sqbr: A cartoon cat saying Ham! (ham!)
Sean ([personal profile] sqbr) wrote2008-05-18 06:46 pm
Entry tags:

On the inventiveness of teenagers

So, I don't drink, never really got into it, and it's been nearly ten years since I was a teenager.

But while adding a tax to pre mixed drinks may cut down on teens drinking, wouldn't the logical solution just be for them to...mix their own drinks?

If I was a bottleshop owner I'd start selling value packs of fanta and vodka.

EDIT: Cam has pointed out that if any of you were dumb enough to go "Oh well, guess I'll have to stop drinking" I've just set you back on the path to drunkenness and ruin. Eh, I don't think any of you are teenagers anyway :)

EDIT 2: So apparently they're just making the tax more consistent, since it used to be cheaper to buy premixed drinks than the raw ingredients. That makes sense then, but the article is still dumb.

[identity profile] strangedave.livejournal.com 2008-05-18 11:39 am (UTC)(link)
As Maelkann points out, they've raised the tax actually to equalise with non-mixed, because previously it was cheaper to buy a load of RTDs than to buy your own (cheap) bourbon and coke and mix them yourself.

alias_sqbr: the symbol pi on a pretty background (Default)

[personal profile] alias_sqbr 2008-05-18 12:03 pm (UTC)(link)
Ahh...well, that makes sense then.

[identity profile] evil-megz.livejournal.com 2008-05-19 10:15 am (UTC)(link)
It doesn't make sense to me... through my teenage years I learned that to save money you bought a bottle of cheap spirits, or a flask of goon. I've never heard of people buying premixes because they are cheaper.

I thought the problem with premixes was they are marketed at a younger audience (like softdrink) than bottles of spirits, so they attract young drinkers.
alias_sqbr: the symbol pi on a pretty background (Default)

[personal profile] alias_sqbr 2008-05-20 05:24 am (UTC)(link)
I have no idea, I don't think I've ever paid money for alcohol that wasn't for cooking :)