Rafaël Cruz (Sweden) wrote
at 2:29am on November 17th, 2007
So long the governments do not take real measures to teach people how to drink responsibly a lot of Finns will keep on dying because studies show that you are one of the unhappiest people in Europe. So solve your issues instead of hidding behind lcohol.
Mikko Ellilä wrote
at 8:01pm on December 9th, 2007
Rafaël Cruz (Sweden) wrote:
"So long the governments do not take real measures to teach people how to drink responsibly"
This is an example of typical Swedish socialist thinking.
You're saying the GOVERNMENT should TEACH the people how to drink. In other ords, you see the government as a nanny, and the people as children. This kind of thinking is obviously antagonistic toward democracy. This is why socialists are typically in favour of a dictatorship.
"a lot of Finns will keep on dying because studies show that you are one of the unhappiest people in Europe."
Are you really stupid enough to trust Gallup polls and other such "studies" where people are asked whether they are happy?
"So solve your issues instead of hidding behind alcohol."
Did it ever occur to you that people might drink alcohol for some other reasons than to "hide" some "unsolved" issues?
Rafaël Cruz (Sweden) wrote
at 3:15pm on December 11th, 2007
If you are going to be so stern and impolite you could at least contribute something interesting to the debate. I was referring to studies carried out professionally by the European Union. People drink for many reason but what the debate lacks is substantial information about these reasons. By "teaching" people to handle alcohol I meant that people are well-informed in schools and campaings about the good and bad aspects of alcohol. I do not mean nanny-state politics. Please refrain from insults and enfantile comments next time you write, kiitos.
Mikko Ellilä wrote
at 2:15pm on December 12th, 2007
"If you are going to be so stern and impolite you could at least contribute something interesting to the debate."
There is no need to debate. The government monopoly on the sales of alcohol should be abolished. Enough said.
End of story.
"I was referring to studies carried out professionally by the European Union."
So?
"People drink for many reason but what the debate lacks is substantial information about these reasons."
We don't need to discuss these reasons. Abolish the monopoly. Let the people drink for whatever reason. The monopoly does not stop people from drinking; therefore the reasons why people drink are totally irrelevant to this discussion.
That's it.
Tapio Reinekoski (Uni. Helsinki) wrote
at 1:46pm on July 23rd, 2008
Do you actually believe that in countries as small as Finland, Norway and Sweden there is enough demand for wines (and beers, sure) of any cultural or culinary value to maintain even a bearable selection for people enthusiastic about wine not merely as alcohol?
Bringing down the monopoly of, for instance, Alko in Finland would mean 5€ wines or 20€ BIBs in grocery stores and drive-by supermarkets, and one or two passable wine shops in the centre of Helsinki with a considerably narrower range of products. People who now show even a modest aspiration to the wine (or any alcohol product for that matter) they drink turn to the supermarkets and their elleged convenience.
The only instance protecting the every day availability of quality wines in Finland is Alko (despite the severe rigidness of its selection). If some right wing twats want to savour their free-market-spawned Gato Negro, that's fine. Just don't expect people with taste buds and curiosity to do the same.
Tapio Reinekoski (Uni. Helsinki) wrote
at 1:51pm on July 23rd, 2008
A state owned monopoly is in the current climate still the only way to ensure the availibility of products with low demand. Reasons why they should be availible are probably beyond the Economics 101 for dummies -perception of society and culture.
Mikko Ellilä wrote
a 7:54pm on July 25th, 2008
Tapio Reinekoski appears to be an extremely typical elitist socialist whose reasoning goes along the lines: "I want something that the free market can't provide, therefore I want other people to pay taxes to give me what I want because I'm a better person than they are and therefore I deserve to live at their expense."
I hope this "Tapio Reinekoski" character is actually a standup comedy routine, but I'm afraid he might be a real person because such arrogant authoritarian socialists actually do exist.
Ingrid Irlin wrote
at 9:22pm yesterday
At en stat skal kunne ha monopol på en vanlig forbruksvare, samt nekte myndige personer å nyte alkohol med en viss styrke er rett og slett helt hårreisende. Det er svært få vestlige land som opererer på den måten.
Nämähän ovat sinänsä itsestäänselvyyksiä kaikille täysjärkisille ihmisille, mutta Matti Vanhasen ja Liisa Hyssälän kaltaisten holhousvaltiofanaatikkojen takia näitä itsestäänselvyyksiä täytyy silloin tällöin toistaa.
Mordorin linna on täynnä imbesillejä, jotka edelleen ylläpitävät valtion alkoholimonopolia silkkaa tyhmyyttään ja/tai pahuuttaan.
Ei kommentteja:
Lähetä kommentti