Does a ban on booze help?

Does a ban on booze help free up valuable space and resources in the hospitals?

  • Yes

    Votes: 222 52.1%

  • No

    Votes: 204 47.9%
  • Total voters
    426
At most it could have been justified as a short term method to ease the pressure in hospitals to enable government (if they were halfway competent) to implement emergency measures.

Government incompetence, general corruption, lack of law enforcement and functioning judiciary can not be fixed by draconian measures that cuts R10billions from already empty state coffers each month, feeds organised crime and SAPS corruption, cuts jobs that put 1000s of people on the street and that could have used the private healthcare system.

Frankly if you voted yes my only conclusion is that you either saw this a mile away and have good stash or know a SAPS buddy with contacts and were drunk off your tits when you clicked yes.
 
Rouxenator said:
I think a far bigger problem we have, which is highlighted by this alcohol issue, is the adulthood in this country.

The reason you can only drink or get a drivers license or vote when you are over 18 is because you are considered to be mature enough (adult) to understand the risks and consequences involved.

Yet is seems we have a vast majority that are not up to the task of being adults.

Another telltale sign of this adulthood problem is the majority vote in the country. That is a much bigger adulthood problem than alcohol to be honest.
Click to expand...
 
Couldnt agree more so now everyone suffers because of supposedly adults pushing the boundries
 
Balancing lives saved because additional hospital beds was available against damage to the economy and job losses is a difficult thing to do. Whether the decisions made were correct will become apparent later. Then the blame game will start.
 
Booze bans just shows you how majority of the country gets out of hand when drunk, why are dronkies stabbing each other when booze is available? I can understand the odd fist fight or two but damn they really want to kill each other.
 
It is the curfew contributing to less so called alcohol related incidents.
Most people after 10 days of this alcohol ban still have ample stock, whether legal or illegal.
The alcohol ban are irrational without any stats to proof reasons for it.
 
KikzAzz said:
The already is a sin tax as well.

The hospitals that was built to handle the increase in hospitilisations stands unused. Even worse, one of the big hospitals was closed after a fire and never opened again.
Click to expand...

If it is the hospital I think you are talking about, it was an utter shithole.
 
10% of alcohol users cause 90% of the problem but all have to suffer because of the irresponsible goons!
 
Tman543 said:
Booze bans just shows you how majority of the country gets out of hand when drunk, why are dronkies stabbing each other when booze is available? I can understand the odd fist fight or two but damn they really want to kill each other.
Click to expand...
And these are people that are allowed to vote....
 
Off course it does. Casualty on weekends is a ghost town when theres a booze ban, where usually we'd see 50+ patients per night, this weekend past was just 9 in total for the entire weekend. The difference is night and day, there is so much more time and resources to see to people who need help when you don't have to resuscitate drunks and their victims every 20 minutes
 
I'm afraid a lot of South Africans abuse alcohol. This leads to a obvious reduction in safety on the roads and elsewhere
 
Having family who work in healthcare industry the answer is yes..

Is it sustainable longer term.. no.

Is it a solution going forward.. no.

Is it the only way for a brief interlude to reduce trauma cases.. yes.
This is quite sad but, as I usually bitch about people being very hard headed with things of the past or future, as much as they accuse others of the same.. even when faced with imminent demise.. they will still do the thing that causes problems. Not sure if this is a uniquely SA thing(across race and culture).

The longer term solution is the one the alcohol industry is scared of(lobbying has squashed this for 2 decades despite many findings).. ie like the tobacco industry, advertisement, sponsorship(marketing + advertisement.. it’s not about the sport), punitive taxes to reduce or erode the affordability etc is all coming. If you look back at ngo reports on the industry and the cost thereof on society .. then no.. it costs the country more than. It makes excluding export. Until such a time society moves to be more responsible, government has to do what it can assist a change and ironically this involves reducing the drinking population by changing norms. As I said previously.. alcohol industry could do this with out as much impact.. gov impact globally hits drinkers unless drinkers regulate their behavior.

And while many, incl. myself, think that this yet another case of a small subset % of irresponsible citizens causing drama for others.. the remedial action is not out of line with norms elsewhere. Nanny state? Sure.. but in a country where tax payers & professionals are a very small subset of society.. is it ok to have them taken out by a drunk driver who often is on the other end of the productivity scale? Let alone taking out or with(in case of transit driver) numerous passengers which costs a lot in settlement.

Sure.. in a perfect world we won’t need insurance and in this case won’t need any restraints.. but SA is a far from this.
 
Last edited:
krycor said:
Having family who work in healthcare industry the answer is yes..

Is it sustainable longer term.. no.

Is it a solution going forward.. no.

Is it the only way for a brief interlude to reduce trauma cases.. yes.
This is quite sad but, as I usually bitch about people being very hard headed with things of the past or future, as much as they accuse others of the same.. even when faced with imminent demise.. they will still do the thing that causes problems. Not sure if this is a uniquely SA thing(across race and culture).

The longer term solution is the one the alcohol industry is scared of(lobbying has squashed this for 2 decades despite many findings).. ie like the tobacco industry, advertisement, sponsorship(marketing + advertisement.. it’s not about the sport), punitive taxes to reduce or erode the affordability etc is all coming. If you look back at ngo reports on the industry and the cost thereof on society .. then no.. it costs the country more than. It makes excluding export. Until such a time society moves to be more responsible, government has to do what it can assist a change and ironically this involves reducing the drinking population by changing norms. As I said previously.. alcohol industry could do this with out as much impact.. gov impact globally hits drinkers unless drinkers regulate their behavior.

And while many, incl. myself, think that this yet another case of a small subset % of irresponsible citizens causing drama for others.. the remedial action is not out of line with norms elsewhere. Nanny state? Sure.. but in a country where tax payers & professionals are a very small subset of society.. is it ok to have them taken out by a drunk driver who often is on the other end of the productivity scale? Let alone taking out or with(in case of transit driver) numerous passengers which costs a lot in settlement.

Sure.. in a perfect world we won’t need insurance and in this case won’t need any restraints.. but SA is a far from this.
Click to expand...
This is rubbish.

Anything that takes a job away from somebody is a BAD THING! I don’t care about the healthcare industry’s failure to cope with this situation. They have been raping us for decades by overcharging us for everything related to medicine and treatment. Now they want us to feel sorry for them because they can’t cope with the influx of new business? Well stuff them and their BS attitudes, I say.

Get cancer in this country and you will find out just how much the “industry” cares about you when they start sending you their bills.

I feel nothing for them. Useless, money grubbing twats.
 
How many people end up in hospital as a result of crimes committed due to economic circumstances? How much lower would that value be if we had better policing?

Now let's go to the industry responsible for that - government and their corruption.

So applying the alcohol sales ban logic here we should completely ban government because it causes poor policing and dire economic circumstances for the masses resulting in crime.
 
bwana said:
Do you believe that a complete ban on alcohol help free up valuable space and resources in the hospitals?

Follow-up: And if so does that justify the ban or are the other costs associated with the ban (income, tax money, etc) more important?
Click to expand...
It won't help to completely ban it but control the influx of it. Rather limit the quantity to outlets ,cut on hours especially shebeen
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X