Windbag is worse threat than Terrorists..

[julian2002]

I take it some of you lot were never young then.... actually you probably were.... and a lot of you probably did this yourself when you were young, but you've had your fun, so sod the rest of us eh?

paul,
when i was young alcohol was more expensive relatively - i was getting paid 6k a year when i started work and was living away from home so had to pay rent / electricity / water / rates / food / etc. all before beer. a trip to the pub or club was relegated to 3 or so times a month and drinks were few and far between. so i can say that in my personal experience the cost of drink did regulate my intake. i've now realised what a stupid, pointless excersise it is to chuck a load of mouldy hops down my throat and don;t drink. i don;t do drugs either but i still go out once a week at least. it costs me at most 35 quid if i go to an expensive club night (20 quid door) and about 15 if it's a small club. i bet i have more fun than you do too.
cheers


julian.

 

[amazingtrade]

Julian do you not drink at all? I guess one of the problems with being young is you have a lot of peer preasure. £20 to get into a club jesus I can have an entire night out for that including my 6 pints and the club entrance Thought I normaly spend about £30.

I suppose indirectly alchohol killed my grandad but then he enjoyed his twice weekly visit to the pubs with his mates, without that he might he died before anyway.

 

[The Devil]

Just like theres no evidence to suggest if they put the price up, they'll drink less.

Actually, there's plenty.

 

[amazingtrade]

Actually, there's plenty.

And there is also evidence to suggest they will just drink more at home, smuggle drink in etc etc or even turn to legal drugs.

This argument is getting a bit stupid anyway its just the same old things being said over and over again.

 

[PeteH]

I guess one of the problems with being young is you have a lot of peer preasure.

That's what we'd change in an ideal world - the culture which defines as "boring" drinking less than xx pints per night and that considers a proper night out to involve vomiting / urinating / passing out / all three in the street (or, even better, in the doorway of the aforementioned person living near the kebab shop). ISTM that the UK is one of very few countries in the world where incapacitating oneself via alcohol, shouting loudly in the street late at night and picking fights with strangers is considered normal or indeed desirable behaviour, and where cirrhosis of the liver is probably deemed to be a badge of honour and knowing "how to have a good time".

Perhaps if we bumped alcohol prices right up then within a decade or two people might realise that actually the rest of the world was right all along, and having a good time and behaving vaguely like an adult member of a civilised society are not mutually exclusive.

 

[Markus S]

Yes, but only because some of the participants don't bother to check the facts.

 

[amazingtrade]

That's what we'd change in an ideal world - the culture which defines as "boring" drinking less than xx pints per night and that considers a proper night out to involve vomiting / urinating / passing out / all three in the street (or, even better, in the doorway of the aforementioned person living near the kebab shop). ISTM that the UK is one of very few countries in the world where incapacitating oneself via alcohol, shouting loudly in the street late at night and picking fights with strangers is considered normal or indeed desirable behaviour, and where cirrhosis of the liver is probably deemed to be a badge of honour and knowing "how to have a good time".

Perhaps if we bumped alcohol prices right up then within a decade or two people might realise that actually the rest of the world was right all along, and having a good time and behaving vaguely like an adult member of a civilised society are not mutually exclusive.

I measure of a good night out by if I am drunk enough to sing New Order's Bizzare Love Triangle on a 3:00am bus! Actually that only ever happened once.

As I said before I don't support them blindy putting up prices but I do support weaker beers and the price increases of shots. I reckon shots should be £5 a go not £1.

 

[PBirkett]

That's what we'd change in an ideal world - the culture which defines as "boring" drinking less than xx pints per night and that considers a proper night out to involve vomiting / urinating / passing out / all three in the street (or, even better, in the doorway of the aforementioned person living near the kebab shop).

Funny, I admit to getting wrecked, but I really cannot remember the last time I threw up or passed out in the street, that hasnt happenned for a long time, and those that do, are usually inexperienced drinkers. Actually most people I know who do those things end up getting the urine extracted...

As for the urinating, well maybe if they provided more public bogs in city centres, people would not need to eh?

But anyway, as AT says, this is going around in circles. Those who don't drink will always look down upon people like me, but do I give a ****?

 

[julian2002]

at,
i've not had a drink in 4 years or thereabouts - mainly due to getting a huge hangover from just one or two drinks so deeming it not worth drinking unless i was going to get completely hammered - and i don;t like that either.
20 quid to get in and 2.50 for a bottle of water was for a big htid club night with 4 separate 'rooms' and a chill out area, stalls and all sorts with the likes of bk and lisa pin up playing so more of a mini festival i guess. that's the most i'd ever pay - most nights i go to it's 3 or 5 quid to get in and water is 1.50 a bottle with red bull at 1.75 or thereabouts.
personally i judge a good night out by the quantity of quality photos i've taken, the numeber of new friends i've made and how much i ache the next morning from constant dancing.
cheers


julian

 

[PBirkett]

Sounds like you do have a good time Jules, but I just wish people could accept that for people like me and AT, having a beer is our version of having a good time, and not assuming that we will go around starting fights and smashing things up!! You are looking at a small minority of people who give us a bad name, and the answer should be to punish them, not everyone else.

And as for the NHS argument, I am sure we contribute our fair share in tax....

 

[Dev]

Paul, anti-social behaviour is just one aspect of drinking. Even for "responsible" but regular drinkers, there may be a price to pay over longer term, such as liver failure etc.

 

[PBirkett]

I understand that, and its the risk I take. To be honest, I am under no illusion that I cannot continue like I do forever, but hopefully my body will let me know long before liver failure when its time to call it quits

My parents were very much like me (so they say) at my age. They continue to drink wine every night. Their livers still work...

But really, its not rocket science, if you get pissed every single day for years, then yeah your liver is gonna pack up. Too much of anything is bad...

 

[Dev]

I think this is the crux of Bub's argument though. If the price is inflated enough, it'll stop most of the regular drinkers from ever reaching that stage.

 

[lhatkins]

I personally think, and no I don't have any facts to back it up its just an opinion, that worst damage is caused by those drinking shots, shooters or alcopop kind of drinks because you do know realise just how much you have drunk until it suddenly hits you, with pints its a slow process and your adjust so its not so much of a shot when you stumble into the loo! So I reckon for a start that a restriction should be placed on those types of drinks.

 

[lhatkins]

I think this is the crux of Bub's argument though. If the price is inflated enough, it'll stop most of the regular drinkers from ever reaching that stage.

I don't think it will, they'll just spend more over the weekend, I don't think a price hike will put many people off, they'll just not get taxi's home or not go for that takeaway, or maybe they'll spend less on "hobbies" they'll find the money.
The only people this will effect are the sensible people who like to go out to their local on a Saturday evening. Clubbers don't think twice about paying £10+ to get into a nightclub you realy think putting the price up will make any difference to them. nope.

 

[julian2002]

from what i understand liver damage is not linear and symptoms occur only after irreversable damage is done so if you get 'warning signs' it's already too late.
if you drink responsibly (i.e. keep to the recomended limit and don;t binge) then a price increase probably wouldn;t hit you very hard anyway - unless you were on the bread line. and then i'd be asking if there was perhaps a better way to be spending your money. perhaps the real issue is that those who are complaining about the proposal know that they are overdoing it and feel guilty but are in denial.

 

[PBirkett]

I think this is the crux of Bub's argument though. If the price is inflated enough, it'll stop most of the regular drinkers from ever reaching that stage.

Right, but as far as I was aware, we were talking about raising the price of drinks in bars. Surely someone with alcoholic tendencies will actually drink more in the house? Certainly, if ones aim is to consume as much alcohol as possible on a daily basis, then it will be far cheaper to do it in the house than it ever will be in a bar.

For example, 8 cans of stella (1 pint per can) from supermarket - £5... 62p a pint. In the cheapest bar in newcastle that (apart from the student places which I cant get into not being a student) will cost £2 a pint, so thats £16 for 8 pints. A lot more expensive. Same applies for spirits. Being an alcoholic at home is cheaper - and thats necessary, because if you really are that bad, then you probably wouldnt hold down a job.

And if they overprice drinks (which presumably would have to be in the form of a tax), then many pubs would simply go out of business, as people deserted by the dozens, instead to go and have parties, or drink their supermarket drink in the street.

Sorry but this just seems like a real rubbish idea. However, its not likely to happen either, I wouldnt have thought.

I personally think, and no I don't have any facts to back it up its just an opinion, that worst damage is caused by those drinking shots, shooters or alcopop kind of drinks because you do know realise just how much you have drunk until it suddenly hits you, with pints its a slow process and your adjust so its not so much of a shot when you stumble into the loo! So I reckon for a start that a restriction should be placed on those types of drinks.

While I agree that drinking shorts and alcopops means you can drink more, I dont agree its for the reasons you say. I will admit to drinking shorts and alcopops almost all night each time I go out. And yes, I do it to get sozzled. But you definitely can control the dosage this way. I have never drank so much that I was unable to walk, talk or get home while I have been drinking this way. The last time I threw up due to drink, I had been unwell anyway. Before that, down to inexperience, but also I'm sure in part, down to the fact I was drinking pints, full of chemicals (so are alcopops, but vodka is clean), and also a very large quantity of liquid, too much for my stomach.

At the end of the day, IMO, people who go out and start trouble are just hooligans at the end of the day, and I know people like this (unfortunately), and trust me, alcohol helps, but these peopl would not need a catalyst for their violence - they were violent people anyway. I resent being tarred with the same brush when I have never had a drunken brawl yet. Why arent we looking at punishing the perpatrators more, instead of being leniant. The main thing I object to is the random violence, and even though I have gone out most weekends for many years now, I have (luckily perhaps) seen very few acts of random violence on a night out. I'm not saying it doesnt happen, and I'm not saying that a city centre is a particularly nice place to be for a sober person on a friday night, but I think its being blown out of proportion a bit, especially when you consider the sheer number of people who go out, the incidents are relatively few and far between.

 

[PBirkett]

from what i understand liver damage is not linear and symptoms occur only after irreversable damage is done so if you get 'warning signs' it's already too late.
if you drink responsibly (i.e. keep to the recomended limit and don;t binge) then a price increase probably wouldn;t hit you very hard anyway - unless you were on the bread line. and then i'd be asking if there was perhaps a better way to be spending your money. perhaps the real issue is that those who are complaining about the proposal know that they are overdoing it and feel guilty but are in denial.

Well, thanks for the scare story, but its the risk I take, I fully know the risks. Its a risk leaving the house. The liver AFAIK is actually very good at recovering, but yes I'd imagine that once you'd pushed it beyond the point of repair, then you're up shits creek. I find it difficult to believe there wouldnt be symptoms before irreversible damage occurs.

Honestly though, you gotta die sometime, who the hell wants to live until they cant control themselves anyway... (maybe with age this outlook will change though ).

As for feeling guilty, I know I probably overdo it, speaking personally i usually knock a couple of bottles of wine back a week, and then usually go out for a good sesh on a friday, and perhaps 5 or 6 pints through the week if i'm flush. However, I dont feel guilty. Its my choice, I'll no doubt pay for it if I overdo it. I object to having what little of my wallet is left to shatter. And yeah, yeah, I should be saving... yeah right. You only live once. Hopefully there will be plenty of time left for me to do this anyway, but for now, I'm having too much fun....

I can sense your replies becoming progressively more morbid though

 

[amazingtrade]

from what i understand liver damage is not linear and symptoms occur only after irreversable damage is done so if you get 'warning signs' it's already too late.
if you drink responsibly (i.e. keep to the recomended limit and don;t binge) then a price increase probably wouldn;t hit you very hard anyway - unless you were on the bread line. and then i'd be asking if there was perhaps a better way to be spending your money. perhaps the real issue is that those who are complaining about the proposal know that they are overdoing it and feel guilty but are in denial.

Weaker bear or a slight price increase I don't mind, I would have no major objection to paying £3 for weaker beer. But I am doing going to pay £7 for it. I also think £7 a pint will create more problems than it solves.

As for liver I have done quite a bit of my own research of this as my grandad died from it, and you're right.

Damaged liver tissue grows back, however once the damage gets to more than 80% its too late and this is when you start to notice the symptons of liver failure. I also understand that once the liver is not functioning properly then other organs start to fail becuase stuff is not being filtered out in the sponge (liver).

I am perfectly happy for a more qualified person to correct me on this however.

 

[lhatkins]

The first "I'm feeling luck" result in google give you some Scary reading.
PBirkett, IMHO, that's borderline alaholic! I have a few mates who drunk loads during the week and excessed on weekends, I guess its the live fast die young attitude. I'll bite you in the arse eventually.