That's really what it's all about: who your role model is. Whether you think life is just great as is, or whether you want to ascend to the glory of your inner something and claim your eternal something else and then….. Who cares ? If you really can't stand booze then we, unlike YOU, are not forcing our lifestyle on anyone. Leave us alone, shut it and just sit in the corner and enjoy an evian or something.
The House of Dumb stands up against the BBC's war on drinking, or rather, war on drinkers. My own take on this is here. There's a classic public choice argument as to why the government is complicit in the rise of the phenomena they seek to destroy, and the solution isn't taxation, it's choice.
Not sure about that House Of Dumb post you link to (bit of a straw-man rant really) or whether a couple of programmes constitutes a war on drinkers by the BBC (although I remember watching the Panorama programme you referred to in your previous post, and it was the most dreadful one sided rubbish).
But I think tou make some very good points in your other post. Government legislation may well makes some problems worse, and as a drinker I certainly don’t want my freedoms curtailed; but I can see a lot of problems excessive drinking can cause.
I was interested in this quote from your earlier post…
The emergency services can complain all they want about how expensive it is to look after us all on a Saturday night, but this merely hints at the underlying problem. If you wish to nanny, expect children. With no financial penalty for drunkeness ansd irresponsibility - if the public purse picks up the bill, then of course people will make unwise decisions. For those who advocate socialised services that erode personal responsibility, funding A&E is a fair cost.
I wonder if you could explain a way out of this conundrum? Are you suggesting that with lighter state control people would get less drunk and rowdy and more responsible in general? How can you prevent the public purse from picking up the tab for drunkenness, and so instil more personal responsibility? Could you go into more detail about your solution to a problem you seem to recognise?
Posted by: Quinn | December 10, 2005 at 04:37 PM
"How can you prevent the public purse from picking up the tab for drunkenness, and so instil more personal responsibility?"
I think private medical insurance is the way to go - scrap the NHS and give vouchers to people who otherwise couldn't afford it. I don't think that the majority of A&E issues are random attacks on innocent bystanders - typically it's a fight between people that are both in the wrong, and if they have to pay for their own treatment (via insurance) then they'll be less likely to kick off.
Some people like a good scrap, and i don't think the police should get too worked up about that, but I object to us all having to pay for it.
Posted by: AJE | December 13, 2005 at 04:05 PM
I've done a rambling and somewhat over-long post over at my own blog, The Obscurer, which covers some of these points, if anyone cares. Just follow the trackback thingy.
Posted by: Quinn | December 14, 2005 at 01:50 PM
Doesn't seem to like my trackback; damned technology. This is the link to my post.
Posted by: Quinn | December 14, 2005 at 01:56 PM