The hypocrisy surrounding alcohol

[cookiebee]

I was commenting on a thread that was discussing the proposed measures for further restrictions on smoking, that is the banning of smoking in beer gardens and other public spaces. I’m an ex smoker and drinker for health reasons, I’ve had lots of support from you lovely people in the alcohol support section and hopefully have helped in turn and find most of you a bit more rational around this subject than those who comment on AIBU.

So on that thread I posed the question to anyone who is for these restrictions and the eventual phasing out of cigarettes, how would you feel if we stopped selling alcohol to anyone born after 2009 to try and phase it out, I wasn’t asking about the practical aspects of it, more the taking of something that is pointless in our lives and trying to be rid of it, the same way that we are treating smoking. My point is if you let them come for one pointless activity, then eventually they will come for others, the ones that YOU love.

I never actually said I wanted alcohol banned, but have so far been told to go live in a Muslim country, where alcohol is banned! That prohibition didn’t work, well I never said it did! Also that my arguments don’t even make sense because there’s no second hand effects of drinking like their are with smoking, I argued that actually there are plenty of knock on effects from drinking, as we all know here.

I just really don’t like the hypocrisy that surrounds people, sitting there with their glass of red and judging others like smokers for example. As soon as you even suggest threatening alcohol they are up in arms about it, of course suggesting that THEY don’t have an issue with alcohol, they are different, it’s people like smokers or drug users that are the real problem. Drinkers don’t see that their vice is a huge issue and that yes, the government could one day come for them with health labelling and restrictions on the sale of alcohol and where it can be served, the price could rocket, it could happen just as it is with smoking. But of course alcohol is the last socially acceptable drug, people don’t want to believe it could happen, they get defensive.

I absolutely hate the ‘nanny state’ as they put it interfering with our lives, but interfering they are, and they will come for all someday, including that glass of Chablis that is sooooo much more acceptable than that cig hanging out someone’s mouth.

If anyone even would like to discuss this, please don’t write post after post about why it wouldn’t work, I’d like to more hear your thoughts on why people get defensive about this and why they think alcohol isn’t actually a serious problem that needs addressing, I’m hopeful of a discussion, but I could of course regret this gamble lol.

So why is alcohol so untouchable, do you think there will eventually be heavy pricing and warning labels, would this be a good thing. There is no longer a safe recommended limit on consumption and the glass of red being good for the heart myth has been debunked. We socialise just fine as youngsters without alcohol, so what exactly is its use, apart from ruining lives from the very first sip?

I think this is a really interesting debate to be honest, I have never smoked and hate being around someone smoking one but I do think the proposed new restrictions probably go too far- we’re all adults.

That said though I think alcohol vs smoking is a little too complex to compare. Alcohol is the more obvious short term risk, going to the pub for the night and drinking 20 pints is more risky than going to the pub for a night and smoking 20 cigarettes. But the flip side is that someone who even just smokes occasionally is at higher risk of certain illnesses, unlike someone who just drinks occasionally, so in terms of pressure on NHS/healthcare alcohol doesn’t have the same direct consequence.

I’m sure the stats also say that smoking causes twice the deaths per year that alcohol does, so there’s that.

Neither are good for you, neither is too much chocolate, too many packs of crisps, but one carries a bigger risk to health.

There’s also no safe level of secondhand smoke, so if you sit and have 2 cigarettes then you’re not only making a decision for yourself and your own body, you’re also imposing that decision on everybody in your immediate vicinity. On the flip side if you sit in and have 2 pints, realistically, that doesn’t impact anybody else around you.

I do think there could be more restrictions on alcohol though personally, or more enforcement on the restrictions that do exist. We were out for a meal a few weeks ago and there was a group of lads in for one of their 30th birthday, he sat and had 30 shots. Bar staff all happy with this, served him them without blinking an eye and laughed along with the group while he necked them, then looked absolutely perplexed when an hour later he was sick all over the bar on his way to the toilets🥲

We're a nation of drinkers (alcohol) historically, so people are going to get their knickers in a twist if they think alcohol will be taken away from them - more so than if cigarettes are taken away from them because of statistics. There are a lot more drinkers than smokers.

I agree with you that alcohol absolutely has bad second-hand effects: violence,
disputes, accidents, memory loss, becoming very vulnerable, loss of control etc. No-one went from being Dr Jekyll or Mr or Ms Hyde from having a few cigarettes.

The tax from both alcohol and cigarettes props this country up a lot. There are some interesting statistics out there too: a rise in lung cancer among non-smokers.

I'm sure it must be horrible to be a non-smoker and have to deal with passive smoke but, for me, alcohol is by far the worse vice causing far more deaths and injury to the drinker, and injury to other people.

I don't want a nanny state. Plenty of things harm people that don't involve alcohol or cigarettes: extreme sports; extreme weather; bad driving; toxic relatives; people generally being prats; people generally; criticism; divorce; cost of living and poverty; buying the wrong dog; being near cows; doing the gardening; living anywhere that has stairs...

Take your pick, I say.

@JerryHasSprungAgain I agree with you. I think most people who are arguing that alcohol is worse or at least as bad as smoking are not suggesting that it should be banned - at least not that I've seen, I'm definitely not - it's more that it IS hypocritical. Why do so many people agree with banning smoking outside is sensiblebut leave our alcohol alone?

Ok ok, I hear you barking big dog, I’m ‘attacking’ drinkers because they seem pretty vocal against smokers in the beer garden debate, but have said a few times that this sort of thing could have a knock on effect, support one set of restrictions then you can’t be against others when they are to do with something you enjoy.

Not seen the social media trend of non drinkers attacking drinkers, but I’m not bitter about not drinking, and also didn’t drink more than most drinkers, but when you find yourself out of the game you do observe it differently, so thought to myself, why does someone who loves one poison get to judge someone else’s choices. Let’s just be done with each other you and me, we won’t get anywhere, you like a lot of others have just cherry picked things to beat me with rather than actually debating what I was talking about.

Also for the last time, ok fine everyone, I give up with trying to explain what I meant about the flavour of alcohol. I’m all for you drinking whatever if you like, my loved ones do. Il try and steer this debate a bit at some point.

@JerryHasSprungAgain and@Shesshinysheila thank you for taking the time to post, your comments show you understand what I was debating here, it’s a relief to hear your points of view

Haha - only the people who agree with you understand the question you're asking!?

I'm certainly not supportive of the smoking ban or lecturing people about whether they smoke or not.

Maybe if you're going to lecture people, do it at a time when the government are not clamping down on other freedoms such as free speech, lecturing parents about the perils of their kids missing a day of school here and there (apart from when they were striking which was fine, or during Covid when it was also fine from them to miss months), all whilst increasing the already record level taxes we're paying.

Basically, you are advocating scrapping the NHS and moving to an insurance based system where how much you pay is based on your health and lifestyle choices. For private health insurance you have to answer questions about lifestyle, smoker, drinker etc and your premiums are based on that, or you may be denied cover for certain illnesses. I agree that it's a lot fairer and probably why most countries have this system rather than public health services like the NHS.

@winterrabbit

"Taxation is not based on fairness or behaviour or your own contribution unfortunately."

Taxation is absolutely based on behaviour- for example both tobacco and alcohol are taxed because they are viewed as an unhealthy activity that the government wishes to discourage. The principle that there should be tax on alcohol is already there- all I am debating is the level of that taxation and how it should reflect the cost to the NHS and the economy.

Nah I’ve agreed with a few posters that would have seemed to be against me, it’s just those posters have debated what my post started about, the hypocrisy surrounding alcohol. I’m not necessarily judging but talking about why do some get to judge others, definitely don’t think I’m right about anything in particular, but you have to admit, it’s fun to debate shit!

@winterrabbit

If you're so concerned about where our taxes are going then the welfare budget would be a good starting point rather than sick people. Getting a few more people off their backsides and into work.

I am "so concerned" about where our taxes are being spent and I agree that the welfare budget would be a good place to start.

However as you can see from the chart actually very little is being spent on unemployment benefits whereas much greater savings could be made on the state pension and benefits for older people:

I can't think of any drink where you take pure alcohol and "mix" it with something to make a drink.

As PP said, wine, beer etc. produced by fermentation. Even something like vodka is fermentation followed by distillation, which is the opposite of diluting it.

Just a reminder to everyone, my thread is about the hypocrisy of drinking alcohol while judging others!

No judgement here - I do think a ban would be impossible though.

Because smoking has already been banned to a degree, I guess, since it was banned indoors in pubs. 2006 I think it was, and people have got used to thinking of smoking as being a bad thing. I have come across the odd alcohol-free pub, but imagine the chaos if you told people you could only have alcohol in the pub garden, like they do for smoking. Also, if you keep banning things, people want to hold on to what's left. It is hypocritical.

State pension? What, the one where people have worked all their lives and paid into the pot? Are you for real? Why the hell should people work all their lives then get FA in old age? God, your logic is really sickening.

And some of VAT is based on behaviour. Personal taxation is based on levels of income.

Really? I thought it was a lecture about how virtuous for not drinking and an example of hypocrisy in lecturing certain sectors of the population whilst ignoring others.

How much tax do you pay a year OP? I pay 70k per year which I bet is more than you. Given that you are so obsessed with fairness, presumably that gives me more say than you in where tax is spent?

My partner is CEO of a pretty large company, I’m director of our business, I have paid a lot more than you, now sod off!

You sound like such a lovely person. Go and have a large G&T. Think you'd be a much nicer person for it.

Director of a business is pretty meaningless. I can set-up a company and appoint myself as a director overnight. And living off your partner's wealth isn't very feminist now is it? I do hope you ban alcohol at your staff events and lecture all your employees on the perils of alcohol. I am sure they're glad to have you around to tell them these crucial facts. Ever thought about applying for a role in government? You'd fit right in with the crew we have there at the moment.

And I hope you are paying A LOT into their personal pensions given your proposal to cut the state pension.

@winterrabbit

We are going well off topic here so this is my last post on this point.

My point is that trying to make significant savings on the unemployment benefits is incredibly hard when the total spent is only £2.2 billion.

Whereas it is much easier to find significant savings on the state pension benefit which costs £138 billion. The triple lock has seen pensions rise by 60% since 2013 compared to an increase in average earnings of only 42% - all the while being paid for by those still in the work force through their taxes. This is hardly fair.

Changing the triple lock to only track increases in average earnings would save the tax payers £1.5 billion per year (or 68% of the entire unemployment benefit cost).

Lastly just to clear up one common misunderstanding, there is no state pension pot. NI taxation today is used to pay for those that are currently retired in the hope that when those workers retire there will be enough people still in work to pay for their state pension and so on. Think of it more like a Ponzi scheme.

It's like the argument against drugs.

I'd be 100% against drugs that are smoked and so pollute the air as people can't escape from that, you're directly harming other people.

Drugs that aren't smoked I don't care about. Behaviour is indirect and not an immediate threat to the environment.

A drugged up nutcase walking past a playground our outside a maternity ward or next to a pregnant person at a busstop isn't damaging them or their children. Someone smoking definitely is and I have no sympathy at all.

Should be banned.

You can take cocaine doesn't bother me at all but you should be arrested for smoking crack.

Does that answer your question?

Ex smoker and ex binge drinker. I don't drink alcohol at all anymore but I do miss it sometimes. Come from a family of piss heads.

Second hand smoke really impacts me; I have multiple serious condition and even a large whiff under my nose of smoking can bring out painful burning and lip ulcers FFS. But, I think this is too far an imposition! Less and less people smoke as it appears to be significantly more socially unacceptable. I can see it phasing itself out before long and I rarely encounter people outside smoking any places I go as it's less common. So I think why target this? It's nonsensical.
.
Alcohol is for me a much bigger issue. The damage this causes way beyond the physical is life altering for so many. And the effects are like a ripple through families and generations. I don't know how many people just have the odd one and don't become a complete dick afterwards so I can't quantity the social, emotional and psychological damage that goes on behind the scenes.

Even watching people tipsy just makes me cringe now - maybe because I can't relate if I'm not joining in. I'm not for a ban on alcohol as I appreciate it does bring joy socially to many. However, this is by far the most damaging of all the substances in my view.