U.K. Study Suggests Grocers Should Be Banned From Selling Alcohol

Intervening in the U.K. alcohol market hasn't produced the desired effect, but experts want yet another bite at the apple.


Grocery stores in the United Kingdom should stop selling alcohol, a controversial new study suggests. The study, published this month in the Journal of Public Health and authored by researchers from the University of Cardiff and elsewhere, suggests inexpensive food sold at groceries that also sell alcohol may encourage more alcohol sales.

"People who pop into the supermarket with a budget are attracted to cheap food offers and therefore spend more on alcohol," lead author Simon Moore told the Daily Mail this week.

"If the way alcohol is retailed influences consumption then consideration should be given to how alcohol is retailed in the U.K. and whether separate stores for alcohol and food… provide greater opportunity to challenge the harms associated with alcohol consumption," the study concludes.

The study looks favorably at countries in which governments "hold a monopoly over alcohol retail" alcohol sales, including Finland and Canada, while contrasting it with the U.K., where "alcohol is not subject to a state monopoly… it is available through various retail outlets, the prominent suppliers of which are local convenience stores and large grocery stores." That means, as Moore notes, "you can go and buy a bottle of wine with your bread and Sunday paper from a supermarket or local shop."

Predictably, reports on the study raise the specter of the "nanny state."

"Stripping alcohol from supermarket shelves could help to curb Britain's drinking problem, according to 'nannying' scientists," the Daily Mail reported in an article this week on the study.

Importantly, as the Daily Mail piece also notes, the study was spurred in part by a pair of failed policy interventions.

In Britain, according to a recent parliamentary study, there's "a widespread belief that most of the alcohol that contributes to drunken behaviour is irresponsibly priced and sold." In response, Scotland and Wales have implemented minimum-pricing laws, while England bans the sale of alcohol beverages below their taxed value (or "below the level of alcohol duty plus VAT").

But the new "study found hiking alcohol prices in Scotland and Wales barely had any effect on [alcohol] consumption," the paper reports.

Despite those minimum-pricing policies having failed to achieve their objectives, the study authors nevertheless conclude that these failures indicate the need for still more policy interventions to make the original failed policy work. Minimum "pricing policies might be undermined," they opine, "if retailers offset an increase in alcohol price by reducing the price of food or increase the availability of alcohol."

Alas, doubling down on policy errors has become one of modern government's chief functions, something critics are also noting.

"This just looks like public health trying to double down on its previous failures, and moderate drinkers will once again suffer the consequences," the Adam Smith Institute told the Daily Mail.

There's been no shortage of recent studies on food and alcohol in Britain. One concluded that the pandemic-related lockdown has seen Britons load up on food and drink at rates higher than those elsewhere on the European continent. Another found that people who drink even a little tend to consume more calories from food. And another concluded that younger British drinkers are consuming less alcohol than that same cohort did a decade ago.

I wonder if the authors of the new study considered other options that might yield the results they desire. For example, grocers could be forced to raise food prices—perhaps by government banning grocer discounts on the purchase of fresh produce—which would leave consumers with less money to buy alcohol. Or government could prohibit grocers from selling food. Or, better still, the law could force grocers to stop selling both food and alcohol entirely. (On second thought, none of these ideas are very good, either.)

As I explained in a 2015 column, government attempts to socially engineer food choices tend to end in failure. Policies that restrict food freedom do not make people healthier, as evidenced by the catastrophic failure of a Los Angeles ban on new fast-food restaurants, the failure and repeal of Denmark's so-called 'fat tax,' and damning research on mandatory menu labeling in the United States. Banning grocers from selling alcohol belongs on the same sordid list.

NEXT: Montana Lawmakers Salvage Weed Bill in the Nick of Time

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The study … suggests inexpensive food sold at groceries that also sell alcohol may encourage more alcohol sales. “People … are attracted to cheap food offers and therefore spend more on alcohol,” lead author Simon Moore told the Daily Mail

    Then just imagine the horror of dedicated alcohol stores. Given no diluting offers, people would spend *all* their money on alcohol.

    1. With all due respect Rich, these are experts practicing science! Exactly what right do you have to question them? What training and expertise do you have in the psychology of alcohol purchasing avoidance?

      1. Shhh… You’ll summon chemjeff and Tony with all of your talk about delicious TopMen.

        1. LOL, you are at it, again.

          1. Hurry. Wk is a victim. He has lit the victim signal.


              1. That’s the game plan.

                It’s a lot easier for the government to take over the few, remaining large businesses than it is to impose themselves on millions of little ones. That would be like herding cats.

                1. JOB FOR USA ] Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
                  on this page…..READ MORE

            2. I would rather light him on fire. I could use some physical comedy.

          2. … and apparently I just lit the White Knight signal, swooping in on his charger to defend the honor of the fair fascist maidens.

            1. You light the White Knight signal pretty much EVERY morning. Then you accuse ME of starting fights.

              1. Is it picking a fight to predict that the usual suspects are going to show up? Especially when they then do, in fact, show up and sealion in their typical modus?

                Like, here you are, demonstrating that exact propensity.

                1. Yup, it is still Mother’s Lament picking a fight. If he truly looked at chemjeff or Tony (or me) as annoyances, he would simply ignore us.

                  If Sevo truly found us to be annoyances he would flag and refresh our comments without posting a comment telling us that he is flagging and refreshing.

                  Quite sincerely, if Mother’s Lament had posted no comment, I would have posted no comment.

                  1. Here’s some more to add to your little posturing screed.

                    I loathe you, Tony and chemjeff. Not mere dislike, but I’m repelled by you.

                    This isn’t just some little disagreement on marginalia. I think that you are dishonest liars who are paid to post here.
                    You are agents of an oikophobic, misanthropic, authoritarian agenda. You are awful, evil, garbage people, and I won’t ever stop opposing and mocking you here.

                    One of my greatest joys posting here, is exposing you three fascists for the evil, malignant clowns that you are.

                    Don’t expect me to ever stop.

                    1. At least Tony is honest about who he is. wk is on competent denial. I actually don’t mind Tony and Strazzle. Sure they are idiots but they are honest about it.

                    2. Well, then it’s settled. ML is going to argue against whatever I say or do, because he hates me as a person rather than the positions that I advocate.

                      So when I advocate for lower spending, ML is going to argue against it and pick fights over it.

                      So when I advocate for reducing the welfare state, ML is going to argue against it and pick fights over it.

                      This is what happens when you have no principles and you view politics as nothing more than a team sport. I am on “the wrong team” so everything I say or do is to be opposed, *even if I’m right*. Just like a diehard Red Sox fan can never admit when a Yankees player makes a good play. Because it’s not about ideas anymore, it’s about people. Making sure the “right people” win and the “wrong people” lose.

                      Jesse does the exact same thing every time. I could argue the perfectly libertarian position and he would find some reason to argue against it with some whataboutism or red herring or distraction or whatnot.

                      You two are both too dishonest to admit when people you dislike actually have the right ideas from time to time. You know, kinda like how the Never Trump crowd treated Trump. They hated him as a person and so had a very difficult time admitting when Trump actually did something right. You’re doing the exact same thing.

                    3. Victimization light summons all.

                    4. Lying Jeffy gets called out because he spews bullshit. So he responds by…spewing bullshit. To everyone’s surprise!

                    5. “You know, kinda like how the Never Trump crowd treated Trump.

                      That’s a good analogy. I’m Neverchemjeff/NeverWhiteKnight.

                      I like it.

                    6. At least you are owning your emotional outbursts.

                    7. Off topic chemjeff, what do you earn a day working comment threads?
                      Are you paid by the post? Or is it a daily rate?

                    8. If you dislike me, I am doing something right. I have done horrible things like not believing the election was stolen from Trump.

                    9. Just kidding!

                    10. “That’s a good analogy. I’m Neverchemjeff/NeverWhiteKnight.”

                      Of course, when I changed my handle to NeverWhiteKnight I abandoned my handle, leaving it free for anyone to claim. Good thing I changed it back before someone grabbed it up.

                    11. Pedo Jeffy, I have occasionally agreed with you. The problem is you’re usually just awful, and also a lying, sea lioning, sophist enthusiast of foreign child predators (by your own admission).

                      So we don’t like you very much.

                    12. I don’t know who you are who’s grabbed my old handle, but I like this one and I’m going to use it for a while.

                    13. Most of us want to have good income but don’t know how to do that on Internet there are a lot of methods to earn huge sum, but whenever Buddies try that they get trapped in a scam/fraud so I thought to share with you a genuine and guaranteed method for free to earn huge sum of money at home anyone of you interested should visit the page. I am more than sure that you will get the best result best Of Luck for the new Initiative. Go to website……-Go to this link

                  2. Cite your last post that contributed to a conversation.

                  3. Bullshit. You start shit all the time.

                    Dee, you bitch!

              2. You should be to embarrassed to even comment today after the beat down Chuck put on you yesterday, Dee.

                1. Which thread is that?

                  1. It was in the roundup after Dee exposed that she still doesn’t understand what ad hominem means.

                    1. Ad hominem: “a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.”

                      The firm, Cyber Ninjas, has made no argument, therefore neither chemjeff nor I were using Cyber Ninjas’ association with Lin Wood to avoid arguing against Cyber Ninjas’ (non-existent) argument. Instead, we were evaluating their fitness as an auditing firm. We were using judgement.

                      By the way:

                      “Doug is running this audit. He told me that his understanding was that blue ink was fine – that the ballots only read black ink.

                      Then he came back and said actually it seems I am correct. But he still seemed unsure. He said that they would work on this.”

                      Dispatches from an audit volunteer.

                    2. Here’s where Chuck P. rhetorically curbstomped White Knight on ad hominem.
                      It’s lucky for White Knight that it has no shame, or it would’ve been too embarrassed to come back.


                    3. Wk, youre q fucking liar. Jeff came out of the gate bitching about who was conducting the audit. It was an ad hominem attack. He didnt wait, he attacked the firm for what it was. He ignores all counting is being fucking live streamed. Nothing is done in secret. He literally repeated the same bullshit Maddow was spouting.

                      My God man. You really don’t know what ad hominem is.

                    4. For Jesse, “ad hominem” is the only Latin term he knows for any of the logical fallacies so he will use that whenever anyone argues against his right-wing bullshit, whether it’s an ad hominem or not.

                      He just doesn’t like that I am applying the same standard to the Cyber Ninjas firm that *he himself* would apply to any firm hired by Democrats to “audit” an election that was in a similar situation.

                      Once again: If Georgia Democrats, after Stacey Abrams’ close loss in 2018, chose to hire a firm to “audit” the election, which was not accredited to inspect ballot machines, whose owner was tweeting BLM propaganda, and whose owner attended fundraisers with Stacey Abrams and prominent left-wingers, Jesse would be having a cow. He would rightly denounce such a stunt as attempting to apply a fig leaf of objectivity in the pursuit of a partisan agenda. Which is what’s happening here with Cyber Ninjas and the “audit” of the 2020 election in Arizona. But of course NOW, Jesse wants us to accept this audit at face value. LOL right.

                    5. Lol. Jeff knows what he did was bullshit as hominem and is imaging others do the same so he is allowed to do so. God jeff. Youre fucking pathetic.

                    6. Jesse, you are a tribal hypocrite who comes here only to push Team Red narratives. Why do you even bother?

                    7. I imagine he does it because it ruins the work of fifty-centers like you.
                      You’re paid to gaslight and shill the DNC narrative, but here’s Jesse and Ken and a whole bunch of libertarians telling the truth and wrecking it for you.

                    8. I’ve had a change of heart. I’m going to stop with the fifty-center accusations. It just makes me look stupid. I now realize I was embarrassing myself.

                    9. “I’ve had a change of heart. I’m going to stop with the fifty-center accusations”

                      Poor Jeffy, you’re so mad. You can’t hold onto my old nick forever if you still want to use all your other socks.


                2. You mean, where Chuck P. let everyone know he has no idea who Lin Wood is? That wasn’t embarrassing for me, it was embarrassing for him.

                  1. You got embarrassed and you’re to stupid to realize it.

                  2. Still lying about the Lin Wood thing, huh

                  3. You mean where you should definitely commit suicide?

                    Dee, you bitch!

              3. You do nothing but fight dummy.

                1. Isn’t he the worst? Except maybe for Buttplug. He rapes kids.

              4. Did you not run up here and start bitching?

                Here’s what I saw.

                1. One person is standing on the street corner, throwing punches at empty air.

                2. You ran up and stood in the way of the fist.

                3. You started crying about being hit.

                So, yeah, you started it. Nothing was happening, nothing was going to happen, until you came in. You could have chosen to not do that. But you chose to get involved. Once you got involved, well, now there’s an internet fight.

                So – you started it.

                1. Dee can’t help squawking like a bird.

                  1. Dee’s a bird! Shut up bird! (In Dennis Reynolds voice.)

    2. Those damned free-market predators! They provide food at low cost so people have “surplus” cash they can spend on whatever else they want.

      The only way to food justice is proper state-supplied food at higher costs!

      1. 500% tax on all consumables. That’ll make Britons consume less calories! It’s the only solution.

        1. If it saves just one fat kid…

      2. Every time I hear something like this study, I’m tempted to lower my standards and go looking for a bottle of Mad Dog to swill on like we did in college.

    3. I’m appalled that they did not consider the increased carbon released in the atmosphere when one must add the additional commute to pick up alcohol at a different location after picking up their food. Modern thinking points to racism and inequity. A study must be done to link the unholy triad of alcohol consumption, climate change, and racism.

      1. I think that points to a need to consolidate all of those functions. Tear down these tiny grocers and replace them with a Walk Mart where you can buy everything from alcohol to tires to farm equipment.

        1. Hah. That was supposed to be “Wal Mart”, obviously, but “Walk Mart” is surprisingly apt.

      2. Patience, Grasshopper.

        Does the ant gather all of a leaf in one go? No, she nibbles at it and, bit by bit, carries it back to the nest.

        As the ant nibbles, slowly and surely, you too must nibble around the edges.

        Today it is separate stores for alcohol and food. Tomorrow it is mileage limits and congestion charges. And then like the ant, at the end of summer, we will have taken the leaf of liberty apart and used it as fuel for our hive.

      3. Don’t forget the children, the poor and the elderly!

        You know, it’s all for their good.

        Are you going to stand in the way of that?

    4. Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings DS A are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
      on this page…. Visit Here

  2. “Stripping alcohol from supermarket shelves could help to curb Britain’s drinking problem”

    “Curb”, eh? Hmm…. A better solution could be to require alcohol be sold from inside storm sewers!

    1. We all floatdrink down here.

    2. I guess if you think alcohol consumption is a problem and the goal is to reduce it…Not sure I agree with that goal and they should probably STFU and Mind Their Own DAMN BUSINESS!

  3. “People who pop into the supermarket with a budget are attracted to cheap food offers and therefore spend more on alcohol,”
    “People are making choices I don’t like” would have at least been honest. Though if you’re looking at a causal relationship, it seems the “cheap food offers” would be the place to start. Or you could butt the hell out of people’s lives and understand that freedom means some folks might do things you would not do.

    1. But we’re talking about the UK, which is still a monarchy, and the people are subjects, not citizens.

      I may think very highly of the current Queen, and be very happy that John Locke published his second treatise, but on the subject of freedom in day to day life, I’d rather be an American.

      1. Try as I might, as an American in the 20th and 21st centuries, I have never understood how there was still a royal family in the UK and even more perplexing, why British citizens would still support that.

        1. An even bigger mystery is why many Americans are enthralled by them.

          1. fucking loyalists

  4. New England journal of medicine just published on how awesome Australia gun control is.

    They say Biden is cool too.

    1. I grew up in Mass. where package stores were and still pretty much are the only option for buying booze, including beer and wine, they were closed on Sundays too. Yet the drunken Massholes can still get plenty of beeahs whenever they want them.

      1. Atheists should protest.

        1. Happily, they were closed on Sundays. Now it’s just no sales before 10 AM on the Sabbath.

      2. “We must close the beeah hoarding loophole!”

        1. Knock it off. I’m having visions of Ted Kennedy when you spell out beer phonetically with a Boston accent.

          1. What a wicked pissah

  5. “Thank God my Granddaddy got on that boat”

  6. The UK should look at Canada if they want to see this policy in action. For generations alcohol has only been available liquor stores and bars here in Canada, and nobody here has ever been a problem drinker.
    No sirree, no problem drinking at all.

    1. I want to start a bottled water company in PdQuebec. I will name it Eau Canada.

    2. Here I was, scrolling down to point out that Canada has a federal system and not all the provinces have the same asinine rules, just to find an idiot Canuck makes the same error.

      Now, I’ll grant that its only Quebec and (just recently-ish) Ontario that actually let beer be sold in grocery stores, so your claim about “only been available liquor stores and bars” is not quite as egregiously false as the article’s claim that alcohol is a government monopoly in Canada. But it’s still false (especially since there are also some other exceptions in other provinces, like Newfoundland convenience stores).

      1. Look, guy, next you’ll be telling us that not everywhere sells milk in bags.

    3. I go to Canada once a year to go perch fishing. Your beer is ridiculously expensive. We bring multiple cases of beer at the risk of paying duty, because it’s still cheaper, and some years they let us through without paying it. I don’t see how poor people could even afford to be alcoholics.

      1. Where do you go to fish?

        1. Lake simcoe. Near pefferlaw.

          1. Ah, I’ve never been that far east (in Canada). I’ve heard that it’s nice though.

            1. The perch fishing is nuts. We frequently catch several around 10 inches

              1. Cripes that’s a healthy size.

              2. You know, more of the conversations here should be pleasant, friendly exchanges like this. I realize I’ve been acting like an asshole.

                And I’ve been thinking. As a Canadian, maybe I should show some humility in my commenting on United States’ politics.

                1. I’ve been thinking Dee should go play in traffic. With her eyes closed.

                  1. Neck tourniquet.

                2. You know, more of the conversations here should be pleasant, friendly exchanges like this. I realize I’ve been acting like an asshole

                  If you weren’t a paid demagogue for loathsome things, you could have nice conversations with all sorts of people.

                  Stop shilling for slavers and watch what happens.

    4. The USSR would be a good model too.

      It’s damn cold and Vodka is still the beverage of choice despite the best efforts of the government to convert them to wine.

  7. Studies also suggest banning football (soccer) so that drunken hooliganism may be ended. Studies might also suggest ending the monarchy to prevent all those boozy toasts to “the Queen.”

    1. Spam, spam, spam and more spam!

  8. Despite those minimum-pricing policies having failed to achieve their objectives, the study authors nevertheless conclude that these failures indicate the need for still more policy interventions to make the original failed policy work. Minimum “pricing policies might be undermined,” they opine, “if ….

    It’s troubling when reviewers and editors allow this “well, our hypothesis turns out to be crap, but may be true nevertheless if we could somehow rig the study better”. It’s not just in political “science”, but you see it creeping in anytime the researcher has too much invested in the hypothesis. Yes, research is hard, of course it is, you’re doing something that hasn’t been done before. But when it doesn’t work, maybe the reason is, the concept is flawed.

    1. Sounds like gun control.

    2. One intervention begets another, and another, and another…..

  9. Drunks and the bag-in-box middle aged women will buy the booze first. And a subsequent UK study will identify that these folks are otherwise starving.

    1. And then this will be used as evidence of the need to bring back rationing and more government control.




  10. We have liquor and beer at gas stations, stores, drive thrus, etc. Nothing wrong with it.

    1. One good thing to come out of the pandemic in WA is liquor delivery and take out has become legal.

  11. Apparently nothing in the world can ever make a left wing media scumbag happy, as I’m seeing a slew of articles now claiming that even though Chauvin was (rightfully) convicted of all the charges that it still doesn’t feel to them like justice was done. Here’s one example from a particularly annoying woman at USA Today:

    Someone please remind this stupid bitch that she’s a hundred times more likely to be traumatized and/or killed by an inner city gang-banger than by a cop.

    1. I mean, I can kind of agree that justice wasn’t done. Even thinking that Chauvin was in the wrong, the process was tainted.

    2. Wow, that article really *was* egregious. No mention that the “child” who got shot in Ohio was in the process of trying to stab *another* child.

      I wouldn’t be at all shocked to see the police effectively “defunding” themselves.

      “Fuck it, you’re on your own.”

    3. I don’t think those types would have been placated if they lined up all cops and shot them.

      When rioting and looting are considered reparations and no arrests are made, we’re doomed.

      We’ve gone that far afield these days.

  12. Sure, there might be a correlation, but the study authors fail the cause-effect relationship. The countries that have different mechanisms of marketing alcohol and that have different relationships with alcohol are probably adopting marketing methods that are appropriate to their relationship with alcohol. In other words, if the people in your country are teetotalers, then your country will probably separate alcohol and food sales, but if the people in your country like to drink and drink a lot (such as Britons), then your country probably makes it easier to have a one-stop-shop for alcohol and food.
    If there’s a problem and the problem needs to be fixed, the best way is to address the underlying issue, and not try to put up barriers. As the “problem” gets resolved, the barriers will raise themselves.

    1. Have been watching a lot of BritBox during the pandemic. It only reminds me of how much I wish we had pubs on every corner in every hamlet like they do.

      Not for the alcohol, although I’m fond of Guinness Stout and Bass Ale and would certainly tip a pint or two. But for the social life it promotes.

      1. If you are still on lockdown, maybe reruns oF Cheers.

      2. Grew up in southwest Detroit. Auto and related plants everywhere and a bar on every corner.

  13. It is all a scam except now the gangsters are the government instead of Al Capone.

    Same thing going on with weed industry now.

    1. I’ve been thinking about going into the biz, now that NM has legalized the recreational stuff. Not sure if it would be worth the headaches, though.

      But I’ve already got the “Mexican” part inherent with it being New Mexico. I just need to figure out how to incorporate butt sex and I’ve got the libertarian trifecta!

      BSMaW Inc. has a good ring to it for a name.

      1. I dunno. I can’t even if I wanted to because of my job.

        I hear it is a tough business. It is labor and cost intensive and agriculture. Also there is still an illegal market to compete with.

        Pot should be legal and drugs should be decriminalized. That is a whole discussion. The conservatives of yore leaned in that direction and it got nowhere. The Biden democrats are nowhere near it.

        1. And made more difficult by not being able to participate in banking or interstate commerce.

        2. I couldn’t with my current job either, but this would be a new career path.

          There are definitely a lot of downsides. It seems to be making a fair number of people in Colorado pretty rich despite the hassles, though.

      2. Are there any Mexicans in New Mexico?

        I thought it was all Indians and old white people.

        1. White people are actually a minority population here. Outnumbered directly by hispanics. We’re even all the way up to 2% black people!

          Which means even our racial tensions are weird. Mostly hispanics wanting to “celebrate their heritage” and indians pissed off because that heritage includes dudes that cut the foot off all the men of one tribe for rebellion.

          But yes, lots of mexicans. Lots of weed, too. No knowledge about our levels of ass sex.

          1. Well, you should look into it for us. You know, for science.

            1. I’m not sure I’m *that* libertarian… 😉

              1. found the transphobe ^

    2. > except now

      It’s not “except now”. It’s always been that way.

      Some of the first governments were basically bandits who realized it was easier to stay in the ransacked village than to sail away with the loot. Government as legal mafia has been a metaphor for as long as I’ve been alive.

      Stop imagining this is all just the Democrats, because Republicans are just as bad. If you think otherwise then open your fucking eyes. Besides, this is England, they don’t have either of those parties.

      1. There is always an inherent tension or trade-off to government. Any government, or other entity, that has the power to protect you from things also has the power to exploit you.

        1. a government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.

          1. Yes! Exactly!

            1. Which is your goal. This is why we hate you. That and you’re a total shitweasel.

      2. Did you reply to the wrong comment? Echospinner didn’t mention Republicans or Democrats at all, until we got to talking about weed in the States, which isn’t England.

      3. Once upon a time, people told the fairy tale that governments created order, allowing cooperation between people to create complex systems like the first irrigation systems in Mesopotamia.

        Then the archaeologists looked more closely, and discovered that all the available evidence showed the complex irrigation systems came first, and that the governments came along after. Thugs taking advantage of people who had lost their mobility by investing their labor in increasing their productivity.

        Taxes are the ransom we pay to thugs for not destroying civilization.

        1. Theft began when mankind abandoned nomadic wandering in favor of agriculture. Actually, females are often given the credit for beginning agricultural society that allowed everyone to stay put.

          1. Thank Martha Stewart

          2. Is that because they were too tired to walk anymore?

  14. Why has this specialized term from blackjack caught on in inappropriate contexts? You don’t mean “double down”, you mean double up.

    1. Because words no longer have meaning.
      My personal most hated misuse is ‘decimate’.

    2. You mean it should ‘of’ said double up?

  15. Government: The sneaking suspicion that someone somewhere is having fun.

    1. So, government is always Calvinist?

      I come from a long line of Calvanists. I used to taunt my mother with; “So mom, according to you, if it feels good it must be a sin and if it hurts I’m doing God’s work”.

      1. Kind of opposite Pentecostals, who go too far the other way sometimes.

      2. Better to stick with Calvin and Hobbes.
        The key to understanding government regulations today is Calvinball.

  16. Fuck you, Reason

    The huge anti-lockdown protest occurring in London right now is a sight to behold. [Pics]

    1. Can you explain the logic of what this has to do with Reason?

      1. They’re supposedly concerned with liberty, and they’re writing an article about the UK. The topic they chose is not citizens objecting to their government’s totalitarian rejection of basic freedom, but grocery store regulation.

        There – now I’ve deigned to draw it in crayon for you.

        1. Umm, Baylen Linneken writes a food freedom-related blog post every Saturday.

          You may slink away in embarrassement now…

          1. The post where White Knight pretends that you’re only allowed to talk about the column, even though it never does.

            1. “The topic they chose is not citizens objecting to their government’s totalitarian rejection of basic freedom, but grocery store regulation.”

              So, you are just going to completely miss the point, and pretend Nardz did not make this clueless criticism of Baylen Linneken.

            2. You know, Baylen Linneken, Reason’s resident food writer, who ALWAYS writes about food-related topics.

              There, I drew it out in ketchup for you and Nardz.

              1. Aww, white knight’s embarrassed

                1. That was a truly pathetic attempt at saving face on your part.

  17. Anyone else following the Maricopa County audit? (not Reason staff, I’m sure, too local) Democrats are freaking out, it’s delicious.

    (CNN: “Republicans begin reviewing 2020 ballots in effort to undermine results”)

    How exactly does an audit “undermine results?” Amazing.

    and the Dems still unsuccessfully are trying to file last minute lawsuits to stop the audit. I wonder if arson or a gas leak is next on the agenda? For “democracy”

    1. It’s not a professional audit. It is a fishing expedition run by a right-wing firm that is not even accredited to inspect ballot machines, whose owner tweeted “Stop the Steal” nonsense, and who was attending fundraisers with Lin Wood and other kooks.

      1. It’s fascinating how credulous you really are jeff.

        1. He knows and that’s flop sweat in the post.

      2. So let’s play your game for a second and imagine that it’s just a “fishing expedition”. What’s the problem?

        If there’s no fish then the 65% of the country who thinks you guys fiddled with the results are somewhat mollified, and if there is fish then the people who committed fraud can be investigated.

        Win-win for the country.

      3. I calmed down and thought about it some more. I can now see how hiring a right-wing firm could lead to misinformation and further fuel for the big “Stop the Steal” lie.

        1. Watching you leftists try to meme is like watching a baby chimp try to revive its dead mother.

        2. “I calmed down and thought about it some more

          Which is unusual because I just type shit from my talking points pdf, without thinking about anything at all. Must have been the impact of assuming a great man’s nick.

          “I can now see how hiring a right-wing firm could lead to misinformation and further fuel for the big “Stop the Steal” lie.

          But I still can’t explain why it is “misinformation” when there hasn’t been a vote audit to prove so, and why I’m so scared of an actual audit of the votes.

      1. The Maricopa Board of Supervisors is linked with many attempts to screw up elections and the prevent anyone from looking at anything. And this ain’t their first rodeo.

        That’s on top of their many, many, many, many, many, many, documented cases of corruption.

        Like, I know you know jack-shit about Arizona politics (even though you keep jumping in like you do) but Maricopa county has been in a long-running political war between the Sheriff’s office, the BoS, and the Judiciary.

        The whole place is corrupt as fuck and is one of two Blue strongholds in an otherwise red state.

        1. Bring back Goldwater!

        2. Okay? I’m not claiming that Maricopa County is some paradise of good government.

          1. Don’t you know. By pointing out that the Arizona Republicans lined up a highly biased firm to participate in the audit, you have revealed your deep Democrat sympathies. An impartial libertarian couldn’t possibly have made the observation about Cyber Ninjas’ bias.

            And, QED, that means you also endorse the sitting government of Maricopa County, and all its actions.

    2. Here is a better article on what is happening:

      Maricopa County’s results were upheld through a number of reviews, including a hand recount of a sample of ballots conducted jointly by both political parties, as well as a forensic audit conducted by federally accredited labs that was ordered by the county and concluded in February. The county elections department said the result of the multiple tests confirmed that the county’s elections equipment “provided an accurate counting of ballots and reporting of election results.”

      There was already a partial hand recount. There was already a “forensic audit”. They didn’t find the smoking gun that Team Red was looking for. So Team Red decided to hire its own unaccredited firm to look at all the ballots and “find” the MASSIVE FRAUD that they are sure exists.

      1. There was already a “forensic audit”

        When? The BoS has prevented every examination except a very cursory hand-recount. So, when and who did this audit?

          1. Umm, they “audited” the equipment to see if it was hacked. They didn’t analyze the votes for their provenance.
            Maricopa County officials could have created thousands of votes and the “audit” wouldn’t show it.

            Funny how they restricted that audit to such limited strictures.

    3. Here’s another article:

      Arizona Republic reporter Jen Fifield was among the first batch of official observers to the audit. During a break, she posted this Twitter update, which hardly inspires confidence.
      “I noticed the counters had blue pens. Supposed to only have red when you’re around ballots since ballots can read black and blue ink. Those blue pens the counters have could potentially be used to mark the ballots. I pointed this out to Doug Logan with Cyber Ninjas.
      “Doug is running this audit. He told me that his understanding was that blue ink was fine – that the ballots only read black ink. Then he came back and said actually it seems I am correct. But he still seemed unsure. He said that they would work on this.”

      Blue pens are never allowed anywhere near ballots because the tabulation machinery will read the blue ink, though it would be a great way to sabotage ballots.

      Fifield also reports she was banned from providing any further updates until her shift is over.

      1. Lol@WashingtonPost
        The blue pens thing is fake news.
        The left is going to do everything they can to stop and/or discredit the audit (everything they claimed the Republicans were doing during the election, basically) so they can get ahead of what they know the true results will be and they can somehow claim that the GOP is manipulating the ballots through the auditors. You know the truth and now you have to regain control of the narrative. But everyone knows you’re full of shit.

        Because the election with ZERO transparency was the most secure in history!!!11 But an audit that is being filmed 24/7 and performed by an independent party is somehow fraudulent and corrupt. You’re only lying to yourselves.

        1. Your type of response is exactly the entire purpose of this “audit”. It is not to reveal the truth. It is to provide a fig leaf of objectivity to the right-wing narrative that the election was “stolen”.

          “what they know the true results will be”

          How do you know what the “true results” are? The “audit” isn’t finished, right? Oh but you are just POSITIVE that this audit will uncover MASSIVE FRAUD and prove you right! How do you know until this “audit” is complete? Huh?

          1. You’re positive it won’t.

            So I don’t see why you’re so upset about it.

            1. For the same reason why scientists are upset when partisan hacks co-opt the word ‘science’ to justify a partisan agenda, in order to give it a patina of objectivity and a veneer of more respectability than it deserves.

              1. Like mask wearing and keeping children out of school.

                Yeah, I get it.

                1. Now you are getting the picture.

                  There is a scientific argument to be made for wearing masks, in some situations and some settings. There is no scientific argument for wearing masks at all times and in all settings.

                  There is a scientific argument to be made for keeping kids out of school in the face of a pandemic. There is no argument to keep them out of school in perpetuity until 100% of the population is vaccinated.

                  In these cases, partisans hijack some valid science to their own ends and twist it into something that it is not, in order to give their cause more legitimacy than it deserves.

                  And so it is the same here. Partisans want to hijack the patina of legitimacy that the phrase ‘hand recount’ and ‘outside experts’ lends to a cause, while rigging the results to make sure that the result will be pre-ordained. In this case, hiring ‘experts’ that are unaccredited partisans who will generate headlines that the Arizona Senate Republicans demand that they generate.

            2. Funny how Jeff spent four years puleing and moaning about how Russia stole the election, and now suddenly it’s all impossible nonsense.

        2. But an audit that is being filmed 24/7 and performed by an independent party is somehow fraudulent and corrupt.

          Go watch the live stream yourself. You can’t see anything. You could have people at tables re-marking ballots as we speak and the live stream viewer wouldn’t know.

          And the “independent party” is an unaccredited firm who is run by a Stop the Steal conspiracy moron and who attended fundraisers with Lin Wood and the other conspiracy kooks. If the roles were reversed you would never tolerate an “audit” under these conditions.

          The recount is being run by the Republican caucus of the Arizona Senate. It is not being run by Maricopa County officials (who are also Republicans by the way).

          But Team Red has you fooled into thinking that this is a legit audit, which is all that matters. All that matters is the perception of legitimacy. Not whether the audit is on the up-and-up in reality. That is the real lesson from Trumpism. All that matters is image. Substance doesn’t.

        3. We need fortified audits!

          1. We need professional audits.

        4. It’s not fake news, but chemjeff did leave out a later update by Fifield where she explained that the blue pen mistake was corrected. chemjeff may not have known about the update.

      2. So, *now* its a problem – but when they were ‘audited’ by a group of people who went into it with ‘there was no fraud’ as their starting assumption (because they were Maricopa county election officials) it was fine?

        So people doing the work with one bias are not ok, but with a different bias then we should just take their word?

        1. What exactly should the null hypothesis be? Assume there was MASSIVE FRAUD and then try to find evidence to prove that there wasn’t?

          The null hypothesis in this case ought to be that votes were counted according to established, regular procedure, and those who want to reject this hypothesis have the burden to come up with the proof for it.

          1. There is either evidence or there isn’t. Assuming there was no fraud (or even supporting there was no fraud) calls into question the effort and authenticity of coming to the desired outcome.
            Someone actually looking for fraud should find it if it was present. And their findings can be seen by all.

            1. Wait. What was this article about again?

  18. Once you understand that the goal isn’t to improve health but to sicken and debilitate people and give the government more power and make people dependent on it, it all makes sense.

    1. Like pandemic propaganda?

  19. The simple answer would be to declare Britain a Muslim country and ban alcohol. Then the citizenry could declare government a bunch of thieves and chop their hands off.

    1. You misspelled “heads”.

      1. Bring back the guillotines?

        1. An axe like was used on King Charles I would seem appropriate.

      2. For Jihadistsit’s both, actually.

    2. Well, Hell, they could do that without Islam, though I’d much prefer them alive, intact, and humiliated by the Monty Python “Blackmail” game.

  20. I thought the British already had an expression to respond to ideas like this:

    “Bugger off.”

  21. Considering this is in the UK and the authors of the study being from Cardiff university, don’t count out the possibility that they’re just being Mohammed friendly. Today the gin tomorrow he pork chop.

  22. Fuck you, Reason.

    MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY STUDY: Biden’s climate plan would force Americans to reduce their red meat consumption by 90%, meaning they could only consume 4 pounds of red meat a year (equivalent to one burger a month)

    Biden’s plan would also require Americans to cut consumption of all animal products by 50%

    1. The citation to this study is notably absent.

    2. What?????

      I’m known to BBQ burgers that start at a half pound each!

      1. If by “recent” you mean a year old, sure.
        So, this study is a year old, has nothing to do with Biden’s plan, and doesn’t involve forcing anyone to give up meat.

        In other words, Fox News is full of shit again but their happy little zombie followers will regurgitate whatever they say.

  23. O/T: Good article about late 19th century politics in this country.

    The takeaway is that these “unprecedented” times really aren’t that unprecedented.

    1. “the pace of the news out of Washington has slowed in the Biden era”

      That is actually the most telling statement in that article.

      1. Well, most of the news in the Trump era was garbage. Along the lines of “OMG did you see what he tweeted today?” So it is totally fine if that garbage news is going away.

    1. O K L A H O M I C I D E Oklahoma!

    2. So, you’re in favor of people being dragged from vehicles and beaten. Got it.

  24. Fuck you, Reason.

    Wow. Kamala is having the federal government purchase her own books. [Screenshots]

  25. I think I pooped my pants.

    1. We know, Dee. We know.

    2. That’s so hot and trendy. All my blue state pals have been doing it since Nov 2016.
      Just a second, I want to switch to my SQRLSY sock and ask you a favor.

      1. Hi, Tulpa. How’s your weekend been?

    3. Can I have a taste?

  26. The British drink like people who probably need to be about a decade away from a major national intervention.

    Yet they have an efficient, universal healthcare system run by the government that everybody loves. Maybe they simply catch their enlarged livers early and intervene in the targeted, efficient way you can when everyone sees a doctor regularly.

    1. Their healthcare system has certainly cured the national alcohol substance abuse problem they used to have. Cheers.

      1. Don’t forget how the brits are famous for their fabulous teeth.

        1. A little of column “elective procedure” and a little of column “crooked teeth give your face character.”

          The British are essentially hobbits. A very strange culture.

          1. Racist.

  27. I love these great findings! Thanks for sharing!

  28. Wot??? No free-plugging of his book by Baylen???

  29. Those ‘experts’ are idiots.
    If the Britons cut back on alcohol, and find out what has been done to their country, it’s lights out for the ‘experts’.

  30. The religions vary, but the zealotry and oppression remain the same:

    Baptists in our South with dry counties.
    Natives at our other corner with dry boroughs in Alaska.
    Puritans and Prohibition.
    NHS as today’s worse and secular CoE replacement with this attempt at stripping alcohol from store shelves.

    1. I can vouch for this with North Carolina’s crazy-quilt of alcohol regulations.

      North Carolina has what’s called “local option,” which means that Cities and outlying Counties have the option to allow or not allow alcohol sales. Citizens can use the power of referendum to vote in alcohol, and that always brings the Southern Baptist, Pentecostal, and Evangelical Holy Rollers out of the woodwork to tell non-stop tales of the evils of alcohol. In college towns, the Holy Rollers typically try to dispute the legitimacy of student voters, even when they fully meet residency requirements.

      Another aspect of this is that in NC, liquor sales are done strictly in State-Run Alcohol Beverage Contol (ABC) Stores like in Old Soviet Union. Also “Blue Laws” regulating Sunday sales, liquor sales, beer and wine sales, brown-bagging, and liquor-by-the-drink in bars and restaurants are all treated as separate issues to be voted upon separately. Thus, one jurisdiction may have beer and wine in private stores, but no ABC stores, or brown-bagging but no beer and wine, etc. People then have to travel over City and County lines to get their desired means of alcohol service and thus risk driving intoxicated and endangering safety on the roads.

      The ABC Stores are also notorious sources of patronage, neopotism, graft, grift, and corruption all by themselves. The State’s ABC Store monopoly, combined with Federal and State Excise Taxes, are creators of a black-market in moonshining and ‘shine-running, romanticized on “reality-TV,” but in fact much more dangerous.

      All together, these regulations, taxes, and State monopoly do nothing to stop alcohol abuse. Too many people in NC seem to have a mentality of either you are a Teatotaller or you let-it-all-hang-out, no happy medium.

      The old stereotypical trope of “Bootlegger and Baptist” is alive and well in the so-called “Good Old North State.”

  31. I think that could be a very important imporovment. Kaminsanierung Wien

    1. If there are store just for selling alcohol than people could be more careful about buying ALCOHOL. SEO Wien

      1. And if someone need a store in Austria thats the address. Ersatzteile Hausgeräte

  32. Or maybe we can just let adults make their own decisions about how and where they spend the money they earn. If COVID has shown us anything it is that governments have no clue what is really good for us and what is not. They forced lockdowns, masks and social distancing on everyone only to discover that, oops, they don’t really work. Did they stop using them when the ‘science’ became clear? No, the doubled down on stupid and tyranny. The last thing I want is some snowflake bureaucrat who was in diapers when I became an adult telling me I can’t buy a beer at a convenience store because he thinks it is a bad idea. Mind your own business.

  33. A study shouldn’t TELL you to do anything. A study should analyze what the facts and relationships are.

  34. Since I started with my 0nline business, I earn $25 every 15 minutes. It s0unds unbelievable but you vv0n’t forgive yourself if you d0n’t check it out.

    Learn more ab0ut it here..


Please to post comments

Comments are closed.