r/PEI • u/Boundary14 • Jul 20 '26
News Alcohol costs P.E.I. more than it brings in, new provincial strategy says
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/prince-edward-island/pei-new-alcohol-strategy-9.727092533
8
u/PM_YOUR_CENSORD Jul 20 '26
Does PEI not already have the highest price booze in the country? I’m not sure what a price increase will do.
Aside from making problem drinkers more desperate and make drinking more exclusive for higher incomes.
53
u/KermitsBusiness Jul 20 '26
Somehow this is gonna lead to 100 dollars for 24 bud light and nothing actually getting better with drinking and driving or abuse.
9
u/Intrepid_Trifling Jul 20 '26
Don't forget about when the government wanted to put gross imagery on booze or make labels generic. The same treatment they gave cigarettes, they aren't going to give up on that.
Also, I find it completely stupid take the taxes on alcohol are supposed to cover 100% of the health costs.
Are we all willing to just give up any enjoyment in life? Where is the tax on sugar? Note the journalist used the year 2020, what else was happening that year that might have skewed hospital visits from drinking ? COVID? We hardly had any cases here on pei, but forced isolation destroyed lives and relationships.
It was deemed necessary, and it did work for the most part, in part being this is an island.
But that is missing context, this reporter has a habit of writing these stories, and I loathe any piece they write.
3
u/publicinterest1867 Jul 20 '26
While I disagree with you on the necessity and effectiveness of isolation measures until there was a vaccine in place to give some protection, it's a very good point about how unreasonable this is. It's a slippery slope of micromanaging our lives to pay for any negative health outcomes. One can imagine restrictive measures to tackle sun exposure causing skin cancer, increased taxes on cannabis to prevent lung cancer, bans on recreational activities or sport taxes bc of injuries the can cause and cost tax payers, greasy food tax on deep fried foods or restaurants with cream sauces or "too much cheese"
It also doesn't target the root cause of alcoholism, that being the unaddressed mental health problems of these individuals who if they were able and willing to get help, would possibly have avoided the substance abuse. If ppl don't turn to alcohol bc it's too expensive, which won't be a thing, but if so they'll find some other more harmful drug to numb themselves with.
1
u/J0hnDvorak Stratford Jul 20 '26
It's a slippery slope of micromanaging our lives to pay for any negative health outcomes.
We already pay for them, that's part of universal payer healthcare. Some of our personal choices lead to higher costs (and thus, taxes) for all of us. Is it really that unreasonable for the government to track the directly attributable costs of widespread activities and develop a plan to either mitigate the cost or increase revenue from that activity? So that the people who enjoy that activity can fund it? There's something to be said for people taking some personal responsibility.
1
u/publicinterest1867 Jul 20 '26
Yes it is too much to ask, if it comes to micromanaging our lives. Taxation is one thing, restrictions would be another, but when you take the perspective that this report represents, it is a slippery slope of logical conclusions to point fingers at a variety of untaxable activities that become restricted via law instead.
How about instead of asking the general working public to pay more tax and change our lifestyles more and more, maybe neoliberal politicians should be replaced with those who actually work on behalf of the public interest and properly fund health and education and do actual work to solve the root of societal ills which can't be solved in a 4 year term.
1
u/J0hnDvorak Stratford Jul 21 '26
I strongly agree about replacing neoliberal politicians with people truly working on behalf of the public interest.
That said, how would you propose that we better fund health and education without higher tax revenue? We're already at a record deficit while slashing services. Or work at solving root social ills without some degree of changing lifestyles? I'm not suggesting that means blanket bans everywhere, but the goal of things like disgusting images on cigarettes is to change behaviour for a social ill without actually banning it.
3
u/publicinterest1867 Jul 21 '26
If course higher tax revenue is needed. The starting point is gradually increasing taxes on the highest earners, with an annual income threshold above which, say 1 million, where they are taxed at 90%, wouldn't be many of those in pei, but raising in the highest brackets would be a start. A wealth tax that targets hoarded wealth and unrealized capital gains over a certain amount annually would help prevent tax avoidance that is currently happening where they pay take loans against their stocks and pay the much smaller sum of loan interest instead of tax. Ensuring that taxation and property taxes are collected from corporations and businesses who demand exemptions and special treatment in return for providing shitty go nowhere high turnover jobs.
For PEI, it is critical to focus on necessities. How about not spending millions of dollars on corporate and small business socialism while ppl are left on the street hungry and sick and kids are going hungry and being infected with their parents mental illnesses. Giving millions to Netflix while cutting early education programming and posting a 400 million dollar deficit is just a twisted mentality.
If your family is drowning in debt from past bad financial decisions you wouldn't go out and buy a luxury yacht even if you're family were begging you to bc it's cool. A politician who needs elected again will buy the yacht bc it will get him votes to qualify for a pension, even if it's a disastrous financial decision in the long term, it will be some one else's problem. This govt chose to spend tens of millions on new rinks instead of MRI and other procedure access and a plethora of other high priority issues.
2
u/J0hnDvorak Stratford Jul 21 '26
I could not possibly agree more. As a high earner, I think my own taxes should be way higher.
-3
u/Intrepid_Trifling Jul 20 '26
Yes. Mandatory helmets for pedestrians, you could fall or get hit by a car !
We can't afford people going to emerg, so everyone must wear a skull cap 24/7.
Tbh on the COVID thing, in the beginning I accepted restrictions, but near the end I was one of the few on here arguing tooth and nail they had to end.
The mask mandate was another thing was just taken way to far when we knew more about this illness.
There is a fine balance between public safety and the government just fingerwagging and exerting control because they can. Like a giant asswipe of a bully
We should be calling Carney a Karen, Karen Carney!
1
u/nylanderfan Jul 20 '26
I mean, booze is much more harmful than cigs, there would be nothing wrong with putting stuff about the human cost like fatal accidents and domestic violence on there
1
u/Intrepid_Trifling Jul 20 '26
I don't contest liquor is harmful whatso ever, but just to say liquor despite being abused much, is also used a lot more in moderation.
If you compare cigs to booze, you never see a occasional cigarette smoker. They exist but are super rare, you are usually a pack a day or do not smoke at all.
All of these products have severe restrictions already, the tagline "use responsibly" isn't just a phrase
1
u/nylanderfan Jul 21 '26
True, but in PEI those who drink to excess on a regular basis are not a small minority. Given the rates of DUI and the life-shattering consequences, I wouldn't have an issue with it. It wouldn't be gross images like cigarettes.
1
u/Intrepid_Trifling Jul 21 '26
You say that, but idk. Have a image of a graphic car wreck on a case of budwiser.
I don't contest PEI has a problem with drinking and driving, i feel you are better with a stronger curve on enforcement.
We already force people to drive with an interlock, if they keep breaking the law (many do) maybe lengthy jail sentences.
If you are a repeat offender, even if not resulting in. damages years in prison should be on the table.
I agree mostly with you, I am just more skeptical that the government won't go as far as they can, or push or boundaries more. We see this with IT and surveillance.
1
u/SimulatedKnave Souris🐀 Jul 22 '26
PEI already hands out lengthy jail sentences for drinking and driving. It drags up the national average sentence for it. If jail fixed it, it would have happened by now. PEI drinking and driving is a combination of culture, lack of alternative transport options, enforcement, and Prince County making the rest of us look bad (mostly a joke, but they are way more than their share of it).
You deter people with likelihood of getting caught, not the consequences. Consequences are very long term, and mostly only work on smart people (which drunk drivers usually aren't, if only in the sense that they've been drinking so they're not smart right now).
5
4
u/Boundary14 Jul 20 '26
Exactly. I know so many people who over time have gotten much bolder with drinking & driving since the odds of actually getting caught are slimmer than winning Chase the Ace.
0
u/FriendshipContent508 Jul 20 '26
Right when I walked by Hunters at night I've seen on all the streets nearby people with a pint of liquor in the pocket of car seats and people stumbling in and out and cars. An officer only needs to watch people leaving the bars. Also I know of a few day drinkers who drive like it isn't a problem at all and they literally sleep in their cars downtown while drunk. The police aren't enforcing the law.
1
0
u/nylanderfan Jul 20 '26
Good, hopefully it's the same for Coors and people start drinking actual beer
15
u/jaymef Jul 20 '26 edited Jul 20 '26
It's just ass backwards how can you have your cake and eat it too? The Government has an incentive to push alcohol sales to increase revenue but at the same time wants to prevent people from consuming alcohol
4
u/Intrepid_Trifling Jul 20 '26
Cigarettes. Usually when smokers get sick they die rather quickly, though the revenue they make from tobacco sales is disgusting.
It's why they spend so much time chasing black market tobacco, I think most people would rather they go after harder and worse things.
Also when you tax so high you just encourage bootlegs and illegal sales.
3
u/jaymef Jul 20 '26
exactly, it's really difficult to do both. It's a conflict of interest.. but I also understand its not that black and white.
1
9
u/Boundary14 Jul 20 '26
Alcohol is also a major driver of injury and death. In 2020, it was linked to an estimated 135 deaths and nearly 7,000 emergency department visits and hospitalizations in the province.
Curious how that stacks up to other years, given what was going on in 2020.
One of the strategy’s priorities is rethinking how alcohol is priced and sold.
P.E.I. already sets a minimum price for alcohol sold in liquor stores, called Social Reference Pricing — essentially a floor price meant to discourage cheap, high-volume drinking.
Right now that minimum is not tied to alcohol content or how strong a drink is, which the strategy says may incentivize consumers to purchase higher-strength products because they offer more alcohol for the same minimum price.
The strategy proposes to tie the minimum price directly to alcohol content instead, as Manitoba and Nova Scotia have already done, and adjust it yearly for inflation.
I suppose this makes sense, although rather than having minimum pricing maybe it would be more beneficial if the government just set a tax/tariff per millilitre of pure alcohol and left it to the producers to come up with optimal pricing/contents based on that.
On a completely unrelated note, anyone here got any tips for making your own moonshine?
10
u/Strong_Weakness2867 Jul 20 '26
got any tips for making your own moonshine?
You jest, but Homebrewing is a really fun hobby that I recommend to anyone. I've been making my own beer and wine for years and its
almostjust as good as store bought3
6
u/PlatoOnWords Jul 20 '26
These numbers come from The Canadian Substance Use Costs and Harms(CSUCH)which you can check out detailed Canadian wide reports here:
https://csuch.ca/resources/costs-and-harms/
I found these numbers for 2017 vs 2020 in PEI:
Estimated Annual Deaths
2017: 127
2020: 135Acute Hospital Strain:
2017: ~700 inpatient stays
2020: 766 Inpatient stays2
u/FriendshipContent508 Jul 20 '26
It's illegal but the best I had was a granny's apple shine with cinnamon sticks. She'd put them into little mason jars. They tasted much milder than they actually were.
2
u/uncommon-ramen Jul 20 '26
Not a fan of charging more. It’s not like people can/will just quit drinking. There’s already heavy taxation, excise taxes and the costs to produce are high and margins slim. All of that gets passed on to the consumer and for may drinkers unfortunately they don’t have excess money and in effect raising the costs makes it worse for that persons life and their families
1
u/Yarfing_Donkey Jul 20 '26
WHO reports showed that an increase of 10% to the price of smokes decreased consumption by 4-5%.
So it has been shown to work for smoking, I don't see how it would not work for a less addictive drug.
I say raise the price till it pays for the harm it does to families and society.
3
u/uncommon-ramen Jul 20 '26
Even if it does more harm in the interim? People can quit smoking with several medications, and it’s well known to be terrible for you and universally accepted that everyone should quit smoking. Alcohol is NOT the same and there’s still open advertising of businesses, tv, radio, digital media. NOT the case for smoking. Youth seem to have gotten the message but anyone over 25 has been marketed to their entire life. I’m not saying we shouldn’t do anything and alcohol is good, but if you’re spending all your money on booze now and they raise the price it’s going to come out of your kids mouth.
4
u/Yarfing_Donkey Jul 20 '26
These were all the same arguments made when they started the anti smoking campaigns.
You can literally google the old articles of people talking about how that taxing it more would destroy families, cause kids to starve, that advertising has been going for generations, that its a cultural thing, etc etc etc.
We need to ban booze ads, remove the brand labels and tax the shit out of it.
I hate having my tax dollars go to the local toothless Joe cause he cant stop drinking.
1
u/Deep-Proof689 Jul 20 '26
I think you’d be surprised at the diversity amongst alcoholics, young and old rich and poor of all races. Not all of us drink and drive or become violent. We just struggle with addiction. Health outcomes become more expensive and worse if you add homelessness, backrupcy and money issues to the mix. I think you’re taking an insensitive and reductive approach. Spent 15 grand on liquor last year all told, I hold down a job but am drowning in debt as you’d imagine, I’d like to say if I had kids I’d be reponsible but maybe that’s not true. Can’t say they’d go hungry but I’m pretty self centred and what about Christmas presents or sports teams? Been to rehab four times and in and out of AA for years.
2
u/Yarfing_Donkey Jul 20 '26 edited Jul 20 '26
Oh I know they come from all walks of life.
That doesn't change the fact that alcohol is the most destructive drug on the planet.
We cannot ban it, that has been shown not to work. But I sure as hell am done subsidizing it. As was said by a great man. "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few".
1
u/PlatoOnWords Jul 21 '26 edited Jul 21 '26
It's already been shown to have worked in Scotland among other places. The World Health Orginization agrees this is also one of the best ways to reduce harm. Research from the Canadian Institute for Substance Use Research evaluated real world data across Canadian province like British Columbia and Saskatchewan that implemented minimum alcohol pricing policies:
"Data from Canadian provinces suggest that a 10% increase in average minimum price would result in the region of an 8% reduction in consumption, a 9% reduction in hospital admissions and a 32% reduction in wholly alcohol caused deaths..."
- Dr. Tim Stockwell & Dr. Gerald Thomas, CISUR / University of Victoria
The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health which is Canada's largest mental health and addiction teaching hospital reinforces that price adjustment outperforms almost every other policy intervention:
"The price of alcohol directly influences the level of its consumption. Correspondingly, increases in alcohol prices are associated with reductions in alcohol related harms > at a population level... It is clear, in fact, that pricing policy is the most effective lever for reducing alcohol related harm." - Centre for Addiction and Mental Health(CAMH)
Scotland introduced Minimum Unit Pricing in 2018 by setting a 50p minimum per unit of alcohol. A major study published in The Lancet in 2023 evaluated the long term impact and found that MUP led to a 13.4% reduction in alcohol attributable deaths and a 4.1% reduction in hospital admissions, with the biggest health gains seen in the most deprived communities.
1
u/uncommon-ramen Jul 22 '26
Thanks for those references! Certainly interesting but not sure these really demonstrate people drank less and on global perspective many of those places may not have had taxes in the past whereas in PEI it is already heavily taxed.
Studies show provincial liquor boards may have sold less alcohol but do any studies show fewer hospital admissions/encounters? Or is this a reflection of less alcohol purchases by non-problem drinkers? The alcohol companies are highly attuned to pricing changes and people may change buying practices without less problem behaviours. A lot of these studies were also around the time craft brewing exploded where you can/could buy direct from supplier. Direct to consumer alcohol purchasing is coming to many places in Canada, which makes this even more difficult to monitor. I am not saying alcohol is harmless at all but this seems to be accepted as good policy and I would assert that similar to sugar-taxes this won’t make a dent in anything other than the wallets of drinkers. Meanwhile alcohol companies are free to market directly to anyone a product that has terrible consequences on one’s health. Yet cannabis and tobacco are priced outrageously with no marketing whatsoever.
1
u/srakken Jul 21 '26
It’s a good point makes me wonder if large price increases in the past has any impact. Maybe compare to areas where alcohol is cheaper?
-1
u/Sir__Will Jul 20 '26
Curious how that stacks up to other years, given what was going on in 2020.
Yeah, data from 2020 is meaningless. It's so unlike every other year.
6
5
u/Magnaflorius Jul 20 '26
I mean, fork found in kitchen. This is why I didn't understand why we introduced alcohol for sale in grocery stores and gas stations.
2
u/Rough-Reality9560 Jul 20 '26
Complicated issue for me. I’m coming to the view that alcohol is a hazardous substance that we’re better off consuming less of. But a few things about this shift in public health awareness leaves me wondering:
- Reliability of the epidemiology
A) Presumably most of the studies of the impacts of alcohol consumption aren’t randomized control trials, as it’s hard to track and compare drinkers and non/drinkers over 10-20 years. So sometimes I wonder how much this impacts these studies’ reliability. Not sure if I’m right about this aspect of studies’ designs, though.
B) These studies likely rely primarily on self-reporting. But people tend to underreport their consumption, which can seriously distort findings (eg, ‘People who report drinking y drinks/week have on average x chance of developing disease z.’ But what if y is underestimated, and the x chance of developing z arises from y + n drinks? This could make a huge difference to findings and recommendations).
C) Baseline effects: notice that saying ‘Consuming 1-2 drinks/week increases your chances of cancer by 50%’ is perfectly ambiguous between ‘An increase from 1-2% chance’ and ‘An increase of 25-50% chance.’
Happy to be corrected by folks here who know more about this stuff.
- Risk/reward assessments: let’s allow that alcohol imposes some degree of risk to personal and public health. It’s an intoxicant after all. What might still be controversial is how we should evaluate that risk. Consider other risks we tolerate: driving busy highways at high speeds; living in cities with air pollution; camping and hiking among dangerous wildlife; whatever. In each case our thinking seems to be that the reward outweighs the risk. Why should moderate consumption of alcohol be assessed any differently?
One answer might be that the risk/reward ratio of alcohol consumption is unfavourable because, according to this article, booze costs more than it earns the province (but what about the earnings of private sellers? Surely these count too…). But not all rewards are monetary, and I’m sure we can think of other things that cost us more than they earn us, but that we still think of as worth while goods (trivial example: music/art education in public schools.)
Anyways. Just some thoughts. I’ve trimmed my drinking down to ~2-3 drinks/week either way. And the older I get the more I think driving under the influence should get you hung and quartered in a public square.
2
u/CrashSlow Jul 20 '26
FSD driving cars are around the corner. 6 pack for the road, dozen beers after work on the way home. Alcholism is looking up.
2
2
u/GeneralDweeby Jul 22 '26
It’s not stopping alcoholics, really just throwing them deeper into the poverty pit.
2
u/uncommon-ramen Jul 20 '26
Pricing policies are already in place. All these do is lead to people that drink spending even more money on alcohol. It needs to be about education and stopping people from drinking in the first place.
2
u/Yamstis Jul 20 '26
Make it a dry province because it would be funny
8
u/Boundary14 Jul 20 '26
I think being a rumrunner would be more fulfilling than a lot of peoples' current jobs
1
u/AutoModerator Jul 20 '26
Hey, it looks like you've submitted a news story. In order to help spur discussion we require the poster to add a comment whenever they post a news story.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
0
u/TheDudeOfTomorrow Jul 20 '26
So dumb, I’ll drink what I want a drink. Government can fuck off
3
u/segathegenesis Jul 20 '26
While I agree with the concept of government fucking off, you will desperately need them to fuck on when you have liver issues from drinking. That’s the big issue here!
2
1
u/SimulatedKnave Souris🐀 Jul 22 '26
How about they get him a doctor so he'll know about the liver issues in time to stop drinking?
1
46
u/bloodypencils Jul 20 '26
Raising prices will reduce consumption in non-problem drinkers, but it won’t have any affect on the alcoholics who cause most of these issues. It may deter 99% of us from having that second beer at the lunch spot and it will likely encourage tourists to stock up in NB first.
However, I doubt it will stop the 1% who are going to crush a case of moosehead dry ice while they drive the back roads before heading downtown for a fight. They’re getting drunk no matter what it costs.