink or been barred from the field.
 
Purple said:
I don't think the legal age to buy drink or consume it in public should be below 18.
The health effects are greater on a young body and the potential to develop an addiction is also greater.
Click to expand...

I take your point but on the other hand the legal age for wine and beer in France is 16 and there doesnt seem to be higher alcohol problems there... if anything they have less.
They have recently increased age for spirits to 18.
Seems reasonable to me.

I am thinking not just of alcohol issues in proposing lower age but issues with antisocial behaviour due to illicit drinking. It hardly encourages respect for the law or alcohol to have most teenagers drinking illegally...
 
odyssey06 said:
I am thinking not just of alcohol issues in proposing lower age but issues with antisocial behaviour due to illicit drinking. It hardly encourages respect for the law or alcohol to have most teenagers drinking illegally...
Click to expand...
For that to work alcohol has to be the same price in the supermarket/off licence/ petrol station as it is in the pub.
 
will not drinking alone save someone from poverty ?

i know people who have always drank perhaps ten pints each weekend yet were never off work and are not in anyway poverty stricken though not wealthy by any means either , i can go six months without a pint and was never much of a drinker but i dont think drinking and poverty are inextricably linked by any means

some people would end up in destructive habits regardless
 
Purple said:
For that to work alcohol has to be the same price in the supermarket/off licence/ petrol station as it is in the pub.
Click to expand...

No... the proposal for here would be that at 16 and 17 you could only buy in pub.
My teenage years are long gone... I can drink at home more cheaply but I drink in pubs and restaurants too. A pub beats a field and it has sky sports.

I dont see MVP doing anything for poverty... an alcoholic wont drink less they will just spend more of their income.
 
odyssey06 said:
That's kinda what I was getting at with the idea that 16 and 17 year olds should be able to get a few pints or glasses of wine in a controlled environment, maybe a pub that they are registered with and that their parents have ok'd.
I think they'd rather be in the pub socialising, or watching Sky Sports, than in a field.
Click to expand...

Thats fine if parents are prepared to act responibly. The issue is not with people who already act responsibly, its with those who act irresponsibly.
There would be huge pressure on barmen to serve 'just another quick one' or 'its alright boss, he can handle his own' .
In the end, parents who are locked into a cycle of poverty, and use alcohol as an escape mechanism may just perpetuate the problem by bringing their kids to the pub.
 
galway_blow_in said:
will not drinking alone save someone from poverty ?

i know people who have always drank perhaps ten pints each weekend yet were never off work and are not in anyway poverty stricken though not wealthy by any means either , i can go six months without a pint and was never much of a drinker but i dont think drinking and poverty are inextricably linked by any means

some people would end up in destructive habits regardless
Click to expand...

No, not drinking will not eradicate poverty by itself. But for some people it may help them to get out of a cycle of poverty.

People who drink ten pints a night and hold a steady job or live a normal life without depending on anyone else for income supports are not the focus here.
 
TheBigShort said:
Thats fine if parents are prepared to act responibly. The issue is not with people who already act responsibly, its with those who act irresponsibly.
There would be huge pressure on barmen to serve 'just another quick one' or 'its alright boss, he can handle his own' .
In the end, parents who are locked into a cycle of poverty, and use alcohol as an escape mechanism may just perpetuate the problem by bringing their kids to the pub.
Click to expand...

Yes they could, but if the parents are that irresponsible, they could just do that at home... at least this way there's a social option in a regulated environment.
I think we have to be realistic about what the state can do, and what limits on liberty are justified on the responsible majority because of an at risk minority.
 
odyssey06 said:
what limits on liberty are justified on the responsible majority because of an at risk minority.
Click to expand...
That's a bit extreme. We limit the sale of knives and weapons as well as drugs and tobacco. Alcohol is an addictive drug and requires a level of maturity by the user for safe use.
 
Purple said:
That's a bit extreme. We limit the sale of knives and weapons as well as drugs and tobacco. Alcohol is an addictive drug and requires a level of maturity by the user for safe use.
Click to expand...

I think it's a reasonable question to ask what limits are justified, I didn't mean to imply there should be no limits on liberty but that is should be weighed in the balance.

We don't ban kitchen knives, we don't ban table wine... Our ban on drugs is practically unenforceable in a free society, unless we want to become a police state with massive restrictions on citziens.
Increases in the price of tobacco don't bother the guy buying from a back alley...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top