It is almost time for Christian celebration of Easter, but it is celebrated very differently in Ireland compared to many other European countries. The Good Friday is not considered as a bank holiday, but the following Monday is. Ireland has this funny custom to have, almost regardless of the case, a bank holiday on the following monday. St. Patrick's day, Christmas, and New Year's day are the only exceptions to this magnificent rule. The reasoning might have something to do with mixing festivities with alcohol.
For is this not the country which economy is basically run by alcohol. One of the economical meters that this country uses is the amount of Guinness brewed, and consumed per day, per month, and per pub, etc. And when it comes to public drunkenness, the attitudes reflect to those of Great Britain, and Nordic Countries. When it comes to consumption, according to some trusthworthy studies, Ireland beats every European country except those of Austria, and countries east from there (Hungary, Montenegro, etc.). So it came to me as a surprise when there is actually a day when selling of alcohol is prohibited by law.
Well, almost. National Newspaper Publin has brought a list of how to get alcohol (with food in hotels, take a cheap 20 euro flight and go to the airport, check the link), and they do this annually. Thing to notice would also be that if you don't want to get killed by thirsty scavengers of alcohol on Thursday, you should stockpile for this special event already on Wednesday. The couple of years I've spent in the country has proven that there are two days when people go on spending spree. The day before Christmas to buy presents, and more so the day before the Good Friday, which is an absolute mess.
There has only been once a day since 1927 that Irish (well Limerickians) have been able to do their normal alcohol businesses on the Good Friday, and that was in 2010 (Good Friday Disagreement). Personally this offends my Atheism, and my goodwill towards all the Public Houses around the whole country. Our only hope is in the politicians like Frances Fitzgerald, but as long as the reasoning is some Gaelic sports like Rugby, we might only see relaxed regulations during major sports events.
Showing posts with label alcohol. Show all posts
Showing posts with label alcohol. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 31, 2015
Wednesday, February 4, 2015
The tiger is about to touch your pint
It seems that the Irish government is planning to set a minimum price for alcohol reports the Irish Independent. Paper usually uses a lot of pages to slur Sinn Féin, but this time they left out the part that the party was opposing the governments plan, not because of raising alcohol prizes, but that they are not promoting a bill to ban alcohol commercials.
My favorite country for comparing Ireland is Finland, and they officially have both of these bills in affect. High taxation on alcohol, and starting from this year, they have also banned alcohol commercials in spite that there is no evidence that alcohol commercials would affect drinking habits. Though there are some credible sources (citation needed) claiming that the commercials have an affect on which brands people pick up as their drug of the evening. So far the price changes in Finland hasn't affected so much in the usage, as it has more affected on the types of alcohol sold (beer, wine, vodka).
Leo Varadkar seems to believe that higher alcohol prizes will put a hold on domestic violence, sexual violence, and all kinds of other violence. At least if we are interpreting his Independent quote correctly when he stated that "[alcohol is] associated with many suicides and instances of sexual violence, domestic violence and child harm. The time for debate is over, we have had four years of it now. It is over and we need to put those measures into place."
I could make a working theory if I would assume that Varadkar's view of correct social policy by stating that it could be measured. In the future, only the people, who can afford drinking, would be the number one suspects when it comes to domestic violence.
Alcohol prizes might go up to somewhere between 1.70 and 2.20 per beer can. It is not a horrible prize, but it is definitely something to be concerned about. With wines the price range seems to be in par with mine. The minimum prize of wine might go somewhere between 7.20 and 8.80.
On the other hand I would suspect that people might still be drinking, and those who already use all their money to alcohol products will be the ones who will only get poorer at much faster rate.
What I truly believe is that alcohol consumption has many effects on society. Alcohol might break families, but it also creates new ones. Alcohol might be the cause of problematic gambling, but some winnings might only be due to the correct amount of alcohol usage. Anyways, this political process is definitely something to follow up on. It might also give a very good insight on how the mainstream politicians truly feel about alcohol.
Finland's neighbor, Sweden, has their own interpretation of Finnish alcohol politics. Robert Gustafsson shows the five stages of Finnish drinking (in Swedish):
My favorite country for comparing Ireland is Finland, and they officially have both of these bills in affect. High taxation on alcohol, and starting from this year, they have also banned alcohol commercials in spite that there is no evidence that alcohol commercials would affect drinking habits. Though there are some credible sources (citation needed) claiming that the commercials have an affect on which brands people pick up as their drug of the evening. So far the price changes in Finland hasn't affected so much in the usage, as it has more affected on the types of alcohol sold (beer, wine, vodka).
Leo Varadkar seems to believe that higher alcohol prizes will put a hold on domestic violence, sexual violence, and all kinds of other violence. At least if we are interpreting his Independent quote correctly when he stated that "[alcohol is] associated with many suicides and instances of sexual violence, domestic violence and child harm. The time for debate is over, we have had four years of it now. It is over and we need to put those measures into place."
I could make a working theory if I would assume that Varadkar's view of correct social policy by stating that it could be measured. In the future, only the people, who can afford drinking, would be the number one suspects when it comes to domestic violence.
Alcohol prizes might go up to somewhere between 1.70 and 2.20 per beer can. It is not a horrible prize, but it is definitely something to be concerned about. With wines the price range seems to be in par with mine. The minimum prize of wine might go somewhere between 7.20 and 8.80.
On the other hand I would suspect that people might still be drinking, and those who already use all their money to alcohol products will be the ones who will only get poorer at much faster rate.
What I truly believe is that alcohol consumption has many effects on society. Alcohol might break families, but it also creates new ones. Alcohol might be the cause of problematic gambling, but some winnings might only be due to the correct amount of alcohol usage. Anyways, this political process is definitely something to follow up on. It might also give a very good insight on how the mainstream politicians truly feel about alcohol.
Finland's neighbor, Sweden, has their own interpretation of Finnish alcohol politics. Robert Gustafsson shows the five stages of Finnish drinking (in Swedish):
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)