Supermarkets Killing pubs

Reginal Perrin · Post by **Reginal Perrin** » Tue 03 Jun, 2008 11:45 am

Samson wrote: Hats Off, Reggie,We will have to disagree.Unfortunately I think that selling strong lager at 58p a pint is socially irresponsible and it is also killing off the pubs. There is a thread on here about all the ones that are closing? Perhaps I have missed the thread about all the new ones opening.In my opinion it is socially irresponsible because alcohol is not cheese, it is has its effects on different people just like a drug, it can also be addictive. The supermarkets sell it to the over 18's. That is the only distiction they make and as we know older ones buy it for gangs of youths outside for a cut of the bottles themselves. Others go to each others houses and fuel up on the cheap stuff before they go out. Plus the ones that go off their heads with it. Don't get me wrong I buy it occasionally, but I think it is far too cheap. Just an opinion, but if you think there is not a problem with cheap booze then you are burying your heads in the sand. The second point was it is helping to kill off the pubs. This is a more complex topic though as someone has already pointed out. I was making the price comparison to show how expensive a pint or two is if you partake a good number of nights a week. I am not that naive not to realise the benefits of a nice pub and what you get instead of staying at home. Unfortunately whatever the reasons a lot of local pubs are closing and I am hoping it is not the tip of the iceberg. It would leave us with chains like Wetherspoons and the others like Geene king and the little independent pubs will be under the bulldozer. Samson, the law already exists to allow the police to confiscate the drink and take the child home to their parents. I repeat it is not the fault of the supermarket unless they actively sellt o children, which in my experience they do not. If an adult buys drink for children to consume in the street then they should be locked up. Why should law abiding citizens suffer with higher prices? I also note that Sam Smiths can sell pints of bitter for about £1.35 and not go out of business. Pubcos are killing pubs not supermarkets. I buy beer and wine for the house I also gol tot he pub a couple of times a week but while I might have had a night out perviously I now only gor for an hour or two.We can't blame supermarkets for the lack of enforcing laws that already exist.

Samson · Post by **Samson** » Tue 03 Jun, 2008 5:24 pm

Reggie, I quite agree. The laws are not enforced. It is an offence to serve someone who is drunk, likewise those underage, but the laws are not used, although to me the situation seems out of hand. As I said we will have to disagree on supermarket prices, as selling it at 57p a pint (along with strong cider) makes it as cheap as pop (or a bottle of tomato sauce). It is of course not pop, so why sell it at the same price? I am a responsible drinker like you. Why should I not have cheap drinks from a supermarket?The question is how cheap? The same price as pop? There is no reason why supermarkets and offies should not sell cheaper drinks, they always have. It is just a question of how low the price should go.Unfortunately, not everyone has a few pints of cheap drink and falls asleep like you and I . I thought I was a lone voice, but today I found (by accident) two people who seem to think that we have a real problem with alcohol and cheap drink.One is an A and E doctorhttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1023 ... -E.htmlThe other is a police chief http://uk.news.yahoo.com/pressass/20080 ... e80.htmlOn a lighter note I will post the cartoon by Hogarth about the problems of cheap drink LOL

Samson · Post by **Samson** » Tue 03 Jun, 2008 5:38 pm

The cartoon was part of a pair called Beer Street and Gin Lane. It was at a time when the poor were drinking cheap London Gin. Beer street was prosperous and moral, whilst Gin Lane was the opposite. Cleverly Hogarth made subtle comments to show that the prosperity of one was linked to the misery of the other.The cheap gin wreaked havoc in poor areas. This was not gotten under control I think until the Gin Act was passed'Drunk for a pennyDead drunk for tuppenceClean straw for nothing'

Samson · Post by **Samson** » Tue 03 Jun, 2008 5:47 pm

Trouble posting picture, so if it does not appear it is easily Googled

martino · Post by **martino** » Tue 03 Jun, 2008 10:22 pm

Have to agree with Reggie Perrin & RichGreedy pubs are in my opinion one of the main reasons for Drunkeness.If there are Door staff(bouncers) on the door,why do they let drunks in to start with?Why do barstaff serve already drunk customers?Under new licencing laws pubs could be forced to close for 24 hrs7 days or longer if the police see fit.However I have yet to hear or read about this happening.If an Off licence is selling alcohol to underage kids then take their licence off them

String o' beads · Post by **String o' beads** » Tue 03 Jun, 2008 11:06 pm

Pubs, or rather the breweries or conglomerates behind them have been putting themselves out of business gradually for years. As someone rightly pointed out JD Wetherspoon makes a profit on lower prices, and I've yet to go in one that wasn't heaving. Same goes for working men's clubs, though they've been hit badly by the smoking ban. You can't penalise the rest of us with higher prices at the supermarket just because youngsters abuse alcohol. How is that fair? It's like everything else - we've evolved into a culture among young people in which being out of work, drinking on the street, taking drugs, committing petty crime have come to be accepted as fairly 'normal' where once they were looked down on. Having said that it must be pointed out that we live in the least violent times in human history, so all this hysteria about weapons crime needs to be put into perspective. And just another point on supermarket prices. If they were raised in an effort to be put out of reach to young people, then bear in mind what happens when they can't afford their drugs. A lot of them would just go on the rob to get cash to afford booze. I don't pretend to know the answer, but I do know that the culture has to change rather than trying to manage this issue financially.

Samson · Post by **Samson** » Tue 03 Jun, 2008 11:31 pm

Pg 317 Ceefax ITV 1/2 page 2A commons committee has questioned supermarkets ASDA and Tesco selling beer at cost and below cost. A Tory MP Patrick Mercer described both firms as 'irresponsible' (His words, not mine this time)I have no objection to supermarkets selling cheaper lager etc. But I do object to them selling it at the same price as Coke (Sorry Coca Cola!!) I agree the culture of going out to get off your face needs to change.Unfortunately the 'drink problem' is permeating all age groups if what you read is to be believed.Well I must go and open another bottle!!(I will let it go there, as we can read about it and see it on the TV every day and life is too short to go over the same ground.)

Si · Post by Si » Wed 04 Jun, 2008 8:57 am

This topic was on Radio 4 this morning (6:45ish.)Just a thought - why is it that booze prices must rise to reduce alcohol related crime, yet cannabis is downgraded (making it more affordable) to reduce drug related crime?

Samson · Post by **Samson** » Thu 05 Jun, 2008 12:13 pm

A very good point.The prices in the pubs seem high enough as it is. It certainly stops me going out every night for a natter in the local over a couple of pints! Tha tax will continue to go up next year I believe.(My point was mainly about Stella being half the price of a 2 litre bottle of Diet Coke) The government has made a hash (pun intended!!) of its legislation re Whacky Baccy. I do not know what crime is a result of Cannabis use. Certainly there have been acts of violence committed with yobs high on drink and cannabis. I thought (perhaps mistakenly) that the majority of crimes re drugs were a result of addicts wanting money for their next hard drug fix and then a smaller percentage of crimes would relate to drug dealers and turf wars.If my memory serves me right cannabis was downgraded, as it was not thought of as highly addictive and damaging. The police could then concentrate on the dealers/suppliers of Heroin, Coke, Crack etcThis seemed to backfire as the strong cannabis available coupled with mental health issues is causing problems and the 'pretty' image of someone relaxing with a non addictive, fairly harmless spliff seems a long way from the reality of the effects of using super strength cannabis.(This is not a starter for an argument, but what I think has happened. So if anyone wants to correct my misconceptions then they are more than welcome!)

Si · Post by Si » Thu 05 Jun, 2008 1:00 pm

I think you're right, Samson.Of course, a "stern telling-off" for having a joint in your pocket doesn't get recorded and - hey presto - drug crime is reduced!At one time, people found on the street by the police who were "drunk and incapable" (as opposed to "drunk and disorderly")were helped home. Nowadays, it's straight to the slammer - another crime solved! This is all due to Government "targets." Things are all over the place with no single plan.