Well Paid Experts Want Alcohol Prices Raised To Save The Poor
ALCOHOL is presented as a wrong that must be subject to still greater control. Says Vivienne Nathanson in the Guardian:
The cost of alcohol to British society is currently estimated at over £25bn per annum. This is not just the health costs, but also costs relating to crime and disorder, including domestic violence and fights and accidents on the streets. Health workers see the personal costs; we see the fractured families, the individual tragedies of wholly preventable death and disability. And we want action, now, to start to address this complex problem.
Complex is right. What about the health benefits of alcohol she makes no mention of? What about any other benefits? And that £25billion… How much does booze make for the Treasury? The Government already heavily taxes the stuff and we still pay to drink it. So, boozing must be something enjoyable. What about peanuts and crisps? And tobacco. All go well with booze. Can the money earned from selling them be added to booze sales? And if we want to be really precise – how mush does the glazier charge to repair the windows smashed in booze-related violence?
She goes on:
…The World Health Organisation has recognised that alcohol is a major cause of ill-health worldwide and that action on alcohol must fall into three areas: affordability, availability and promotion…
You mean the cost should be raised? The drinkers of a fine Champagne will not notice much. But the poor – for whom a drink might be a welcome mental health break from drudgery and an alternative to pills – will need to find more money. And the WHO, you might recalls, told us that “all of humanity” was under threat from swine flu.
And isn’t alcohol a antiseptic?
Sheesh! Banning booze will make us all worse off…
Posted: 16th, March 2011 | In: Reviews Comment (1) | TrackBack | Permalink
