Alko, Alkoholi and the Fleecing of Finland
@ 2:23 pm 
Once again, it looks like the Finnish government, in cohorts with the state-owned alcohol racket, Alko, is about to play the age-old trick of fleecing Finns out of their hard-earned money. Yes, the issue of raising alcohol taxes has resurfaced here in a country that already has among the highest alcohol prices in Europe.
Not surprisingly, Finland also has a high incidence of alcohol-related problems due to binge drinking; a commonality among countries that try to influence drinking behavior via raising alcohol prices. Will Finland ever develop a mature, central European drinking culture?
That remains to be seen.
But in the meantime, would you like to see how much this ploy costs the Finnish consumer? Consider that in Germany, .5L bottles of high quality beer cost about 55ct each at the supermarket. That’s 1.10 per-Liter. And wine is about half-price in Germany compared to Finland.
So, it’s not hard to imagine that the Finn overpays by at least 10€ each week, on average, even if he only enjoys drinks at home with dinner. Naturally, the overpayment would be much greater if he’d drink at Finland’s many overpriced pubs and restaurants. To place things in perspective, let’s consider the Time Value of Money.
Suppose he’d have the option to purchase alcohol in Germany (as I normally do) and could invest that 10€ each week in a Stock Fund that yields 10% growth-per-annum. In 25-years, he’d have over 55,000€ saved!
Wow! The Finnish alcohol ripoff has cost the price of a luxury automobile! It’s no wonder that Finns are among the poorest people in western Europe. By the way, would you like to see how Autovero will cost the price of a new flat?
“Since the tax cut, alcohol consumption has hit new records”
Yeah, I’m sure they were able to keep good track of all the alcohol coming from Estonia and Germany to make such an accurate assertion. Right.
Comment by Kristian — Mon, Apr 2nd, 2007 @ 2:27 pm
No need to raise the taxes, with a monopoly on wine and hard liquor, they only need to raise the prices at Alko.
Actually, how are items priced in Alko? Is there some sort of formula or is it more according to maximizing profits? (It is a business after all.)
In addition to tax revenue, Alko must make a fortune from marking up the prices of most everything in the store. The high prices are not all due to the alcohol tax!
Comment by Fred Fry — Mon, Apr 2nd, 2007 @ 2:51 pm
Actually, how are items priced in Alko?
I suspect there is a certain social flowerhattism involved, i.e. Koskenkorva for the masses is expensive while I can buy my quality wines for quite nice and affordable prices from Alko. And of course the selection in Alko is way better than it would ever be in Lidl or Alepa.
Btw, Kristian, I think you are confusing cause with effect. The binge drinking culture is the cause, the efforts to influence it with alcohol prices is the effect.
Comment by N. Siinistö — Mon, Apr 2nd, 2007 @ 3:28 pm
“I think you are confusing cause with effect. The binge drinking culture is the cause, the efforts to influence it with alcohol prices is the effect.”
I doubt it.
Comment by Kristian — Mon, Apr 2nd, 2007 @ 3:47 pm
You doubt it? So why then do Finns have this reputation for binge drinking ever since the 1800th century (at least!), long before the government began trying to influence the drinking behaviour?
Comment by N. Siinistö — Tue, Apr 3rd, 2007 @ 12:01 pm
Finns want their drinks hard and heavy. Raising taxes is the effect but I doubt it’s to reduce drinking.
Money makes the goverment go round.
Comment by BlizBob — Tue, Apr 3rd, 2007 @ 5:00 pm
#6: I agree, the alc is an important cash cow. It’s just easier to justify milking it by claiming it’s to improve national health.
Comment by aet75 — Tue, Apr 3rd, 2007 @ 5:21 pm
Kristian:
Don’t I remember that you have lately taken to brewing your own beer? Surely, this is a reasonable alternative to high alcohol taxes, and it has to taste far better than “Lappin Kulta”.
That reminds me, I have to ask my mother for her sima recipe.
Comment by Nipsu — Tue, Apr 3rd, 2007 @ 6:02 pm
Wine is about half-price in Germany compared to Finland.
Been partaking of the herb again, Kristian? We’ve been through this.
N. Siinistö:
I suspect there is a certain social flowerhattism involved, i.e. Koskenkorva for the masses is expensive while I can buy my quality wines for quite nice and affordable prices from Alko.
Indeed. Due to relatively high price of plonk and the bargains on quality wines, it makes economic sense to chip in that extra 5-10 euro. Thus, we junttis are on the wine connoisseur fast track. Talk about social engineering! If anything, this pushes the nation toward the mature central European model than Kristian so yearns for.
Kristian:
Suppose you’d have the option to purchase alcohol in Germany (as I normally do) and you could invest that 10€ each week in a Stock Fund that yields 10% growth-per-annum.
My investment track record so far has about -50% cumulated gains. I think it’s better to pay taxes.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Tue, Apr 3rd, 2007 @ 7:27 pm
Ah, we’re back online again….
“So why then do Finns have this reputation for binge drinking ever since the 1800th century (at least!)”
I think everyone in Europe was a binge drinker in the 1800’s
Here’s an interesting note:
“Researchers have found that increasing the prices of alcohol beverages to reduce alcohol consumption may actually have the opposite effect, since drinkers who were buying the more expensive brands will switch to cheaper drinks, and because they are cheaper than what they were paying originally, buy and drink more.”
http://alcoholism.about.com/od/issues/a/blacer060107.htm
In Finland’s case, “cheaper” means higher alcohol content. Obviously, Finnish alcohol policy never produces the intended effect. That’s why Finland is the running joke of Europe. Even many Finns know this. Unfortunate but true.
In Finland, there are no bargains on wine and beer at any quality level; you can get EVERYTHING cheaper in central Europe. However, I do find that hard liquor is comparatively less expensive in Finland than central Europe. Shocking!
But the reason is easy to trace: Hard liquor is compact and easy to transport. Therefore, levying a high tax on it only encourages people to make that ferry crossing to Estonia.
For beer and wine, that threshold is slightly higher; that is, people are willing to pay more for the convenience of buying locally before deciding to schlepp 100kg of beer and wine to Finland from another country.
Policy makers know this. That’s why the whole Finnish alcohol issue is a big scam—and an unhealthy one at that. Just consider all the problem-alcoholics who’ve been ‘channeled’ into drinking hard liquor because of Finnish alcohol policy.
Comment by Kristian — Tue, Apr 3rd, 2007 @ 8:02 pm
Kristian:
Therefore, levying a high tax on it only encourages people to make that ferry crossing to Estonia.
I wonder why anyone would bother to get wine from Estonia, as it is more expensive there. In Central Europe you might get better deals if you buy by the crate, or directly from the producer. But as for the wine department at Les Galeries Lafayette…ordinary mortals need not bother.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Tue, Apr 3rd, 2007 @ 8:39 pm
“In Central Europe you might get better deals if you buy by the crate”
Or simply go to a local wine shop. All price and quality levels are represented.
“Don’t I remember that you have lately taken to brewing your own beer?”
Yes Nipsu, I drank the last of it a few weeks-ago. Still have some Hefeweizen from Germany though. We’ll be traveling over the summer, so now’s not a good time to start a new batch. The last 24-liters would’ve lasted me 12-months had I not given so much away as presents! Very tasty.
By the way, this costs 1€ at German gas stations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Weizenbier.jpg
Comment by Kristian — Tue, Apr 3rd, 2007 @ 9:05 pm
Time to drink more water and or milk…you want to punch your government in the balls ? reduce your alko intake
Comment by Born there — Tue, Apr 3rd, 2007 @ 9:27 pm
#5 You doubt it? So why then do Finns have this reputation for binge drinking ever since the 1800th century (at least!), long before the government began trying to influence the drinking behaviour?
Ah…. Wasn’t there a small policy of prohibition in Finland bfore the leaders of the Nanny State decided we could be trusted enough to be given an Alko card and a shop to use it in? Not too much at one time or in the one week but the chance at least to buy booze. Seems to me that the binge drinking has been around as long as the control. Simple case of the “forbidden fruit2 if you ask me.
Comment by Punter — Tue, Apr 3rd, 2007 @ 9:37 pm
Seems to me that the binge drinking has been around as long as the control.
I disagree. The prohibition was in effect from 1919 to 1932. There are numerous references to binge drinking in finnish literature before the prohibition, see for example Aleksis Kivi’s Seitsemän veljestä (Seven Brothers) published in 1870. That said, I believe that the prohibition does play a role in the drinking habits of finns.
Comment by mh — Tue, Apr 3rd, 2007 @ 11:10 pm
Booze seems cheap enough to me ie. I can get drunk as often as I want to.
Also, I don’t believe the TIME VALUE OF MONEY!!1!! bs because no one actually invests every 10 € they save in a fund. It’s just spent elsewhere, maybe to buy some decent meat more often instead of jauheliha.
Comment by Fägäri — Wed, Apr 4th, 2007 @ 3:57 am
Kristian - I’ll never forget my colleagues discussing the best alcohol-by-volume/price ratio of a collection of some fine single malt whiskies that would be beneath even high school students. It was both amusing and appalling.
I can’t think of a single social/cultural problem that taxation has ever fixed and the drinking is so much a part of the culture as to be akin to daily shootings in the US that the only thing the taxation will do is give the government more money to waste while everyone continues to make excuses for the poor elder care, the closing of schools, cuts in medical and other such services that are assumed to be there for all. At some point the idea of taxing people with higher risk lifestyles, e.g. drinkers, smokers, with higher medical taxes and lower priority for medical care might be the only way to make a dent in the national pasttime.
Comment by hfb — Wed, Apr 4th, 2007 @ 7:00 am
To 17: I’m sure your opinion of this would change when your child becomes a teenager and starts smoking and/or drinking. Or will your child be immune to such temptation?
Comment by DAVE THE MAVE — Wed, Apr 4th, 2007 @ 9:39 am
so who controls the price of beer in Lidl ? I was just there last night and I bought myself some cans of Boddingtons and some Irish stout. The price was a bit lower then at the grocery store, but not that much (something like 20 cents less per can)
Comment by unlce sam — Wed, Apr 4th, 2007 @ 9:48 am
Here’s an article with an interesting anecdote on the way some British expats in Africa reacted to circumstances where booze was effectively free of charge:
http://www.city-journal.org/html/7_2_a1.html . (’I discovered that, when alcohol is effectively free of charge, a fifth of British construction workers will regularly go to bed so drunk that they are incontinent both of urine and feces.’)
I hate to even imagine how our guys would behave. Perhaps we should do an experiment, a reality TV show, Survivor Finland with a difference? But I’ve no doubt Kristian will insist that if booze (or any other non-essential commodity) had a negative cost, people would buy less. That’s your brain on Libertarianism. Just say no.
Comment by prince of dorkness — Wed, Apr 4th, 2007 @ 11:42 am
Yeah, the Finns are a joke, Christian frÃ¥n Esbo, but let’s put this in perspective anyways.
There are a lot of binge-drinking “nations”, Finland is not the only one. Ireland for one has a huge drinking problem, bigger than Finland, a strict alcohol policy _and_ extremely fast growing economy. There goes your theory.
Britain, too, the father of liberalism, has a “binge-drinking problem” bigger than Finland in many ways - and in some ways stricter policy … and no wonder knowing what a liberal alcohol policy brought about to begin with:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gin_Lane
In Russia an alarming proportion of the male population is dying of alcohol-related illnesses, the the average life expectancy is probably below 60, and they have no alcohol policy to speak of. The same goes for most of north-east Europe, although the problems are smaller.
The “Anglo-Saxon” binge drinking habits have apparently spread till och med to Asia as well. Japan: few problems before, now huge problems. China too.
Even the South-European youth has apparently broken the ties to the traditional way of life; there binge drinking and overall alcohol consumption among teenagers is on the rise while in Finland it’s rapidly going down.
Not to mention France where the overall consumption has been going down for about two decades and has “finally” reached a Finnish level. But where the age-old binge drinking habit of the northern parts is replacing the more moderate tradition even in the south - among the youth that is.
So, what to make out of it all?
Well, if the taxation and selling restrictions has anything to do with anything, why not follow the Swedish example? They drink modestly compared to other North-European countries (although “home brewing” is more common than in most countries which makes the statistics less trustworthy). The biggest difference compared to Finland is probably that they don’t sell “4,7% beer”, “keskiolut” in stores but only in System Bolaget.
They also seem to take pride in not getting too drunk.
That again is something you see only in younger generation in Finland. The older, hopeless generations think that it’s nice to be free … that, hell, okay we moved to these suburbs and made this shithole of a country to one of the most efficient money-making machines in the world, but can’t you just give me a fucking break, leave me alone for once (speaking to themselves, of course ;-).
Then again, I have this theory that in Finland, because of its historical poverty, the genetically drunkard family lines have not died out the same way as in those countries where the career of a drunkard has been possible for a longer time.
Perhaps it’s okay that the same is happening in Finland now: hopefully the genetically impaired drink themselves to death before reproducing … or perhaps not. The Finnish parliament, which is the only legitimate body to make decisions about such things, apparently doesn’t think it’s okay. What can you do?
Comment by Anonymous — Wed, Apr 4th, 2007 @ 11:51 am
I tend to agree with this Harvard Medical School study. It’s yet another study that correctly links binge drinking and hard liquor consumption to temperance countries. Finland is of course a modern-day temperance country.
I think if hbf had lived in a non-temperance country instead of Finland, her harsh opinions about teenage drinking would be more……tempered
http://www.peele.net/lib/antidote.html
Comment by Kristian — Wed, Apr 4th, 2007 @ 12:24 pm
Anon, #21: “hopefully the genetically impaired drink themselves to death before reproducing…”
I am afraid it is not so simple. In the famous “alcoholic rat” experiment some years previously researchers found out that rats with a very high genetic affinity to alcohol tend to live -on average- much longer than those genetically avoiding all alcohol and are also more healthy. The amount of alcohol actually consumed was not a factor. For more, check this:
http://www.uta.fi/ajankohtaista/tiedotteet/2004/0202.html
If we can apply this also to humans, it could be posited that those genetic combinations making people drawn to alcohol have also some very positive sides in maintaining bodily health. Therefore, those drawn to drinking would not be “genetically impaired” at all, but rather suffering from a unhealthy clash between their previously beneficial genetic heritage and a culture that offers (historically speaking) an abnormally high access to alcohol. Something to think about, is it not? Certainly, more research is needed about this subject.
Genetics aside, I agree with Kristian above. The moralist tendencies in Finland, the temperance movement and especially Prohibition have done much to promote a binge drinking culture, ironic as it is.
Comment by Drakon — Wed, Apr 4th, 2007 @ 12:56 pm
I am afraid it is not so simple.
Perhaps not, but the study you referred to doesn’t really have much to do with the issue. First of all, alcohol has not been present for four thousand years but at least ten thousand. “Sima” made out of honey and all kinds of “fruit drinks” are probably much older … How can you trust “experts” who make such a basic error?
Secondly, the rats in question didn’t - as far as I can tell - live in the kind of “Malthusian” society humans have been living (until lately, in a few industrialized countries). A typical drunk in, say, 16th century Firenze survived by begging or odd jobs until hard times fell upon the city. Then he was among the first to die.
In poor Finland the same person could not have, in all likelyhood, started drinking in the first place. That’s pretty obvious and I wonder how the study took this into account, that is, the fact that most people - and the drunks especially - have always died of hunger or epidemic diseases, not the kind of organ failures the study talks about. Did they make the rats work hard for their food, in other words?
Comment by Anonymous — Wed, Apr 4th, 2007 @ 1:42 pm
Firenze is in fact Florence for some strange reason
Comment by Anonymous — Wed, Apr 4th, 2007 @ 2:02 pm
“Not surprisingly, Finland also has a high incidence of alcohol-related problems due to binge drinking; a commonality among countries that try to influence drinking behavior via raising alcohol prices. Will Finland ever develop a mature, central European drinking culture?”
The notion of “mature” central European drinking culture is crock. Italians, for example, binge drink much more than has been previously thought, indicated by higher-than-thought levels of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome.
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-08/ace-fis082106.php
Comment by Markku — Wed, Apr 4th, 2007 @ 2:06 pm
An indication of the marvelous Russian sense of humour is the Soviet-era saying that alcoholism is the middle stage between socialism and communism.
Comment by Markku — Wed, Apr 4th, 2007 @ 2:18 pm
#26 I don’t think that study tells anything. I’m pretty sure that if a mother drinks regularly during pregnancy, then there’s a high chance of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome occuring. Binge drinking as such isn’t necessary.
Besides, if they really binge drink like Finns, then they’d have a higher-than-normal rate of miscarriages from falling down all the time.
Comment by Kristian — Wed, Apr 4th, 2007 @ 2:35 pm
Dave @ 18 - I don’t think I would…I both smoke and drink and am pretty realistic that these are not life prolonging activities and that they may create a burden on a system that is already overburdened. The obese are also straining the health care system in western countries with type 2 diabetes. It’s a harsh idea, but it may be an avenue of last resort to save the care for those who live less dangerously.
Comment by hfb — Wed, Apr 4th, 2007 @ 2:55 pm
By the way, hfb is a racist, I mean, would - or should - you take seriously anybody who says:
“I’ve not seen a single violent, pooping, pissing or passing out in the street drunk since I left the so-called happiest nation in the EU [from Finland to the USA], another baseless claim that mere observation doesn’t support, […] Maybe it’s genetic, too.â€Â
Not that she’d be in touch with reality in other respects either …
Comment by Anonymous — Wed, Apr 4th, 2007 @ 3:11 pm
You people that constantly go back and cut and paste old posts to prove a continuous negative issue are really pi**ing me off. Who cares what hfb said 6 weeks ago. To constantly drag up an old post and bring it into every new topic in order to shoot someone down shows why this country finds it so hard to forget the lessons of the past and move on to the future. It’s why we’re going nowhere. Pi**poor
Comment by Punter — Wed, Apr 4th, 2007 @ 8:06 pm
Ummm… Like the Switft Boat Veterans in some unnamed country?
Comment by Zark — Wed, Apr 4th, 2007 @ 9:00 pm
Ummmm….. no like the people on this page and their trivial “he said she said” BS
Comment by Punter — Wed, Apr 4th, 2007 @ 9:31 pm
Punter:
To constantly drag up an old post and bring it into every new topic in order to shoot someone down shows why this country finds it so hard to forget the lessons of the past and move on to the future.
Yes, this really only happens in Finland.
A Netizen’s Guide to Flame Warriors - see any familiar types?
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Wed, Apr 4th, 2007 @ 9:34 pm
Well, it seems that the list in #33, while conveniently on the same page, lacked the Warrior most relevant to this blog.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Wed, Apr 4th, 2007 @ 9:45 pm
Punter:
“You people that constantly go back and cut and paste old posts to prove a continuous negative issue are really pi**ing me off. Who cares what hfb said 6 weeks ago.”
How long are people - according to you - responsible for their statements? 1 minute? 2 hours? A week.
What hfb said 6 weeks ago is relevant wrt. to what hfb says today. Unless hfb is 6 years old.
hfb can surely take up the issue if necessary.
YOUR opinions are as astonishing as they tend to be.
Comment by Thomas — Thu, Apr 5th, 2007 @ 12:28 am
Franklin:
Glad to see that somebody else than me has had the pleasure to meet these fascinating characters of Mike Reed.
Hadn’t visited the page in months (it seems to have been somewhat “modernised” since my last visit), and “capitalista” was a new one for me. This character is important
for this blog and the general discussion culture elsewhere as well. But the “character” has become mainstream - at least in the way you see it in blogs like this day in, day out, in an outspoken loud way - rather recently. That’s probably why “capitalista” is a recent introduction.
In fact most of my “enemies” fit that characterisation rather well. Previously “Ferrous Cranus” was my “favourite opponent”. But both these characters are rather similar.
Nevertheless, these characters are funny, since they are basically usable for any side of a debate. “capitalista” being a difference. But (s)he has MANY clones in this blog.
Comment by Thomas — Thu, Apr 5th, 2007 @ 1:12 am
Thomas, we’ll convert your Commie ass yet. Yes, even you will eventually enjoy buying products in Finland at normal market prices. Then you’ll vow never to get ripped-off again!
You will experience true liberation
Comment by Kristian — Thu, Apr 5th, 2007 @ 1:52 am
Kristian:
“You will experience true liberation :-)”
Get a life while you go on one of your beer importing tours will you.
Comment by Thomas — Thu, Apr 5th, 2007 @ 2:18 am
Punter - People in denial tend to grind the same axe to avoid discussing the harder truths….like just how much of a burden to the social system all the drunks really are. *shrug* If some anonymous dickless wonder wants to snipe at me by calling me a racist for being realistic that the government will be forced at some point to get creative about how to pay for health care, well…it’s my daily affirmation as to why I’m still glad I left.
Did you ever see the TV serial named ‘Riget’? The Danish creator/director had one of the surgeons in the drama receive a donor liver from Finland. Pure comedy.
Comment by hfb — Thu, Apr 5th, 2007 @ 4:41 am
I guess that liver’s seen it all before
—
Oh, and Thomas, just so you know… Resistance is futile.
Comment by Kristian — Thu, Apr 5th, 2007 @ 8:45 am
@anon
‘hfb is a racist’ — You know, there are really offensive and/or bigoted people in the Net, they’re not even hard to find. The notorious ‘runkkuklubi’ (’Blood, Honour, Tummeli’) is debating street crime round the world even as I type, after their leader Halla-aho opined that Helsinki’s drunken street violence is exceptionally nasty because it’s so random and unpredictable, but I’m sure they’ll get sidetracked to Islamofascism eventually, so hurry up if you wish to stand up for Finland. And don’t get Panu ‘Oikeuden miekka’ Höglund started on the drinking habits of (other) Finns. How about you go pick fights with people who enjoy them?
Comment by prince of dorkness — Thu, Apr 5th, 2007 @ 11:27 am
hfb, I’m sorry I missed it. Sounds funny.
Yes, as to these snipers, they are mainly looking through rosey glasses and have never faced the reality of minority crime and affirmative action BS. They seem to find the truth hard to face and yet one day when these troubles start biting them on the butt they’ll be the first ones calling. Hope you’re enjoying it back at home, ah a holiday is just around the corner……
As for Thomas, thanks for the compliment. I think astonishing may be taking it a bit far. One question though. If people are responsible for what they say on this page for eternity, why are people not left alone to be responsible for themselves in this society? Seems you and many of your friends like to think not all people are responsible (or can’t be responsible) for their actions in society and therefore we need government to redirect and influence our daily lives.
Now Thomas, I ask you. WHICH IS IT? Are we only responsible for trivial matters said online but not for making decisions that come up daily in the real world? You can’t play the responsibility card with me when you refuse to let me be responsible for my daily affairs. Get a clue.
Comment by Punter — Thu, Apr 5th, 2007 @ 12:36 pm
Punter: “Are we only responsible for trivial matters said online but not for making decisions that come up daily in the real world?”
I can assure you that Thomas wants TOTAL control. Closed borders, no beer runs, Internet only within Finland……but perhaps with privileged arrangements with Cuba, N. Korea, etc.
Comment by Kristian — Thu, Apr 5th, 2007 @ 12:56 pm
Yes, as long as they can be responsible for what we can do. Now, that’s freedom. Responsible for a statement online but not for being a drunken park bum. “We’ll fix that because the poor guy didn’t have a fair chance. No silver spoon in his butt. Can’t expect him t be responsible for his actions so we will be for him” at the cost to the entire society.
Comment by Punter — Thu, Apr 5th, 2007 @ 1:10 pm
Kristian:
Oh, and Thomas, just so you know… Resistance is futile.
Libertarians indeed have these Borgish tendencies, which is pretty ironic considering their claims of individuality. I suspect that most libertarians were the kids that got selected last to the soccer team every time. Hence their wrath towards the “collectivists”. At the same time, they have a desperate need to identify with like-minded “individuals”, something that they sorely lacked during their formative years.
My advice to libertarians: Abandon evil collectivist team sports and take up e.g. long distance running. You can do that all alone, just like sex, and you can even listen to Atlas Shrugged on your iPod during it. (just like sex)
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Thu, Apr 5th, 2007 @ 8:18 pm
hfb:
Did you ever see the TV serial named ‘Riget’? The Danish creator/director had one of the surgeons in the drama receive a donor liver from Finland. Pure comedy.
Natural selection would ensure that it was one tough muthafucka of a liver. Survival of the fittest and all.
In all seriousness, I think it would be easier to find “clean” livers in Finland than in Denmark. After all, most of the booze in Finland is consumed by a conspicuous minority, whereas Danes get started on the sauce at age five. “It’s not alcohol, it’s Irish coffee!” - authentic quote from a Danish mother…
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Thu, Apr 5th, 2007 @ 8:30 pm
hfb:
Punter - People in denial tend to grind the same axe to avoid discussing the harder truths….like just how much of a burden to the social system all the drunks really are.
Then there are those who insist on beating a dead horse. Few people in Finland are in denial about the extent of the alcohol problem. It’s just that
-Prohibition: been there, done that, bought the speedboat
-”booze cards” and Kekkoslovakian restrictions: been there, done that, bought the “dark bottle” from Vaasankatu at 3 am
-High alcohol tax: been there, done that, bought the Tallink ticket
-Lowering of the alcohol tax: been there, done that, bought the family-size Kossu from Alko, drank it and ended up in ER
What’s next? The Maoist solution to the opium problem, i.e. public execution of all drunks?
hfb, as much as I love you (on an intellectual level), maybe there’s a hint of Issues with this issue, hmm?
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Thu, Apr 5th, 2007 @ 9:10 pm
Kristian:
“Oh, and Thomas, just so you know… Resistance is futile.”
Why don’t you give up then?
Comment by Thomas — Thu, Apr 5th, 2007 @ 9:26 pm
Kristian:
“I can assure you that Thomas wants TOTAL control. Closed borders, no beer runs, Internet only within Finland……but perhaps with privileged arrangements with Cuba, N. Korea, etc.”
You’re not only a tax&finance expert, you’re a mind reader as well. But, like you’re tax&finance expertism, you’re mind reading sucks. Big time.
Why don’t you simply:
1) Go to germany
2) Inport loads of cheap beer
3) Drink a lot of it
4) Pass out/Shut up
Comment by Thomas — Thu, Apr 5th, 2007 @ 9:39 pm
And why don’t you ever tackle anything asked of you? Throw around mud but avoid answering anything serious or too difficult.
Comment by Punter — Thu, Apr 5th, 2007 @ 10:17 pm
Punter:
“One question though. If people are responsible for what they say on this page for eternity, why are people not left alone to be responsible for themselves in this society?”
I don’t know which society you live in, but where I live, people are pretty much “responsible for themselves”. If you kill someone, and get caught, then you’re punished.
If you talk of the good old FREEDOM, then your FREEDOM might affect/restrict my FREEDOM. That’s what you libertarian geniouses (?) DO NOT get.
That’s why there are laws and rules. But even children understand this. Why don’t you?
What I said concerning this “hfb issue” is - basically - that if you say something in January, and the opposite in April, then I believe somebody else is allowed to comment on that without you bitching about it. The “person” (nobody here is even using their real names) attacked (”hfb” in this case) is the right one to address the attack, not some self-appointed “nanny”. This is a general remark, not directed towards this particular incident, btw.
“Seems you and many of your friends like to think not all people are responsible (or can’t be responsible) for their actions in society and therefore we need government to redirect and influence our daily lives.”
Whom of my friends do you know? If you know none of them, then why are you putting words in their mouth?
But in general societies try to direct the actions of the members of the society, in a direction that is most beneficial for the society as whole. That’s natural. That’s even necessary - I believe. That social mechanism has a name. “Democracy” (something certain commenters on this particular blog find it most satisfactory to introduce into Irac by force). It can have another name (e.g. “Dictatorship”), based on the form of “oppression” towards the common goal. But I know of no functioning societies, where there isn’t an element of the “oppression” you seem to find so offending.
Comment by Thomas — Thu, Apr 5th, 2007 @ 10:38 pm
“mature, central European drinking culture”?!?! My goodness, I hope that never comes to Finland! Especially after seeing German tourists behaving in Algarve and Canary Islands like barbarians after drinking a couple of beers, shouting in the streets, DEMANDING that people talk in German to them and pissing in the corners -under the quiet disaproving eye of locals enjoying a glass of wine. At least the Irish were polite enough to chat and sing with the locals and saying “good night” and “thank you”.
Comment by Seppo — Thu, Apr 5th, 2007 @ 10:39 pm
The whole point of Kristian is “booh, boooh, boooh, I should have more money to play on the stock market roulette!!!”
Comment by Teppo — Thu, Apr 5th, 2007 @ 10:41 pm
Punter:
“And why don’t you ever tackle anything asked of you? Throw around mud but avoid answering anything serious or too difficult.”
You talking to me?
In that case, what are the questions unanswered?
Comment by Thomas — Thu, Apr 5th, 2007 @ 10:48 pm
If I remember correctly, our alcohol consumption was at pretty low level at the beginning of the 20th century, as the dreaded temperance movement (which wasn’t a flower-hatted joke yet) had dried up the countryside quite successfully. Then they messed it all up with the prohibition.
So our beloved ‘longhandle’ alcohol monopoly is quite an old geezer now, turning 75 today.
–
Hmmm, I still have the prize book the ‘aunties’ gave me as prize of the temperance essay writing contest at school ‘Antti katsoo tähtiä’ (Antti looks at stars). Damn with that kekkoslovakian innocence.
The winner was my classmate, who had seen it all, while travelling from a road construction site to another with his dad. At that time they could send you to siirtotyömaa anywhere to build a road etc. in return for the unemployment benefits.
Comment by Antti rn — Thu, Apr 5th, 2007 @ 10:51 pm
Yes I was talking to you. Glad to see you attempted to answer these questions although we may agree to disagree with the quality of answer. As for your “But in general societies try to direct the actions of the members of the society, in a direction that is most beneficial for the society as whole.” I think that is a cheap way out of really saying we want to control and restrict your freedoms and that big brother knows what is best for all. Even when it is clearly not the best way, here we are directed to the “society” and told that the government will look after us. Why can’t we be left to look after ourselves more and keep government out of my daily decision making? That social mechanism has a name. “Democracy†So why here does it feel so undemocratic in many ways? What with government and typical Finnish “brother clubs” everywhere, dipping their uncorrupted finger into the pie. Democracy and a free market with open and competitive economy would surely benefit us all regardless of where you stand politically. Times have changed and this system is gasping for air but we all cling on it like a dying relative. Sad.
Comment by Punter — Thu, Apr 5th, 2007 @ 11:10 pm
#57 So Finland isn’t a democracy? Why? Argue and justify.
Comment by Zebulon — Thu, Apr 5th, 2007 @ 11:18 pm
Punter:
Since you are so fuckin’ intrested in QUALITY of answers, the why don’t you direct some of that interest towards yourself.
I mean, your answer is on SINGLE message without any fuckin’ structure. How am I to read your babble? Long sentences. You don’t even single out the qoute you’re adressing. Just 16 lines of text in one block.
“I think that is a cheap way out of really saying we want to control and restrict your freedoms and that big brother knows what is best for all.”
No - that is simply a reflection on how life IS and how life WILL BE in any organised society, like it or not. The belowed FREEDOM allows murder, rape and whatever. Therefore there are “big brother”-like punishments against these crimes MOST people don’t approve of.
“Even when it is clearly not the best way,”
Says who? Kristian, the financial expert? Or who is the genious behind these bold statements?
“here we are directed to the “society†and told that the government will look after us.”
So what do you want exactly. That society should say, “get out of my way, we don’t want to look after you”? Let the MARKET handle it?
“Why can’t we be left to look after ourselves more and keep government out of my daily decision making?”
Even a child WOULD understand this, but I’ll say it AGAIN. Because, WE do not work very well when left in anarchy. I don’t know how many lawless anarchies you’ve lived through, but I’m glad that I haven’t had to live through any single one. I hope I do not need to suffer that.
“That social mechanism has a name. “Democracy†So why here does it feel so undemocratic in many ways?”
I don’t know. I’m not a mind reader. Unlike Kristian. Ask him. It’s the autovero, the lack of a swiss health-care model and the taxes in general. Plus the lack of capital in Finland.
“What with government and typical Finnish “brother clubs†everywhere, dipping their uncorrupted finger into the pie.”
So these are a Finnish Invention. NOBEL PRICE. NOBEL PRICE. NOBEL PRICE. NOBEL PRICE. NOBEL PRICE.
“Democracy and a free market with open and competitive economy would surely benefit us all regardless of where you stand politically.”
That depends on the definition on key words, such as “democracy”, “free”, “open” and “competitive”, if you claim this GOSPEL of yours should be generally accepted.
“Times have changed and this system is gasping for air but we all cling on it like a dying relative. Sad.”
In what sense have the times changed? Why is this system gasping for air?
You accuse others of not answering questions, but then you burst out with this extremely long bulk of text, without a SINGLE CONCRETE answer to ANYTHING.
Comment by Thomas — Thu, Apr 5th, 2007 @ 11:58 pm
Punter, your text makes perfect sense. And this is the part that some just can’t seem to find terms with:
“Times have changed…”
It’s so true. You can’t block-out the world anymore. People expect better choices and they know what’s possible.
Thomas, you need to catch these things on an upswing. Communism is dead for a while. But I’m sure it’ll come back in the future. Then you’ll have your day.
Comment by Kristian — Fri, Apr 6th, 2007 @ 12:28 am
Kristian:
“Thomas, you need to catch these things on an upswing. Communism is dead for a while. But I’m sure it’ll come back in the future. Then you’ll have your day.”
Name-calling, hasn’t died away with the wonderful libertarian freedom, - or whatever it is you propose - now has it?
Do you get it or do I need to re-explain?
Comment by Thomas — Fri, Apr 6th, 2007 @ 12:59 am
@61 Are you saying you’re not a Communist?
And by the way, I don’t really fit the definition of Libertarian on economic issues. I’ll admit I have a Liberal slant, but I’m not even extreme in that sense. Note: there’s a difference between Libertarian and Liberal.
I perceive you as much more extreme toward Communism than I am toward Liberalism.
Comment by Kristian — Fri, Apr 6th, 2007 @ 1:07 am
Kristian:
“I perceive you as much more extreme toward Communism than I am toward Liberalism.”
I might be wrong in accusing you of being libertarian, but what about your communism accusations?
Comment by Thomas — Fri, Apr 6th, 2007 @ 1:32 am
Well Thomas, what can I tell you? I envision you with a picture of Mao next to your computer monitor
Seriously, maybe you’re not a Communist in the traditional sense. But sometimes I get the feeling that you want to live according to old ways that don’t—and CAN’T—exist anymore.
So, as what do you describe yourself?
And by the way, I’m not insulted by being called a Libertarian. I only meant that the definition doesn’t fit me regarding economic issues. I didn’t make the definition.
But when talking about personal responsibility regarding alcohol as opposed to state control, then I’m very much Libertarian. There are many such non-economic issues about which I consider myself pure Libertarian.
Comment by Kristian — Fri, Apr 6th, 2007 @ 1:54 am
“I’ll admit I have a Liberal slant”
And to be more precise, I’m at the liberal end of the socialist spectrum.
Comment by Kristian — Fri, Apr 6th, 2007 @ 2:07 am
I don’t think I’m a communist in ANY SENSE, execept you’re sense. But that’s the scariest sense, the one where concepts mean nothing. That’s going to hit back fucking big time, and whe´re the ones who are going to take take the blow.
Comment by Thomas — Fri, Apr 6th, 2007 @ 2:51 am
#59 “In what sense have the times changed? Why is this system gasping for air? ”
Are you serious? Haven’t you noticed that times have changed? Finland no longer lives with the “protection” of a big neighbour buying second grade products without question for prearanged prices or in exchange for resources. Cartells and “associations” are being broken open and Finland is being forced to trade in a global economy under global conditions. Even our much loved and respected forest industry can no longer survive in the soon to be “level playing field” of wood procurement. Unless we wisen up and catch up with the times, the rest of the world will fly on by and leave us here spinning.
but regardless of your politics, I’m amazed that you need to be told how the world has changed. Must be that good public funded education you’re all so happy to mention.
Many of Finlands traditional industries are suffering due to a lack of flexibility in regards to work and conditions and the unions today are selling their own members out to maintain there own positions of power. Foreign labor and investment opportunities, as they open up in the east, will become a far more attractive option and soon this model of economy will breath it’s last breath. Think about it, I haven’t seen too many of the newly democratic (read capitalist) economies formed in the 90’s following this type of model. Most, whether in Asia or Europe, have taken the market model and minimize government intervention in the economy. (except perhaps Moldova or Belarus…..) Now they are good models I suppose???
Now Thomas, you might lke the idea of living in “the good old days” but I’m afraid it’s not possible, It’s not a question of would it be better or not, it’s simply a matter of can it happen and unfortunately the answer is NO.
Now I’m not calling you a commie, just a pinkie socialist by the sound
Hope that wasn’t too long for you BTW
Comment by Punter — Fri, Apr 6th, 2007 @ 8:42 am
Punter, vide supra: Maybe the thing is that it is not so much the world that has changed, as such, but the dominant ideologies have. Globalisation, in one form or another, we have had also in Finland at least for a thousand years, so that is not the new thing. The new thing is that as an ideology market liberalism has just recently risen to a dominant hegemonic position. How the world changes and how we perceive it to change are two different things: this is where ideologies come into play. You can not turn Thomas around to your perspective, because he rejects your ideology. That is what it is, a theoretical construct, not the TRUTH. The same applies equally to Thomas, of course.
Your example of the “New European” countries illustrates the point. These countries have turned to market liberalism in stead of, say, social democracy, because the people there equate any interventionist government policies to the bygone communist rule. Because they suffered one extreme of economics, they are ready to distance themselves ideologically as far as possible from it. This is of course both an ideological and sentimental reaction, an assertion of both economic and political independence. Even as our Nordic “mixed models” have been quite successful in the last 50 years or so, adopting this model would have been almost impossible for Estonia et al. because of their peculiar (their very own) ideological baggage and the recent upsurge of a aggressive market liberalism, exemplified, in the case of this discussion, by you.
Comment by Drakon — Fri, Apr 6th, 2007 @ 12:37 pm
Well thank you Drakon for your interesting and imformative answer. I am not interested in changing Thomas to my way of thinking afterall I’m a democrat and hold freedom of thought and speech above all else. I just wonder how and why people are held in a time and thought so far behind the times of today.
As for your idea of globalisation in Finland being 1000 years old, I see your point. Yes, globalisation is indeed an ancient happening and yes countries/tribes have been trading since the dawn of time. Unfortunately this type of thinking doesn’t help us face the reality of globalisation circa 2007. Perhaps it is such old and stale thinking that leads so many here to the position of comfort (laziness) and the accepting of mediocracy?
Comment by Punter — Fri, Apr 6th, 2007 @ 12:52 pm
Punter:
“Are you serious? Haven’t you noticed that times have changed? Finland no longer lives with the “protection†of a big neighbour buying second grade products without question for prearanged prices or in exchange for resources.”
So. This “change” happened in the beginning of the 90’s, now 15 years have passed. And you are suddenly in a shock?
“Cartells and “associations†are being broken open and Finland is being forced to trade in a global economy under global conditions.”
Yeah, and new ones are formed by the same people all over again. I don’t believe anything has changed in this sense. Not in Finland. Not in Europe. Not in the world. If legislation - a form of oppression btw. if you listen to some other market fundamentalist - somehow regulates cartels, the cartellists usually find other means. That is, if their “market” is one where cartels are beneficial. As most are.
“Many of Finlands traditional industries are suffering due to a lack of flexibility in regards to work and conditions and the unions today are selling their own members out to maintain there own positions of power.”
What does the word “flexibility” mean in your vocabulary? What does it mean when applied to “work and conditions”? 80 hrs per week? And where is your proof for the statement “the unions today are selling their own members out to maintain there own positions of power”?
Unless you define these words, it’s not worthy to start a discussion. Market-religion true believers love these words. But what they don’t love is if someone asks what the words actually mean.
“Think about it, I haven’t seen too many of the newly democratic (read capitalist) economies formed in the 90’s following this type of model.”
So? Maybe their rulers are too neo-classical in their beliefs? Doesn’t mean that THAT will not change.
“I just wonder how and why people are held in a time and thought so far behind the times of today.”
What are these “times and thoughts”?
I have a purely intellectual pow wrt politics. The “market religion” has a whole science to prove it’s worth. Much like the good old Marxism-Leninism btw. Now, the only problem with that science - i.e. neo-classical economics - is that it cannot be applied to the world WE live in. Unlike you, and others seem to think.
Most “free market”-believers know their neo-classical dogmas fairly well, but what they DO NOT know is the assumptions these theories are based upon.
I agree, that globalisation introduces changes. But I do not believe that those changes should only affect the ordinary “worker”, as most market-religion believers seem to think. I think we need to ask ourselves the question: Do we really want to work 80 hrs per week, to maintain our superiority wrt. the “chinese” or do we simply accept the fact that they are catching up.
I don’t want to live in a world where everybody is forced - one way or another - to work 80 hrs. per week. And the funny thing is, automation was supposed to lessen the work burden. Now it seems quite the opposite. One more nail in the coffin of “neo-classical economics”.
Comment by Thomas — Fri, Apr 6th, 2007 @ 3:27 pm
“Do we really want to work 80 hrs per week, to maintain our superiority wrt. the “chinese—
No way! We should instead allow formation of capital; then we won’t have to work so hard.
“ or do we simply accept the fact that they are catching up.”
Let them catch-up. Then we can sell them management consulting services
Comment by Kristian — Fri, Apr 6th, 2007 @ 4:23 pm
Kristian:
“No way! We should instead allow formation of capital”
That’s allowed nowadays. I.e. there’s no prohibiton against it. Your tax discussion is simply NOT the answer.
“then we won’t have to work so hard.”
Why is it then that “automation” causes people to work harder globally?
“Let them catch-up. Then we can sell them management consulting services ;-)”
Most of that could be sold inland, since I think most of our companies suffer from bad management.
Comment by Thomas — Fri, Apr 6th, 2007 @ 5:35 pm
My flexability means unions understanding that pay, conditions and job security must all be reviewed to make employment more attractive for companies. The idea that companies are scared of hiring on a permanant basis yet welcome casual contracts is evidence of the unbalance in the market favouring employees. Some of the conditions negotiated in better times “saunalisää” need reviewing and yes, if people WANT to work 80 hour weeks for appropriate pay then why not? As long as it is their CHOICE and rewarded suitably, not by ridiculous taxation.
Why do you also mention the ordinary “worker?†The way it comes out seems to demean their input and value to society. Probably not the case but it seems to me that it is often those that associate themselves with leftist politics that always mention “workers” in a demeaning and reduced capacity. I see them as vital to any companies success and today, at least as wise and understanding as all members within the company. It is only the left that feels “the poor little worker” (SAK election ad) are still “a bit thick and need our protection.” Get past it.
BTW, who said automation was meant to lessen the burden? I thought it was meant to make us more productive/efficient which we are today. That doesn’t mean that we have to work less. A Didn’t your parents teach you that “a little hard work never hurt anybody?”
Comment by Punter — Fri, Apr 6th, 2007 @ 6:12 pm
Punter: “I just wonder how and why people are held in a time and thought so far behind the times of today.”
Punter, complacency and intellectual laziness can certainly by problems, especially in a society that guarantees a reasonable standard of living for virtually everybody. But not everyone who disagrees with you is lazy, maybe they just have a different understanding of how the current global change should be appraised and dealt with. You seem to equate the current change with progress; if one sees an ultimate market freedom as the peak of happiness for mankind this is of course understandable. But there are also as many negative as there are positive changes, and as for the benefits of an unrestrained liberalization of world markets the jury is still out. I am afraid it will be for a long time.
It is easy to take faith in a theory that promises good for everyone. Certain obsolete structures are to be abolished, the system is to be totally reformed, the man is to be made free. If the last century is to teach us something it could be that the human animal can not be bent to conform to a simple theory. Human biology, culture and society are too complex for a mere Marx or a Hayek to fully explain. But we naturally learn by trial and error. Someone had to suffer the disaster that was the Soviet Union, and probably the next generations will see what kind of hardship the next swing to an another extremity will give us.
“As for your idea of globalisation in Finland being 1000 years old, I see your point. Yes, globalisation is indeed an ancient happening and yes countries/tribes have been trading since the dawn of time. Unfortunately this type of thinking doesn’t help us face the reality of globalisation circa 2007. Perhaps it is such old and stale thinking that leads so many here to the position of comfort (laziness) and the accepting of mediocracy?”
Punter, it would be so easy to think the world was made anew in the last century and the man has risen reborn, but it is not a luxury we can afford to indulge in. I am afraid intellectual laziness and comfort can also be found in Grand Theories that explain everything: after accepting one you never need to question or explain the surrounding world anymore, just bend it to conform to your preset truths.
As for Finland, our political history shows that we have always been quick to interpret the way international winds are blowing and have turned that way. So far our leaders have had the wisdom to understand that a small nation can not constantly swim against the tide. So, worry not, economic liberalisation will come here too. It already has, in many ways, but we probably still stand too close to see it. You’ll see taxes and minimum wages dropped and big chunks of the welfare state dismantled in the next few decades. Some will win, others will lose. You probably feel like a winner already.
Comment by Drakon — Sat, Apr 7th, 2007 @ 11:34 am
Great post Drakon, I enjoy your answers and banter. I will now turn my check and anxiously wait for the things mentioned in your final paragraph to come true. As for feeling like a winner, well no not yet but tell you something, if and when these changes occur, remind me of this post and I’ll happily buy you beer…. (If we’re still alive that is)
Cheers
Comment by Punter — Sat, Apr 7th, 2007 @ 12:30 pm
“Some will win, others will lose. You probably feel like a winner already.”
I certainly don’t. I paid 25€ for cab fare home last night; that’s because the buses weren’t operating.
In Germany, cab fares cost about half the Finnish price. Yet the German cab driver has a higher standard of living than the Finnish one.
I really hope that Finland finally gets connected with the world.
Comment by Kristian — Sun, Apr 8th, 2007 @ 2:27 am
Don’t get me started with cabs in Finland
Comment by Punter — Sun, Apr 8th, 2007 @ 7:24 am
Try one in Sweden, Punter.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Mon, Apr 9th, 2007 @ 1:46 pm
Punter:
“My flexability means unions understanding that pay, conditions and job security must all be reviewed to make employment more attractive for companies. .”
I see, FLEXIBILITY means, workers pay. Nice to see this spelled out so clearly and consicely. Never hear any politicians use these kind of definitions of this modern code-word.
“The idea that companies are scared of hiring on a permanant basis yet welcome casual contracts is evidence of the unbalance in the market favouring employees”
Not necessarily. It might be a sign that what the law allows, one is willing to use. And when the “market” is in the hands of the employer, then it’s simple to use anything the law allows.
“Some of the conditions negotiated in better times “saunalisää†need reviewing and yes, if people WANT to work 80 hour weeks for appropriate pay then why not?”
Sure why not. Unless it’s forced upon them. Usually these kind of “flexibilities” are stuffed upon workers, no question asked.
“I see them as vital to any companies success and today, at least as wise and understanding as all members within the company.”
When do we start hearing of Fortum like benefits to workers of Fortum then? Haven’t seen much discussion about that in the news. But I’m sure Lilius is the one to thank.
“It is only the left that feels “the poor little worker†(SAK election ad) are still “a bit thick and need our protection.†Get past it.”
I’m past it. Now you ought to get past it.
“BTW, who said automation was meant to lessen the burden?”
Who might that have been? Isn’t that part of the mantra people like you spit out regularily like clocks? Automation relieves people from tedious work.
Comment by Thomas — Mon, Apr 9th, 2007 @ 8:41 pm
Kristian:
“In Germany, cab fares cost about half the Finnish price.”
BS. Just made a (business) trip to a small southern German town, and the taxis cost a lot there as well. Here we talk about a really small town, in a non-crowded area, yet my taxi trips cost me (relatively short distances) roughly 15e a trip. And these were distances shorter than Helsinki-Espoo or H:ki airport-my home (in Helsinki, cost me 22e). So why don’t you stop lying about German prices, once and for all.
Whether these german taxi drivers were better off than finnish ones, I have no idea. But their “equipment” surely didn’t raise my expectations in that sense. The cars weren’t the same caliber as in Finland (Helsinki area). If you wanted to pay by means of credit card, no fuckin’ way. You get hand written receipts to bring back to your employer, whereas ALL taxis I’ve used in Finland accept ALL credit cards I’ve offered, and hand me printed receipts.
And the “necessary” tip. Never once has any taxi driver in Finland asked me for any. But like Franklin implied, in Sweden (where taxi’s are - if I’m not completely misinformed - “liberated” much more than in Finland) you can end up paying massive prices for e.g. a trip from Arlanda to Stockholm. Moreover, taxi drivers may not only EXPECT a tip. The might DEMAND it. Like one bugger did to me. I handed over all the spare coins I had, he looked at them and threw them upon me. Luckily he drove away fast, because I was so annoyed, I might have kicked in the window of his fuckin’ taxi. So Sweden and taxis, that’s the nightmare scenario imho.
Comment by Thomas — Mon, Apr 9th, 2007 @ 9:03 pm
Thomas #80: “…yet my taxi trips cost me (relatively short distances) roughly 15e a trip. And these were distances shorter than Helsinki-Espoo”
Yes, that supports my point. For example:
A trip from the Rautatieasema to my place in Espoo is about 35€.
A short trip from the Rautatieasema to Ruoholahti is about 15€. In Finland, the meter starts at 7€.
Comment by Kristian — Tue, Apr 10th, 2007 @ 3:28 pm
Kristian:
BS.
A rather long trip from the airport in Helsinki (Vantaa) back to my place - in the middle of the night - cost me 22e. A short trip in Germany cost me 15e - daytime. Am I now to believe your statement that taxis are double the price in Finland? If so, why?
Comment by Thomas — Fri, Apr 13th, 2007 @ 12:04 am
82:
Not BS
“ Rates vary by city, but generally there is a €2-3 “drop charge” or basic fee, then a rate of €1-2 per kilometer.[...]To tip the driver, round the fare up to the nearest Euro or two if you receive extra or exceptional service.”
http://gettingaroundgermany.home.att.net/taxi.htm
“If you hail a driving taxi and only want to travel a short distance then you can ask the driver for a low-cost “Kurzstrecke†(which costs around 3 euros).”
http://www.justlanded.com/english/germany/tools/articles/travel__1/bus_trains_trams_and_taxis
Comment by Kristian — Sat, Apr 14th, 2007 @ 10:45 am
Kristian:
So do you really think the KURZSTRECKE would cover your nightly trip from the centre of Helsinki to Espoo? Didn’t think so, but in your case of course any interpretation of info supporting your delusional views is possible ;-).
Neither would it cover my trips from the airport in Vantaa back home. And those trips I made in Germany were not THAT SHORT.
Now, say it costs 2e per kilometer (which according to your source is possible), then an easy calculation shows (I live something like 12 km from the airport) 24 + 2 (drop charge, which is probably higher during night, although your source doesn’t give any hints) 26e. I paid 22e. Even with the lowest possible rate it would be 12 + 2, i.e. 14e. That’s not half the price. And would you expect that Berlin has the lowest rates?
Comment by Thomas — Sat, Apr 14th, 2007 @ 2:14 pm
Good point Thomas. It’s possible that for longer trips the price is comparable in some instances, but I doubt it is for most cases. For short trips it’s definitely not. Most of my cab trips are short. And I would NOT pay–e.g.–15e for a short trip from Rautatieasema to Ruoholahti. You get that for about 6e in Germany, maybe 7e depending on traffic volume. The savings add up.
My main complaint about the cost from Helskinki to Espoo is that not one single bus travels that late. Why? Probably because the taxi union would complain or something like that. It’s the endless protectionism game. No one benefits in the end. You don’t benefit either living in Itäkeskus. Not even the taxi driver himself benefits in the big scheme of things.
Comment by Kristian — Sat, Apr 14th, 2007 @ 3:27 pm
Kristian:
“My main complaint about the cost from Helskinki to Espoo is that not one single bus travels that late. Why?”
Too small demand, perhaps? Did that thought cross your mind? No, of course not. There’s always some union or department you can suspect.
“Probably because the taxi union would complain or something like that.”
So do you seriously think that the “taxi union” (whatever that is) can affect the time-table of Espoo buses. Get a life.
“You don’t benefit either living in Itäkeskus.”
I don’t live in Itäkeskus. Where do you get these ideas of yours? And honestly - living in east Helsinki - I haven’t had the need for a bus at 4 in the morning, in like the last 5 years. And if I’ve had, the 25e (?) for that one taxi is not much, compared to having to pay extra taxes year in, year out, so that constantly bitching Kristians get their asses home cheaper. You have chosen to live in Espoo. Now, pay the consequences. If you frequently have the need to visit Helsinki in the middle of the night, why don’t you move from that shit-town?
Comment by Thomas — Sat, Apr 14th, 2007 @ 8:45 pm
“If you frequently have the need to visit Helsinki in the middle of the night, why don’t you move from that shit-town?”
Well, there’s no public transit after midnight in Helsinki either—despite the demand. That’s why I would like to see the system modernized like the rest of Europe. It helps everyone in the end.
This is just an example of the nuances that aren’t reflected in ‘EU price comparisons’ and such. Transportation prices in Finland might *look* similar—or *only* 20% higher— but the service is NOT the same. Even though Helsinki region has over 1-million people.
Comment by Kristian — Mon, Apr 16th, 2007 @ 1:46 pm
Well, there’s no public transit after midnight in Helsinki eitherâ€â€despite the demand.
This, as well as many of Kristian’s other extraterrestrial claims, can be easily verified through the internets:
3B tram timetable
Helsinki night buses
Sure, Helsinki public transit isn’t nearly as good as in most central European cities. A real Einstein might figure out the significance of population density in the matter.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Mon, Apr 16th, 2007 @ 9:39 pm
Kristian:
“That’s why I would like to see the system modernized like the rest of Europe. It helps everyone in the end.”
Didn’t notice much bus traffic after midnight in Turin the last time I visited. Maybe your modernisation frenzy hasn’t reached northern Italy yet? In fact, public transportation in the middle of the night in Frankfurt wasn’t so readily available either. Can’t remember Berlin for sure, but if I remember correctly it more or less closed down there as well. New York, that’s a metropol, right? Public transportation to New Jersey died out at 1 in the morning. At least 10 years ago.
Comment by Thomas — Mon, Apr 16th, 2007 @ 11:03 pm
“A real Einstein might figure out the significance of population density in the matter.”
One million people in the Helsinki area. They could do better—at least get some major routes established. If eastern German cities with a few hundred thousand people can do it, then I’m sure Helsinki can too. I’m sure people wouldn’t mind walking a few km if necessary. I don’t mind it. Just gotta loosen-up the unions.
It would benefit Helsinki’s nightlife in a big way.
By the way, Berlin and Dresden now liberalized their opening hours—24hr shopping is possible! Doing the same would be great for Finland during tourist season. It would help to rake-in cash and increase the tax base….so that we little workers don’t have to pay all the bills ourselves!
Comment by Kristian — Tue, Apr 17th, 2007 @ 12:28 am
Excellent Web Site! Very professional and full of great information. I am greatly enjoying it. Your enthusiasm is wonderful!!!
Comment by jouer au virtuel suite 332 — Tue, May 27th, 2008 @ 8:51 pm