'Minimum priced' alcohol policy- should there be a 'maximum price,' too?

[Cyclone 10]

That is what i object to- a minimum price policy, but if a minimum is introduced on ANY item surely a maximum has to be introduced.

I'm not suggesting on a maximum or a minimum, but if there is one, there has to be the other.

 

No, there is no logical, moral or philosophical reason to always introduce a maximum when a minimum is introduced.

We've given you numerous examples of things where only a max or min exists and not the opposite, we've asked for any supporting argument to explain why the two should be linked.

 

You might wish it were so, but that is all it is, a wish.

 

If you disagree with the minimum then just stick to disagreeing, you're current argument makes no sense.

[Joe9T 10]

No, there is no logical, moral or philosophical reason to always introduce a maximum when a minimum is introduced.

We've given you numerous examples of things where only a max or min exists and not the opposite, we've asked for any supporting argument to explain why the two should be linked.

 

You might wish it were so, but that is all it is, a wish.

 

If you disagree with the minimum then just stick to disagreeing, you're current argument makes no sense.

 

I obviously do object to any minimum, but that is my opinion, it is you who is disagreeing with my opinion.

You are entitled to your views and my thread was to discuss my OP and that is what we have done.

[Cyclone 10]

I don't disagree with your objection to the minimum.

 

I disagree with your assertion that anything with a minimum price imposed must have a maximum imposed. An assertion you are soundly unable to support.

[Joe9T 10]

Let me try it from this angle... Would the Government ever wish to set a maximum price policy on an item?

They are prepared to set a minimum but would they ever be fair enough to set a maximum, let's say if we the consumer was being abused.

I would say NO!

[Cyclone 10]

They don't have to. The monopolies commision stops any monopoly position on a single good or item from existing. Without a monopoly the market regulates the price.

You can see it happen with your £3.20 beer. If that was the only pub in the village they could charge £5 or £10, but pretty soon someone would open a new pub and undercut them, or people would buy it from the off license and drink at home.

I can't think of a single thing that would benefit from a maximum price (that's within the remit of the UK government to manage).

 

Can you give an example of something where consumers are being abused and no alternatives exist?

[Joe9T 10]

Without a monopoly the market regulates the price.

 

 

That is not true IF a minimum price policy is introduced.

 

The market is being prevented from regulating itself, as the Government seems to be stepping in, in the case of alcohol, as an example, and thus preventing the market (For example) from regulating itself!

 

It is the market that is selling "cheap" alcohol and why? Because it is regulating itself and the Government do not like it, as it is getting too cheap for their liking.

 

You have answered my OP. Thanks

Edited March 10, 2009 by Joe9T

[Cyclone 10]

It is still true of everything except the very cheapest drinks and definitely true of anything being sold at a price where a maximum would be relevant. QED introducing a minimum does not mean that a maximum should be also.

[Joe9T 10]

Should alcohol have a minimum price?

 

Have your say here and also check out the following BBC website link. Cheers!

 

http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?forumID=6205&edition=1&ttl=20090315112833

[Joe9T 10]

"First they came for the smokers

I did not speak out as I was not a smoker

Then they came for the drinkers

I did not speak out as I was not a drinker

Then they came for the "junk food" eaters

I did not speak out as I was not a "junk food" eater

Then they came for the motorists

I did not speak out as I was not a motorist

Then they came for me

And there was no one left to speak out for me." Anon

 

How very true!

[handypandy 14]

The object of the minimum price ( if it isn't a stealth tax:suspect:) is supposedly an attempt to control the habits of those who abuse it. I would be more in favour of a minimum punishment for the characters who cause mayhem when their brains are flooded with booze. The risk of a guaranteed stay in the big house might make them think before they spoil everyone elses night.

[lizmachin 10]

Scotland is to become the first country in Europe to set a minimum price for alcohol - raising the prospect that England could follow suit.

 

But, if there's going to be a minimum, then, why not a maximum, too?

 

The reason, because i went to a place, where they were charging a whopping £3.20 for a pint of lager.

 

Now that is utter daylight robbery, but as we live in a free world, if we set a minimum price on an item, then we surely ought to set a maximum, too!

 

The Government shouldn't be allowed to do it one way without the other.

 

What do you think?

 

Ah yes, but last night I went to a restaurant where the wine list started at around £17.95 for a bottle of house wine and went up to around £220 for the more exotic offerings. How would that fit in with your vision?

[Joe9T 10]

Ah yes, but last night I went to a restaurant where the wine list started at around £17.95 for a bottle of house wine and went up to around £220 for the more exotic offerings. How would that fit in with your vision?

 

I see your point.

I am really referring to say drinks in pubs or hotels and the 'bog standard' drink like Lager or soft drinks etc.

 

I found out that 'post mix,' which is the mix that is used for say coke, costs about 7.5 pence per drink and is then sold to the paying customer with a bit of fizz etc for as much as 40 times the cost or even more.

Your expensive wine would not have been 40 times the cost!