A story in New Scientist talks about proposals (well advanced in Scotland, the rest of the UK may well follow) to impose minimum prices for alcohol, based on those “units” that we’re constantly told that most of us drink too many of.
It’s all about trying to restrict anti-social behaviour and alcohol-fuelled violence in towns, cities, and indeed people’s homes. It’s likely to be unpopular with owners of bars which survive on promotional pricing, and there would be much weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth from people who like to drink a lot, but is it really that bad? According to New Scientist’s figures:
Making 50 pence the minimum charge for a unit of alcohol would undoubtedly hit drinkers in their pockets, pushing up the price of a bottle of wine to at least £4.50, a bottle of whisky to £15 and a six-pack of premium lager to £7.50.
Look, drinkable wine starts at slightly above £4.50, except when something better is on special offer. Whisky? I don’t buy it often, but I don’t recall paying under £20 for a bottle in a very long time, but that might be because I like a nice single malt if I’m going to drink the stuff. Perhaps this measure, if it comes about, will lead to people drinking more quality and less quantity? Works for me…
OK, I might have mentioned that I’m rather fond of a good espresso or three. While I generally enjoy it here at home, I do like a good coffee shop – a good one being one with good espresso, comfortable seats and an atmosphere that encourages you to relax and enjoy the coffee and any food items you might fancy. So I’m not sure about this at all:
Look, I don’t want to be excited by a coffee shop. I want to be welcomed and relaxed by one. Still, I suppose it’s not as bad as the sign I saw a while back telling me that an “exciting shoe shop” was about to open. I really don’t find shoes at all exciting…
When I left home this morning, it was bright and sunny, so I took my camera with me, planning to have a bit of a photographic stroll at lunchtime. Naturally, by the time I could leave the office, it had clouded over and was threatening to rain. But I was in the mood, so I went out anyway, with my trusty 50mm lens attached to the 30D. The light was far from ideal, but I got a few pictures I like, and one which I’ll have to repeat with different lenses and different light conditions. This one, in fact:
Somehow, despite passing that way many, many times over the years, I’d never noticed how the Tyne Bridge creates these nicely interesting fragmented reflections in these upper windows. And now I’ve seen it, I’ll have to go back when the light’s better, and try some variations on this picture. But this one will do for now.
Well, that’s March out of the way. And while observant readers may have noticed that I haven’t actually got round to the February end of month report, it’s time for this month’s summary.
March 1: 218 pounds (15 stone 8 pounds, 98.9 kg) March 31: 215.4 pounds (15 stone 5.4 pounds, 97.7 kg) Difference: A fall of 2.6 pounds (1.2 kg), made more dramatic by the unexpected bloatage on the first of the month
Totally random fluctuations were the main feature of March.
Not done at all well this month. Too many sausage rolls, and a possible excess of bacon and the like at weekends. And possibly more bottles of wine than normal, too.
Remarkably little of that has gone on. Walking has been occasional only.
Well, I had a bit of a dip for much of the month, relieved only by automagic posts relating to my day’s Twitter activity. However, I seem to have picked up a bit in the last few days, and caught up with some stuff. Total for March is 7779 80 including this report, some random Twitterage, and including a few posts following this one.
Still not doing much photography, though I did get out a couple of times. Still too much going on at work…
 It may appear later. How much later remains to be seen
 Not that much later, as it turned out