I'll probably be shot for this one, but good! They're expensive as hell, horrible pits of socially acceptable alcoholism which tend to end up in misery for a lot of people. Everyone found better, healthier things to do and better places to hang out and did it.
Its not like there aren't still a metric ton of purveyors of liquid death and destruction. People would be better off in every way with the return of Opium dens, at least they don't destroy your physical and mental body as badly and irreoverably than/as alcohol
This is to say nothing of the violence and murdery shit that directly flows from alcohol consumption, statistically speaking
If you are looking for how alcohol, despite the author acknowledging that alcohol is physically not great for humans, has some positive benefits, I highly recommend checking out the below:
Drunk: How We Sipped, Danced, and Stumbled Our Way to Civilization Hardcover
by Edward Slingerland
I appreciate that but truth be told, I'm not interested in learning or experiencing any more from that product + soectrum of relevant lifestyles. Thanks tho, but I have learned many diffict lessons that Im equal parts grateful for and being away from going forward :)
They can't copyright or whatever otherwise reserve and deter me for professing a metaphor. I stand by what I said, that would not be a popular lawsuit if I were mistaken and I would be answering fully to it. Cheeky tho =D
Edi: okay, give me a few months' headstart, got some other nails to hit so I don't continue to step on them as I approach. They will have to come to me tho, I don't do international lawsuits lol. The quality or expense or dilligence of their anti-accountabillity hit squad are of zero consequence to me and they will come to know accountabillity finally.
What about sugars and fast food? Heart disease is a leading cause of death and diabetes in rising in most populations. We have sugary drinks and fast food to thank for it. Strange I don't see culture warriors going after these things. Feels more like a come back of good old Puritanism perhaps. No thanks.
Death liquids come in many carbohydrate-based offerings and forums. They all suck, we're talking about alcohol right now. We can't shut down everything at once or snap fingers and change people'seating habits willy-nilly, can we? Should we even try if we can't do it perfectly, immediately, and seamlessly?
I don't believe we should shut down any of these places. In moderation they are all fine. Advocating for abstinence is a proven failed strategy and requires fairly authoritarian methods to make work.
Educating people is the only moral approach, but these days anyones opinion is as valid as expert knowledge so that is out the window.
I'm not advocating for abstinence, I'm advocating for people relocating to whats open if they want to do pub stuff. I'm simply stating my conviction that the fewer places (nothing about 0 or overly-prohibitive), the generally better off society is as long as there is help finding a new income and stabillity and a reasonable offramp for those affected in terms of employment since its unthinkable to simply provide an income for people so we can all be ok on that front.
I did share my personal take on what I want and don't want going forward beacause of where I was with it in my life and where I'm going now that I am not weighed down and mutated by it any further.
There's zero coercion. If people want to try to grt off, I would say talk to your dr and request nalfamene so you can still drink what you like but in a context that starts to remove the psychological and physical hooks it digs into anyone who loses the plot with it. If you need the anxiety help, request baclofen as an adjuvant and work your way down at whatever pace if at all that works for you
Nalfamene or naltrexone or whatever opidoid antagonists are available thru NHS is a successfull and affirming approach that makesit simple and likely to be successfull with attenuating issues with addiction and use of alcohol. I get I'm n=1 but what's the harm in exploring your options?
If I loved someone and I was invested/wanted them to heal and organically redefine their relationship with alc, I would help them with this even if I had to take them to the Dr myself to ensure they walked out with what they need and there was no ambiguity about how they are to honor the regiment that is available for their healing.
If I don't care for someone, I remain silent and return my efforts to address my own imperfections and pain so everyone is better of if I meet them or not
No, that's not the reason pubs had to close. If that were the reason I would half-agree with you, but it wasn't. They were destroyed by the economy. Businesses being destroyed by the economy is nothing to celebrate.
Yup. This is because costs are too high and people literally can't afford to go patronize their local establishments.
Some people are indeed living better lives, freer of problems for not being around alcohol. Yes. But a lot of people are probably at home watching the tele instead, and many of them were fine &didn't have problems with alcohol in the old culture. And a good number of the people who would have had problems are pants drunk instead, and some who would have been fine happy people having a pub scene are probably doing much worse instead.
I'm not sure if your post is making fun of the original author, but what parts of "the economy", other than customer demand, do you think destroyed these pubs?
They didn't close for economic reasons. They have been slowly dying along with their patrons and have been ramping costs to cover this for the last couple of decades. They then tried to reinvent themselves. It has now reached the point of saturation.
Also a lot of people have complete alcoholics in their family and history and it's not seen as a socially acceptable thing and is tied to negative sentiment as well.
It’s not a topic I’m particularly passionate about, but to take the opposing view:
Millions of people enjoy visiting pubs every week and the overwhelming majority don’t have an alcohol problem.
It’s an important venue for social connections at a time when there are less and less of those. They haven’t been replaced with other venues for many people, particularly the elderley who already struggle with social isolation.
They are also a big part of our culture and heritage at a time when that is also under threat from many angles.
The industry covers tens of thousands of jobs and captures boat loads of taxes both directly and indirectly.
And the annoying thing is that they are still viable small businesses, but the big pubcos and the taxes have squeezed the industry until it’s unviable to operate.
I’m not a big pub person, but I think it’s a shame to lose one of the few remaining pastimes which haven’t been replaced with an app.
Did we get third spaces that replaced the pubs though? The lack of third spaces is a real issue and I find myself longing for them. I don't see myself hanging out in the pub to socialize with strangers, but more third spaces and people using them more are one of the things that I think could greatly help the mental health epidemic and our social discourse in general.
Yeah there are plenty of third spaces. I go and play board games at my local cafe and library. Go on walks. Play sports (tennis, cycling). Have a book club. Drink way too much coffee.
Outside of the coffee houses, I’m not sure any of those are a third space. A third spade is somewhere people can allow their real selves to show. It’s also commonly identified as a place where you can have revolutions grow, or have the dissenting come together.
If the primary purpose of a space is a singular activity that overwhelms discussion of other things, then it’s not a third space.
Sporting associations can be third spaces, but that isn’t the case if people take the sport seriously.
I don't think that's the case. I have three of them in my house. They all seem to drink a lot of coffee, read a lot of books and do a lot of sports together (all of them at the school).
Weatherspoons encourages binge drinking, daytime alcoholism, etc. Those aren't the pubs that are closing.
I was in a pub near St Pauls earlier today, one built by Christopher Wren with some friends I hadn't seen for a long time ahead of a mattine performance. The four of us sat round the fire, one had a pint of draft peer, another half a pint, another a mulled wine, and another a coffee. Certainly not expensive -- less than the cost of a coffee from starbucks, certainly not a pit of misery, and I didn't get the impression anyone near us was miserable.
Meanwhile just down the road are chain stores selling heavily processed junk food causing far more damage, but I'm sure you consider them healthier because of your puritanical beliefs.
Spoons is a fine example of what the old pubs were though. The cheapest place you could get casually fucked up. The new pubs are closing because they are not profitable as they are dead 80% of the time and the rest of the time they have to make up for the staffing costs. It's a dying business. The only successful one is the pubs like spoons which are completely harmful to society.
Not a puritan. Just realistic. I don't care what you do. People care what they do and the end game is they started caring about themselves more.
I assume by "expensive as hell", you're talking about it being expensive to patronize these places.
The "good" implies that you might think these places deserve to go out of business because they are expensive. You can bet your ass that they're expensive because all of their costs have skyrocketted, not because they are profiteering.
"Forced to close" [...] "the downward trend started with [among others] younger people drinking less".
I get why pub owners aren't please with this situation, but I do think it's a win for society as a whole. It's also a bit strange (even if it's technically correct) to use the word "forced" for businesses that are simply getting less clients.
It’s strange when businesspeople seem to expect that their business has a right to exist beyond profitability in the market place.
But more to the point - while alcohol and binge drinking certainly aren’t great for society some of these places must have been the “third place” (not work or home) that is getting harder to find (both for free e.g. public spaces or without getting nickeled and dimed for simply being a customer).
I’m surprised that many coffee places close as early as they do (typically mid afternoon or earlier) and don’t move into the late night third place spot that these bars fulfill.
Regardless of whether it's good or bad these places are closing down, don't be confused and think they're operating in a free market. Government policy has a huge influence on their ability to survive. It will end with the majority of remaining pubs being large, soulless chains.
> No markets in a civilized society are truly free. So I don’t think it’s very meaningful to point this out.
I disagree. My comment was in direct response to the GP's comment of:
> It's strange when businesspeople seem to expect that their business has a right to exist beyond profitability in the market place.
When the "marketplace" is dictated by government policy, it's fair to question the effects of policy. You cannot handwaved it away with claims of some hand of God marketplace that no one has the ability to influence.
> What about government regulations is wrong here
I specifically stated I was not making claims of whether this result was good or bad.
> and why would this result in soulless chain stores?
You ask this, and then go on to say:
> Aren’t soulless chains the default resting state of a mature economic sector?
Clearly, the operating environment results in this sort of thing. The environment is influenced by government.
Soulless chains need not be the default resting state. For instance, a government could introduce a prgressive company tax rate, or rules (like limits on number of liquor licenses a Corp can own), making it easier for small businesses to compete.
Now, I will make a value judgement: soulless chains, and massive businesses are not good for society for many reasons. I would much rather live in a world of many competing small businesses, than a homogeneous pastiche of mediocrity.
Country pubs struggle to survive now that driving after a couple of pints is socially frowned up on. You've then got it relatively easy to get permission to convert a pub to a house, so there's an incentive to kick out the landlord and make a fortune. That part is a consequence of the ridiculous real estate situation in the UK for the last 20 years.
I think another aspect of this is that people don't just socialise with people in their immediate neighbourhood anymore too. My friends live all over the city, so why would we go to a local pub to hang out? It's just easier for us to meet in the city centre.
In the past (before cars) people used to work and socialise far more locally.
> Country pubs struggle to survive now that driving after a couple of pints is socially frowned up on.
While drunk driving was and is a huge problem, and does cost lives, I do think the USA (and maybe UK, I don't live there) have massively over-corrected on the problem. The pendulum has swung so far, and cops enforce so aggressively, that you really can't chance even having a single beer while out with your car--even if you know it won't put you over the limit. And a DUI on your past record will stay with you basically forever.
Depending on the US State, you can even get a DUI for many things that don't involve drinking or driving:
- You're merely seated in a vehicle while intoxicated
- You're sleeping in the car with your car keys nearby, and intoxicated
- You're standing outside a vehicle while intoxicated, without any intention of driving
- You're in possession of car keys near your car, while intoxicated
- You're tired or lost (but haven't been drinking) and the officer thinks you are intoxicated
No, I don't want to go back to the days when it was socially acceptable for people to get shitfaced and drive home because it's just around the corner. I had a classmate killed 2 years out of high school as a passenger of such an asshat. But I do think we've over-corrected to the point where I won't even dare to drive to dinner or a pub if I'm going to have a single beer there. I just drink at home now.
I have serious doubts that a lot of people celbrating this have ever been to the UK, let alone lived there.
Pubs in the UK, for better or for worse, serve an important function as being pretty much the only "third place" [1] for a large number of Britons [1]. If you say "it's good because people are drinking less" or "businesses don't have a right to exist", you're completely missing the point.
Is this an ideal situation? No. But UK pubs closing is really a function of the sky-high cost of housing specifically and the cost of living more generally. People have less free time because they're forced to work more to make ends meet. And pubs are expensive because they have to pay for their own commercial space.
People get really excited about their home price going up because on paper it loiks like they've made a profit but in real terms you haven't: you still only own one housing unit worth of wealth. If you sell your house, you still have to live somewhere.
But more importantly, that cost of housing is an input factor into every business you frequent or use.
I actually feel quite sad about this. Us Brits are increasingly turning more inward and pubs have been the heart of many communities. People focus on the health benefits of not drinking, but people also forget the impacts of loneliness. Pubs are a very easy way to meet people across social classes, interests, religions etc.
47 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 115 ms ] threadThis is to say nothing of the violence and murdery shit that directly flows from alcohol consumption, statistically speaking
Drunk: How We Sipped, Danced, and Stumbled Our Way to Civilization Hardcover by Edward Slingerland
https://www.amazon.com/Drunk-Sipped-Danced-Stumbled-Civiliza...
Source: https://liquiddeath.com/
Edi: okay, give me a few months' headstart, got some other nails to hit so I don't continue to step on them as I approach. They will have to come to me tho, I don't do international lawsuits lol. The quality or expense or dilligence of their anti-accountabillity hit squad are of zero consequence to me and they will come to know accountabillity finally.
Educating people is the only moral approach, but these days anyones opinion is as valid as expert knowledge so that is out the window.
I did share my personal take on what I want and don't want going forward beacause of where I was with it in my life and where I'm going now that I am not weighed down and mutated by it any further.
There's zero coercion. If people want to try to grt off, I would say talk to your dr and request nalfamene so you can still drink what you like but in a context that starts to remove the psychological and physical hooks it digs into anyone who loses the plot with it. If you need the anxiety help, request baclofen as an adjuvant and work your way down at whatever pace if at all that works for you
Nalfamene or naltrexone or whatever opidoid antagonists are available thru NHS is a successfull and affirming approach that makesit simple and likely to be successfull with attenuating issues with addiction and use of alcohol. I get I'm n=1 but what's the harm in exploring your options?
If I loved someone and I was invested/wanted them to heal and organically redefine their relationship with alc, I would help them with this even if I had to take them to the Dr myself to ensure they walked out with what they need and there was no ambiguity about how they are to honor the regiment that is available for their healing.
If I don't care for someone, I remain silent and return my efforts to address my own imperfections and pain so everyone is better of if I meet them or not
I personally believe that lack of physical activity actually plays a larger role in what drives the resulting health issues.
Some people are indeed living better lives, freer of problems for not being around alcohol. Yes. But a lot of people are probably at home watching the tele instead, and many of them were fine &didn't have problems with alcohol in the old culture. And a good number of the people who would have had problems are pants drunk instead, and some who would have been fine happy people having a pub scene are probably doing much worse instead.
There's a difference between "I want to drink less" and "I can't afford to drink as much as I want"
Also a lot of people have complete alcoholics in their family and history and it's not seen as a socially acceptable thing and is tied to negative sentiment as well.
Millions of people enjoy visiting pubs every week and the overwhelming majority don’t have an alcohol problem.
It’s an important venue for social connections at a time when there are less and less of those. They haven’t been replaced with other venues for many people, particularly the elderley who already struggle with social isolation.
They are also a big part of our culture and heritage at a time when that is also under threat from many angles.
The industry covers tens of thousands of jobs and captures boat loads of taxes both directly and indirectly.
And the annoying thing is that they are still viable small businesses, but the big pubcos and the taxes have squeezed the industry until it’s unviable to operate.
I’m not a big pub person, but I think it’s a shame to lose one of the few remaining pastimes which haven’t been replaced with an app.
Nah we all have an alcohol problem. It’s still worth it though because a beer objectively tastes better when it’s drank away from home.
If the primary purpose of a space is a singular activity that overwhelms discussion of other things, then it’s not a third space.
Sporting associations can be third spaces, but that isn’t the case if people take the sport seriously.
This feels like a leap.
For a lot of younger people, the alternative seems to be staying home and socializing less.
I was in a pub near St Pauls earlier today, one built by Christopher Wren with some friends I hadn't seen for a long time ahead of a mattine performance. The four of us sat round the fire, one had a pint of draft peer, another half a pint, another a mulled wine, and another a coffee. Certainly not expensive -- less than the cost of a coffee from starbucks, certainly not a pit of misery, and I didn't get the impression anyone near us was miserable.
Meanwhile just down the road are chain stores selling heavily processed junk food causing far more damage, but I'm sure you consider them healthier because of your puritanical beliefs.
They give the market what they want in terms of cheap food and beer, and some of the venues are beautiful.
Most of them are fairly civilised during the week as they revolve around food and there are families present.
The city centre ones do get a bit rowdy on Friday and Saturday nights though.
Not a puritan. Just realistic. I don't care what you do. People care what they do and the end game is they started caring about themselves more.
The "good" implies that you might think these places deserve to go out of business because they are expensive. You can bet your ass that they're expensive because all of their costs have skyrocketted, not because they are profiteering.
I get why pub owners aren't please with this situation, but I do think it's a win for society as a whole. It's also a bit strange (even if it's technically correct) to use the word "forced" for businesses that are simply getting less clients.
But more to the point - while alcohol and binge drinking certainly aren’t great for society some of these places must have been the “third place” (not work or home) that is getting harder to find (both for free e.g. public spaces or without getting nickeled and dimed for simply being a customer).
I’m surprised that many coffee places close as early as they do (typically mid afternoon or earlier) and don’t move into the late night third place spot that these bars fulfill.
What about government regulations is wrong here, and why would this result in soulless chain stores?
Aren’t soulless chains the default resting state of a mature economic sector?
I disagree. My comment was in direct response to the GP's comment of:
> It's strange when businesspeople seem to expect that their business has a right to exist beyond profitability in the market place.
When the "marketplace" is dictated by government policy, it's fair to question the effects of policy. You cannot handwaved it away with claims of some hand of God marketplace that no one has the ability to influence.
> What about government regulations is wrong here
I specifically stated I was not making claims of whether this result was good or bad.
> and why would this result in soulless chain stores?
You ask this, and then go on to say:
> Aren’t soulless chains the default resting state of a mature economic sector?
Clearly, the operating environment results in this sort of thing. The environment is influenced by government.
Soulless chains need not be the default resting state. For instance, a government could introduce a prgressive company tax rate, or rules (like limits on number of liquor licenses a Corp can own), making it easier for small businesses to compete.
Now, I will make a value judgement: soulless chains, and massive businesses are not good for society for many reasons. I would much rather live in a world of many competing small businesses, than a homogeneous pastiche of mediocrity.
Millennials And Gen Zs are also more anxious and stressed than previous generations.
How many were freehouses?
How many belonged to brewers?
This headline number, along with those in the article, are meaningless without deeper context.
In the past (before cars) people used to work and socialise far more locally.
While drunk driving was and is a huge problem, and does cost lives, I do think the USA (and maybe UK, I don't live there) have massively over-corrected on the problem. The pendulum has swung so far, and cops enforce so aggressively, that you really can't chance even having a single beer while out with your car--even if you know it won't put you over the limit. And a DUI on your past record will stay with you basically forever.
Depending on the US State, you can even get a DUI for many things that don't involve drinking or driving:
- You're merely seated in a vehicle while intoxicated
- You're sleeping in the car with your car keys nearby, and intoxicated
- You're standing outside a vehicle while intoxicated, without any intention of driving
- You're in possession of car keys near your car, while intoxicated
- You're tired or lost (but haven't been drinking) and the officer thinks you are intoxicated
No, I don't want to go back to the days when it was socially acceptable for people to get shitfaced and drive home because it's just around the corner. I had a classmate killed 2 years out of high school as a passenger of such an asshat. But I do think we've over-corrected to the point where I won't even dare to drive to dinner or a pub if I'm going to have a single beer there. I just drink at home now.
Sounds like the "problem" (if it's indeed that) is decreasing.
Pubs in the UK, for better or for worse, serve an important function as being pretty much the only "third place" [1] for a large number of Britons [1]. If you say "it's good because people are drinking less" or "businesses don't have a right to exist", you're completely missing the point.
Is this an ideal situation? No. But UK pubs closing is really a function of the sky-high cost of housing specifically and the cost of living more generally. People have less free time because they're forced to work more to make ends meet. And pubs are expensive because they have to pay for their own commercial space.
People get really excited about their home price going up because on paper it loiks like they've made a profit but in real terms you haven't: you still only own one housing unit worth of wealth. If you sell your house, you still have to live somewhere.
But more importantly, that cost of housing is an input factor into every business you frequent or use.
This really represents a breakdown in UK society.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_place
The George is closed and forgot;
Some changes are all for the better,
But Woolworth's is probably not.