Well, John,
If school kids can afford a whole bottle to themselves, risking brain damage/immediate death, maybe the spirit taxes are not high enough.

And thank God the "minerals is driving the economy"

The price of something is never the deciding factor when buying something. If they want it, they will forgo something else (like a new game)
to be able to afford it.

Yeah, 505G, but price is a factor.

When I was a kid about 45 years ago I was given $2 when I went out on Saturday nights. With that I could buy a flask of whisky and share a bottle of sherry :P (or, alternatively, two 26oz bottles of beer) a packet of cigarettes, get into the Palais and have enough to buy a hamburger at the end of the night - or maybe a coffee for some girl if the opportunity arose. Even if I could have got a full bottle of rum for $2, there would have been nothing left for anything else.

Ironically, buying straight spirits has increased since the tax on ready-to-drinks and coolers was increased to save kids from themselves. Now, they buy a bottle and mix their own but, hopefully, share the bottle or use it over several nights.

quote:

Originally posted by sambarman338:
Yeah, 505G, but price is a factor.

When I was a kid about 45 years ago I was given $2 when I went out on Saturday nights. With that I could buy a flask of whisky and share a bottle of sherry :P (or, alternatively, two 26oz bottles of beer) a packet of cigarettes, get into the Palais and have enough to buy a hamburger at the end of the night - or maybe a coffee for some girl if the opportunity arose. Even if I could have got a full bottle of rum for $2, there would have been nothing left for anything else.

Ironically, buying straight spirits has increased since the tax on ready-to-drinks and coolers was increased to save kids from themselves. Now, they buy a bottle and mix their own but, hopefully, share the bottle or use it over several nights.

Funny that the gov't has never heard of unexpected consequences ....

Every time they try to modify behaviour, the owners of that behaviour just do something equally destructive but in a different way.

quote:

Originally posted by sambarman338:
Well, John,
If school kids can afford a whole bottle to themselves, risking brain damage/immediate death, maybe the spirit taxes are not high enough.

And thank God the "minerals is driving the economy"

I used to have a job and work holidays. But Brandivino was more common as it was cheaper.


PS What were the "spirit taxes" in 1982? Were they cheap enough or too high back then?

I drank some Bundy tomight - generous splash of coke zero and a good squeeze of lime ... delicious!!

quote:

Originally posted by Bren7X64:
Funny that the gov't has never heard of unexpected consequences ....

Every time they try to modify behaviour, the owners of that behaviour just do something equally destructive but in a different way.

Taxes have nothing to do with trying to "reduce" consumption of a product. That is an excuse only. Taxes of this sort are put on products with a high demand curve, ie where price increases do NOT have a significant effect on consumption. On alcohol, tobacco, fuel etc. That way the gov't can tax the hell out of the product and us, and consumption not be changed greatly.

The way to change excessive alcohol consumption is to change the culture. Education, and peer pressure. Beer and wine with food, not just guzzling it alone. The whole "culture" of kids needing to be eighteen before consuming alcohol is wrong. They should be introduced to beer and wine as young children in small amounts as part of meals. Then it is not a forbidden drink.

The culture that exists for many is alcohol only exists to get drunk with. Many do not understand drinking alcohol if not to plan to get drunk. This attitude is strong in Africans and some Asians as well as many Australians.

Watch an American movie where shot glasses are poured. The attitude is always they must be "slammed down" in one gulp. Really stupid. Even when quality brandy is poured, the only way to drink is to "slam it down" in one gulp. As if that is manly behaviour ... instead of being really stupid. Who on Earth drinks really good brandy, cognac, whiskey etc by gulping it down in one gulp? I think it is moronic behaviour not manly and a huge cliche. But sheeple watch and learn.

Maybe Bundaberg Rum needs to be "slammed down" if what people say about it being so bad is true ... to get back to topic.

Well, John, though lifting taxes on beer and smokes used to be a favourite budget balancer, spirits taxes have long been pretty high, more than 50%, I think. This is not as high as in Scandinavia, of course, where the cold and dark cause people to overdo it and the government uses high taxes even to deter them from drinking wine.

Learning to drink moderately at home used to be thought a good idea but modern scientists have decided it's not, that the American late drinking age is actually healthier. And if the kids in America drink before they are 21, their appearance probably limits their ability to get it as young as we do (and used to do ).

The Poles and Russians tend to throw their spirits back, either because that's the tough thing to do or because the don't like the taste and want to get it over with. Trouble is, then they've got an empty glass and have to fill it up again. This kind of drinking has been identified with cancer of the oesophagus in places like Glasgow.

Being told by governments that "this is good for you and/or the community" and not seeing any good come out of it tends to give one a jaded view.

Did the banned drinkers register work in the N.T? No if you talk to the bottle shop attendants, a resounding success if you listen to the last state government.

If you really want people to cut out their drinking only have bundy rum for sale