The Government Is Choking Off Wineries
It seems anything the government touches dies—today, it’s thousands of acres of once-productive vineyards.

The drinks world has been rocked by dramatic media stories about barren patches of California countryside, abandoned vineyards, and scores of wineries closing their doors. Photos show tens of thousands of vineyard acres being bulldozed and then pulverized into wood chips by large industrialized grinders across the Golden State.
This "Grape Apocalypse" (Grape-pocalypse?) is being framed as the sad but inevitable result of declining consumer interest in wine. That's true, but it's not the full picture.
Unsurprisingly, the wine industry has been hit by inflation. However, the market has also been flooded by spikes in imported wines and grocery store chains preferring their own private-label wine brands (such as Costco's Kirkland Signature wines or Whole Foods' Wine Farmer).
The long-term future of the wine sector is bleak given that Millenials and Gen-Zers are not only drinking less alcohol in general than previous generations but are also increasingly opting for microbrews and craft cocktails over vino. Global wine consumption has hit a 27-year low and American wine sales fell by 8.7 percent in 2023.
But while all these factors certainly play a role, they glide over the biggest industry-wide issue of all for wine: Being choked to death by government policies.
Due to the three-tier system that nearly every state subjects alcohol to, wholesalers or distributors act as government-mandated middlemen connecting alcohol producers to retail stores. The purported rationale for the three-tier system is to prevent Big Alcohol monopolies from forming at the producer level of the supply chain.
And yet, it has essentially done the opposite. For decades there were multiple distributors available for almost every winery. Today, there are fewer than 1,000 distributors for over 8,000 American wineries—and out of those distributors, it's actually just three goliath distributors that control up to 67 percent of all the U.S. wine sales (in some states this climbs to over 90 percent).
This begets a form of government-sponsored collusion, in which the largest distributors disproportionately focus most of their energy on servicing the accounts from the largest wineries. Many smaller and medium-sized wineries are often unable to find distributors who will carry their products. In turn, their wines never even make it to store shelves, severing them from their main market-access channel entirely. When less wine is being produced or sold, fewer grapes are needed—hence the growing epidemic of vineyard desecrations.
It's a lesson the government never learns, especially when it comes to booze: If you create a government-mandated middleman in the name of stopping private alcohol monopolies at one level of the supply chain (the producer level), you inevitably end up creating a government-sanctioned monopoly in another level. Eventually, as Wine-Searcher put it, the "arteries" of America's wine market—the world's largest—become "clogged," with the repercussions flowing all the way back up the supply chain to the grapes themselves.
The way to help independent wineries is to reform the laws to allow more wineries to self-distribute their products directly to retailers, including across state lines. Better yet, scrap the three-tier system entirely and allow alcohol to operate like basically every other industry in America.
If more wineries can stay afloat, then demand for grapes will bounce back—and grape-meggedon can be reversed before it's too late.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
It always bothers me when an editorial recommendation uses the word "allow." That terminology accepts the underlying premise that permission is to be required for pretty much anything.
Though not words that trip so readily off the tongue, would it not be more accurate to say something like "stop preventing" -?
It's so easy to fall into that trap. It's one of the three recommendations I post aperiodically:
Fire KMW.
Get out of DC.
Put liberty front and center, not pragmatism or utilitarianism.
Always always always remember that government is the problem, not absence of government. The solution to government is not "better" government, or different government, it is less government.
Government is always an uncaring third party at best, in theory; when government actually has skin in the game, it is theirs, not yours or the public's. This shows most clearly in calling 9-1-1 to get help for someone suffering a mental crisis. The cops who show up don't give a damn about anything but stopping the problem, and if that means shooting the problem, or shooting your distracting chihuahua, they will do so.
Fire KMW.
Get out of DC.
Put liberty front and center, not pragmatism or utilitarianism.
Check out Mr. Mises caucus over here...
Half are in New York.
Oooh, I better change that rant.
Step away from the power centers.
Yuck. Well, I'll think of something.
Liberal intellectual bubbles?
And please stop using "liberal" when you mean "leftist".
The problem is they still think they can persuade leftists to seek liberty if their pragmatic utilitarian arguments are persuasive enough, instead of realizing that leftists want powerful government, to enforce their values on everyone else, and to loot the productive class to pay for it all.
Yes, that's a good point. Collectivists didn't arrive at their position by logic, but by feelz, and logic only confirms that logic is racist.
Well, I don't know about "leftists". I think it is more along the lines of trying to persuade those who are 'libertarian-curious' or 'third-party-curious'. Fiery broadsides like "taxation is theft" and "abolish the welfare state" is unlikely to persuade those who aren't already part of the choir. But, articles like "here is an example of taxation producing an undesirable result" or "here is an example of why the welfare state has to be reined in" can be a sort-of 'gateway' to exploring these issues deeper.
Well, I don’t know about “leftists”.
You’re right. “Left” and “right” are meaningless. He should have used “Democrats/fascists” instead.
Marxists would have worked as well.
Awlfs are a big market for wine and big gov. They deserver it
It's just recognition of the fact using simple language. Do you object when it's said a kidnapper allowed the release of some hostages?
According to the Wines Vines Analytics Winery Database, the United States is now home to 11,691 wineries, which is nearly 400 more than in 2021 and 1,215 more than in 2020. Since 2019, the number of U.S. wineries has grown at a rate of 4 percent, which matches the growth rate since 2010.
https://www.winebusiness.com/news/article/266918
Stop whining about it.
Put a cork in it.
Don’t keep these things bottled up inside you.
Stop these puns or i will tannin your hide.
I would be crushed.
You will be pun-ished for that one.
What about all the graft?
Thanks a bunch.
On the plus side, wine moms will be extinct soon.
Like polar bears and snow.
Again?
They are the gift that keeps on giving.
Like those bottom-weighted punching bags which always pop back up.
Tattoo industry hardest hit.
Replaced by vodka moms.
You think beer moms will be any improvement?
I think soccer moms are an improvement over Little League moms, and both are safer on the road than those sleepless hockey moms.
Strzok and Page finally get paid for trying to take down Trump in the 2016 election. Paid for... checks notes... texts released from government issued phones. Over 1M in "settlement" for information released from, again, government issued phones.
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/07/26/peter-strzok-lawsuit-settlement-00171498
Politico see's the blatant, unbelievably unethical payoffs and makes excuses.
The Nuremberg trial penalties imposed on the deep state and the oligarchs after the revolution, have to be extreme enough to frighten bureaucrats from even thinking of doing it again for a hundred years.
The Donald, July 26: “Christians, get out and vote, just this time... You won’t have to do it anymore. Four more years, you know what, it will be fixed, it will be fine, you won’t have to vote anymore, my beautiful Christians.”
Hoping one of the TDS-addled commentariat can explain how that promise isn't as bad as it sounds. What, exactly, will be "fixed"?
That’s disturbing. I wonder what defense his minions will come up with for this one. He was speaking figuratively? He didn’t mean it? Look at what he does not what he says? Only leftists take him at his word? It's ok because Democrats did it first?
Poor sarc
What’s disturbing about it? Telling voters to vote is scary to you?
He can’t run for another term if elected a 2nd time. They won't have to vote for him again.
Read the entirety of what he said. There is nothing actually disturbing there unless you watch Maddow. Which you probably do.
Being generous, and assuming he doesn't mean the Republicans will shut down elections once they are in power (which seems unlikely), I would interpret it to mean that once people see effective government in action, most voters will prefer it, and Democrats will have no chance to win elections.
His faithful can’t decide if he’s God or the second coming of Christ. So I figured he was saying he’ll cause the Rapture or some similar nonsense.
Ideas! So many pour ideas!
You remain retarded. Is there something g in jeff head pats that actually make you dumber?
Sarc may not hate Christians as much as Jeff, KAR, Pluggo and Hank, but he's definitely willing to pretend.
Also, Sarc doesn't seem to get that of course they can't vote for Trump again in four more years.
I don’t hate Christians. I don’t like people who force their religion on others or use it to justify their bigotry.
Put on the wrong sock again, sarky?
No, just trying to correct the lying Lamanite.
Ok, drunky.
Have you met the modern leftist?
To you "leftist" means anyone who opposes Trump. The word used to mean actual communists and socialists who wanted political control over the economy. Now actual fucking leftists might as well be Trump supporters, while the people they call leftist are people who support liberty.
You're exactly like the people you hate. You want to control business, and you want to change what words mean.
The only difference between you and a leftist is the man you worship.
There’s a lot of the word “you” in that post.
He's addressing a specific group of people who often don't vote. He didn't say no one would ever have to vote again. Just that they could go back to not voting because everything will be "fixed". I tend to doubt that he can or should do everything that hardcore Christians want him to do. But I'd say it's pretty clear that that is what he is saying, not that there won't ever be consequential elections again if he's elected.
MAGA is working on having the state legislatures determine the electors.
It is why wingnut America keeps saying that the US is "not a democracy".
Democracy = Bad. MAGA = Bible Power Ordained by Gawd and his Fatass Holy representative Donnie.
Missed throwing in Christian nationalists on your caterwauling
turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
Get help.
Ideas, not people.
OK, here, I’ll help him.
A few years back SPB2 posted kiddy porn to this site, and his initial handle was banned. The link below details all the evidence surrounding that ban. A decent person would honor that ban and stay away from Reason. Instead he keeps showing up, acting as if all people should just be ok with a kiddy-porn-posting asshole hanging around. Since I cannot get him to stay away, the only thing I can do is post this boilerplate.
https://reason.com/2022/08/06/biden-comforts-the-comfortable/?comments=true#comment-9635836
It’s all the response shrike deserves.
Shrike was a real person. Now it’s just a moniker the idiots throw at anyone who argues with them. Like how any new person who pops up with libertarian ideas is called “sarc” and run out of town.
You’re a smart guy with good taste in music.
Why do you back up these idiots?
Is it fun to have them on your side?
Are you afraid if their wrath if you act like a human being?
Shrike has posted under the Buttplug handle since like 2010 or at least since the whole White Indian fiasco. I’m pretty sure this is common knowledge and something he doesn’t deny. He’s been a bigoted piece of shit since I first started posting here, and no one post links that completely destroys their argument the way he does.
If noting all of that puts me on “their side” so be it.
I do have great taste in music though, so thanks for that.
(Also, I thought we were all Tulpa?)
What is scary about the quote?
"my beautiful Christians" ? Who talks like that?
People who like Christians?
Let associate it with a practice you’re more religiously attuned to. Pretend for a second that you're at another of your mom’s syncretic Santeria/Black masses and just as the Head Witch is about to throw a child’s testicles on the alter, he turns to you and your fellow celebrants and says “my beautiful devils”. You wouldn’t find that weird, would you?
That is oddly specific and descriptive. I'm not sure I want to know what is in your browser searching history.
So says the obese pedophile.
Oh, one more person I forgot to mute. That's been corrected now.
Well, the guy who said, it for one. This shouldn't be surprising or even really worth mentioning at this point. Trump is Trump and that's how he talks. I'm not a fan myself, but what are you going to do?
Oh, and I am sure that Trump’s Deranged Supporters will definitely come up with a long list of excuses why this is okay:
1. You have to pay attention to what he does not what he says! (Except when he does something stupid, then you have to pay attention to what he says not what he does!)
2. OUT OF CONTEXT!!!!
3. It’s the media’s fault for reporting on the story at all
4. But Democrats did it first
5. Democrats made him do it
6. The Deep State hacked his teleprompter
7. WhataboutBidenRedSpeech/WhataboutHillaryDeplorables
8. It’s 9th Dimensional Chess. He is stealing the news cycle away from Kamala. Brilliant!
9. All the illegal lawfare lawsuits distracted him
10. BUT HE WAS ALMOST KILLED! You are not allowed to criticize him now!
11. It was lunch time and he was preoccupied with thoughts of Diet Coke and Hamberders
12. If it wasn't for the illegals, Trump would be an eloquent orator
Poor sarc.
Well, he was almost killed.
Yes, he was. That doesn't mean criticism of him is now completely off-limits.
Nobody said it was.
Here's the quote in context, and just so you don't accuse it of deepfake or something its on a Democrat-PAC page:
https://x.com/AccountableGOP/status/1817010508072882202
It's blatantly obvious that Trump is telling them that they won't have to vote in another fixed election, but the truth's not going to stop you and the socks from sperging, is it.
they won’t have to vote in another fixed election
Umm, no that is not what he's saying, and your own clip disproves it. Instead he is claiming that they won't need to vote in 4 years because Trump will have everything fixed by then.
"In four years you don't have to vote again. We'll have it fixed so good your not gonna have to vote."
And you do realize that you are citing an anti-Trump twitter account, right?
This is so on-brand for you. You do some extremely shitty web searching, you don't even investigate the own links that you cite, you lie and try to gaslight people into thinking that they mean something other than what they actually say (because you didn't actually read them), and when you are called on it, you stomp your feet and stand your ground and refuse to budge.
Your entire strategy is basically repeating things people smarter than you have said, Jesus, seek help.
Stop calling Maddow. Sulu, and Katie Hill smart.
Everything, obviously. If you don't aim to make the following election less important than the current one, what good are you? It'll be refreshing to not have politicians keep asking for our votes again and again.
Seriously, if you could ever get things the way you wanted them, wouldn't you want them to stay like that forever? Why would you ever want to allow anyone to reverse what you had willed into being? If you don't think that, how can anyone take your opinions seriously?
I suspect the point is that there are Christians who often don't vote who may feel motivated to vote this time because of social and government trends they don't like. Trump claims he can fix all those things so they can go back to staying out of nasty, worldly politics.
That's my most charitable interpretation. I obviously can't say for sure, but I think it is probably what he's getting at, in his typical crude style.
JD Vance, Menstrual Surveillance Hawk
...
consider the ability of a woman from an abortion-ban state to travel to another state to get a legal abortion, or her ability to receive legal abortion drugs through the mail. The news has been filled with proposed or actual laws which would attempt to restrict travel to receive abortions in other states, charge those who travel or criminalize those who might facilitate such travel or facilitate the legal shipment of prescribed abortion drugs through the mail. Of course, local police agencies might simply take it upon themselves to pull records to see who had unexplained disruptions to their menstrual cycles.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/jd-vance-menstrual-surveillance-hawk
The Vance solution of course is a federal database of menstrual activity.
#BigGovernmentMAGA
Pull out before you commit.
GALS SIGN UP ON THIS HERE DATA BASE OF UNBORNS. GET YER ANKLE MONITOR TODAY TOO. WE CAN'T HAVE YOU GOING JUST ANYWHERE.
Retards like you fail to remember that those same women already gave that cycle information up. Complaining about it is sour grapes.
Sure, the gyno has it all.
Now the feds just need a nifty API and all that medical info can go into a Federal Menstrual Archive for monitoring.
What could go wrong?
You'd have to be stupid to believe that something like that doesn't already exist.
turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a TDS-addled lying pile of lefty shit.
TALKING POINTS MEMO IS PLUGGO'S ACTUAL LINK, FOLKS.
He's not even hiding it any more.
What's next? Jeff will post copies of his Media Matters pay statements?
Aren't you all for sloppy pull-outs.
From stupid wars, yes.
turd, the ass-wipe of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a TDS-addled lying pile of lefty shit.
Yes, everyone sees you, Sevo. You Donnie-worshipping splooge-mopping attention whore.
Sieve-oh? Nobody can be everyone without me, and I mooted that disgusting lewser the minute Reason made it possible to avert eyes from anarco-Republican practice of hopping onto someone else's platform to engage in public defecation. Other less sacrificial magazines have evidently discovered quicker means hosing off those infatuated contributions. Still, it's a start...
^ This is what passes for clever in the TDS-addled liars three brain cells.
FOAD, lying pederast.
turd, the TDS-addled ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
It makes sense youre a male liberal feminist. They are all creepy as shit. Many have pedophile issues too. See Anthony weiner.
He actually linked to their talking points memo, Jesse. Unbelievable.
Well. Quite believable. Like jeff linking to daily beast dark Brandon posts for his argument.
He’s literally the dumbest motherfucker to post here. It shouldn’t surprise you that he would link to that.
turd, the ass-wipe of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
While I agree with the point on over regulation, the writer gives no data or information related to the impact, or to show that a 8.7 percent decline in wine sales is not the dominant driver
Are the small wineries the ones grinding their vines?
Or is the lack of small winery wines causing young people to not drink wine?
I thought it was climate change.
Racism. It’s always racism.
Trans vines - that identify as soil.
Nowhere in the article do they reveal the skin color of the vintners tragically being crushed by evildoers. How can we possibly reach a conclusion here?
Climate is racist. So why not both?
Can Donald Trump Switch Out JD Vance? Speculation Swirls
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-replace-jd-vance-1930967
This loon has turned out to be a fucking freak show. Donnie picks people who either hate him and leave or are goofballs that hang around like shit stuck on your shoe.
#DonnieOnlyPicksTheBest
Idiotic speculation based on nothing.
Thats all his team has at this point.
Anything to distract.
Don't worry.
Democrats will make a terrible choice too. It will even out the loon vote.
turd lies. turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
turd lies. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit and a pederast besides.
The problem for Harris if she picks a reasonable and accomplished VP, is people will start to ask why she is on the top of the ticket instead of them.
Shrike is correct at some levels. Trump has repeatedly reached across the aisle and picked deep state hacks who subvert him. Ever notice how the deepest, slimiest swamp creatures mock Trump for failing to drain the swamp?
Trump has repeatedly reached across the aisle
Who did he reach to "across the aisle"?
He had Chris Christie in charge of his first administration. No longer there.
Grabbing ass doesn’t count.
So many ideas.
Leftist idiots pounce?
The amount of flailing by the left the last 2 weeks has been amazing.
Vance 2028.
turd lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
Those are the Gee-Oh-Pee keepers. The ones that come unstuck from The Don's golf shoes apply to the Alabama AfD Anschluss Legal Front for funding with to infiltrate the Libertarian Party as Jesus Caucus zombies.
He's not going to replace Vance, because:
1. Vance is a mini-Trump, but creepier
2. Trump Jr. recommended Vance to Trump
And point 1 makes him a lot better impeachment insurance than Pence ever was.
Biden didn't exactly pick the best either:
VP: Harris, border czar who took one look at the problem and walked away
Sec of Transportation: Buttigieg, mayor of a small midwestern town, presided over actual train wrecks (and supply chain foul-ups)
Sec of Treasury: Janet "show me your checkbook" Yellen
AG: Garland, protecting our liberties?
Comptroller of Currency: Omarova, an actual Soviet Communist
Disinformation czar: Jankowicz (I guess it takes a crook to catch a crook?)
Sec of State: Blinken (describes his go-to reaction to diplomatic standoffs)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13678791/jd-vance-emails-texts-transgender-classmate-trump.html
JD Vance's transgender classmate leaks trove of private emails and text messages with former 'buddy' - including GOP VP pick's bombshell remarks about Trump
Lies. There's no way a good MAGA like Vance was ever friends with a tranny. That would be like someone in these comments having a friend who is a Democrat or who is gay.
Don't you cry about people posting your old posts?
[Vance] added: 'If [Trump] would just tone down the racism, I would literally be his biggest supporter.'
Spoiler alert: Trump didn't tone down the racism, and Vance is now his biggest supporter. Huh.
Hey, to be fair, Kamala became Joe's vice president after she accused him of being a white supremacist. So clearly, people change!
Funny what the desire for power will do to people.
Even Kamala Harris finally showed some leadership skills and work ethic when it was time to round up enough delegates to secure the Democrat nomination after Biden dropped out....
Really? Do you think Kamalama has more autonomy than Joe?
Vance made the cut thanks to Dr Nick Gillespie's hillbilly eulogy.
Is this the libertarian hill Reason wants to die on, how government bureaucracy hurts boutique wine producers?
No other, more fundamental threats to liberty? Or did some Reasonista run out of their favorite chardonnay?
The fallacy of relative privation, also known as the appeal to worse problems or “not as bad as”, is a logical fallacy that weakens an argument by claiming that a more important problem exists, making the original argument irrelevant.
These comments are a case study in fallacies, and the morons like you who feel that they refute facts and reason.
The best example was in Young Frankenstein: "Could be worse... it could be raining!"
Have another malt liquor. It's Saturday!
Just try not to throw up in the library.
There's still the concept of scarcity and focusing on the biggest problems when resources are limited. It's not a fallacy to suggest that the few articles Reason publishes per day might better be focused on issues of higher impact.
This article wasn’t written by Reason. Looks to be syndicated. Which makes the criticism even more stupid.
After you say, "It's taxes and spending, stupid!" enough times, nobody's going to listen to you any more.
Ironic from the guy who doesn’t understand the fallacies he accuses others of.
Or the king of strawmen.
sarcasmic 1 day ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
From what I’ve gathered from the comments, all homos are pedophiles, and their agenda revolves around grooming children. That’s why gays want gay books in school libraries, gay drag shows, as well as transition surgery for children. I’ve also read that Chase Oliver wants all those things because he’s gay.
Continuing our case study in logical fallacies that the commentariat views as truth, this one is called tu quoque, or appeal to hypocrisy. It’s a special form of the ad hominem attack that’s the logical equivalent of a sneering child saying “I’m rubber and you’re glue!” It is probably the favorite fallacy in these comments.
Are you finally admitting to being a hypocrite? Because you claim to be here for discussion but the above is 90% of your posts. Also, lying about muting me again?
Can you see someone about your pathalogical need to lie?
This will be news to many idiots in the comments, but the mute function can be on or off.
That and you don't mute dumdum. Easy to trigger you. I just have to post your comments anytime after 7am when you are drunk.
Also, his example is not a strawman. Strawmen are set up to be knocked down. Like when this idiot makes wonderful counter arguments to things people never said.
Pour sarc.
You can call it a straight lie about your opponents if you want. But it was quickly struck down by your boyfriend jeff when he agreed with you to debase other arguments in the thread.
You and Jeff are the kings of hypocrites and lies here. Lol.
This fallacy is just straight ad hominem. It seeks to invalidate arguments by attacking the person.
Personally I believe it comes from watching too many court dramas where the hero attacks a witness’s credibility. But the stupids employing the argument use it to attack ideas instead of witness testimony.
Don’t you ever get tired of lying?
Hold up. You literally just above said you weren’t making an argument. Which is it retard?
If you were using the above as an argument as you admit to here then you did it as a strawman. Lol.
Secondly I didn't say you're wrong because youre a retard in love with Jeff. I stated you used the above as an argument which you just admitted to.
God damn youre dumb.
You saying that an improvement in wine policy is going to hurt somewhere else?
This whole article has to be fiction. OUR government simply passed the Eighteenth Amendment by two-thirds vote of the idiots comprising the mystically superstitious half of the eligible voters. The grape growers were in the greedy minority of producers who prefer to dispense with the importunings of coercive parasites. What you are looking at is the rebirth of importunings by coercive parasites waving the swastika of Faith. The thorny headband has, for marketing purposes, been replaced by the more modern Mark of the Beast MAGA caps.
Did you buy a generative AI program and set in on "retard"?
Can we get a translator for LIBtranslator?
Sorry, those were banned at the same time Comstock was passed.
Something something girl bulliers.
Everything Is So Terrible And Unfair, hank.
Nancy Pelosi hardest hit.
Harder hit than Mr. Pelosi?
You'd have to ask the LGBT pedos that.
, it's actually just three goliath distributors that control up to 67 percent of all the U.S. wine sales (in some states this climbs to over 90 percent).
If you think that's bad wait till you hear about the control Google and microsoft have over your entire life, not just your booze
Were the wineries hit directly by a government policy, or hit by a fragment of glass resulting from the government policy?
Were those "popping sounds" from champagne corks, or still unidentified?
Wine industry falls down during rally.
Looks like Jesse is posting from Alabama now.
https://www.al.com/news/2024/07/alabama-man-pleads-guilty-to-threatening-arizona-election-officials-you-are-so-dead.html
Looks more like Nardz or Sevo.
Such ideas have not been seen since Socrates was alive!
Never talks about people. Here for ideas.
Voter Fraud Update:
https://qns.com/2024/07/six-indicted-voter-fraud-2023-gop-primary-northeast-queens-da/
It’s ok because Democrats did it first.
This argument is another strawman. Nobody here argues that.
But you will note you never criticized the democrats prior.
You just list off all the times Democrats did it first and say you can’t win unless you do what they do.
Come see the genius ideas!
Cite me bitch.
I call you a hypocrite for being okay with what democrats do and only crying like a leftist child when the GOP responds.
I also believe in equality of execution of law, which means when precedent is set it needs to be done both ways.
You on the other hand love unequal application of the law when it favors the left. You cheer on their abuses while crying the above if they are held to their own standards.
This is why you're not a fucking libertarian. You believe no response is necessary when the democrats violate the NAP or abuse power. You literally favor banana republics. You've even cried about investigating political abuses of the state like a good MSNBC Democrat.
This is the culmination of a strawman argument. He puts out a bunch of false premises and argues against them.
Thank you for completing my case study.
You performed brilliantly!
You’re the one that erected the strawman….
Nobody here has said it was contained to the Democrats, so this is just a win for their arguments that fraud happens.
Nice own goal.
What about all the wine moms? People are still drinking plenty of vino.
I think we’re just seeing industry consolidation. Everyone thinks it’s cool to start a winery or a brewery, so a lot of them get started and aren’t very profitable. Then a bunch of them shut down or get bought up. Most people don’t want to track 100 brands, they want 2 or 3 they can count on -- a high end brand for special occasions, a good mid-tier choice for family and friends, and a decent cheap version for parties.
It’s a market. The government should stay out of it.
Nobody needs 23 kinds of wines.
Maddog 20/20 and box wine. What are the other 21? - sarc.
Nah, not consolidation, but an overall improvement in the quality of mid-level whine. While the thought of Kirkland Vino makes me puke in my mouth, one can get a decent bottle of wine for $15 at the grocer. So why pay premium for l33t Napa vineyards?
Faux wine snob.
Kirkland just re bottles known vineyards dumdum.
Champagne sales are down roughly 20% globally. There might be a bigger trend going on.
Still, the regulations are dumb and should die.
Well there's nothing to celebrate so that may have affected the champagne market. I switched to Keystone Ice in November 2020.
So, a massive drop in the demand for wine? Sounds like a Karen shortage to me!
We should be so lucky.
So, yesterday was the 34th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2024/07/26/americans-with-disabilities-act-anniversary-disabled-data/74529653007/
I think the most charitable way to describe it is a well-meaning but flawed law. The original idea was to, say, let people in wheelchairs be able to access ordinary public accommodations. It's been obviously abused in plenty of ways, e.g., "emotional support animals" and mandatory infrastructure improvements that sometimes seem pointless. So it's definitely a double-edged sword.
In a libertarian society, of course, there would be no ADA at all, and providing accommodations for the disabled would be completely up to each establishment. And from a purely economic perspective, whether an establishment's owner would upgrade his infrastructure to be able to accommodate disabled people would have to be justified by the anticipated increase in business that more disabled customers would bring. Since these improvements tend to be very expensive, there would generally have to be many potential disabled customers to justify the cost. So if a particular area does not have many disabled people, potentially, very few businesses (if any) would have infrastructure to accommodate the disabled. This seems like a real problem.
What is a libertarian solution to this problem?
Small anecdote: What really opened my eyes to the problems with ADA was when I was traveling and stopped at a small local motel for the night. The motel had a pool, and it was filled with water, but the owner said it was closed. I asked why, and he said it was because the pool lift for disabled people was broken, so they couldn't legally open the pool to everyone just in case a disabled person happened to stop by and want to use the pool, and say that was discriminatory treatment that he wasn't able to use the pool while everyone else was. I thought that was a pretty stupid way to interpret the law, but here we are.
A stratified economy, one where people accept less profit to service a given market composed of X.
providing accommodations for the blacks/gays/women would be completely up to each establishment. And from a purely economic perspective, whether an establishment’s owner would upgrade his infrastructure to be able to accommodate blacks/gays/women would have to be justified by the anticipated increase in business that more black/gay/women customers would bring.
I like where you’re going with this, Jeff. I can envision many a business model that intentionally excludes certain demographics by asserting extra costs that are necessarily increased by having to instead accommodate them. Kind of a soft discrimination you’re aiming for, no?
Like having to consider the costs of building a “women’s restroom.” How stupid is that in 2024? What is a “woman” anyway?
And, from the consumer side, this is also beneficial. Businesses that market in a way that aims to exclude certain demographics from wanting to do business with them. Like, say, a beer company hiring a crossdressing twink to be their spokesman. Or a big box retailer going out of their way to rainbow up every June. There’s only one goal there: to tell certain demographics everywhere “stay away from our business.” And it works!
Look at you Jeff, you’re holding the banner! Make Discrimination Great Again!
I am not sure what is your point here. Are you asserting that there ought to be a civil right for the disabled to access public accommodations, just like there are other civil rights for public accommodations? Okay, fine, but that is not exactly a libertarian position. Besides, that thinking is what gave us the ADA.
Do you like and support the ADA? Okay, fine. Do you think it can be improved upon?
No no no, I'm following your argument. Exclude blacks, gays, women, and cripples from anything and everything unless there's a profit margin to be made from it.
That was your point, right?
I am personally fine with civil rights laws, broadly speaking. I think there are times when they have been taken too far, but I don't think those cases are reason enough to throw out the entire concept.
What do you think of civil rights laws?
What do you think of civil rights? Are there times when those have been taken too far?
Broadly, I think that all individuals ought to be able to go about their daily lives without discrimination based on sex, gender, race, religion, or sexual orientation. I'm open to considering more items for the list, but those are the ones that I'm comfortable with right now.
Do you think that is 'going too far' in your opinion?
Are the “other items “ about lowering the age of consent?
Interesting that you didn't include disability (but, oddly, did include sexual orientation).
Sure, we can add disability to the list, but with a caveat that we have a strict definition of what constitutes a 'disability'. That is one of the pitfalls of the ADA: the definition is so loose that it includes things like 'emotional distress' hence the need for 'emotional support cats' on airplanes. If we can agree on a suitably objective definition, then sure.
Bake the cake, Jack.
There isn’t a libertarian solution to everything. And that’s okay.
Well here it is, KamKam's VP short list.
https://www.newsweek.com/kamala-harris-vice-president-shortlist-1931123
Mark Kelly, Arizona Senator
Josh Shapiro, Pennsylvania Governor
Tim Walz, Minnesota Governor
Andy Beshear, Kentucky Governor
Roy Cooper, North Carolina Governor
I am thinking it will be Roy Cooper. NC is a state that is very winnable for Team Blue.
2nd choice is Josh Shapiro. PA is very crucial swing state for Team Blue. Problem for them: Shapiro supports school vouchers though.
Yeah everyone wants a lockdown Karen like cooper. Go fuck yourself.
Sigh. Reason. Would you please join 2024?
Good writing, decent research; but if this is a global trend, how much could it be ameliorated by the abolition or liberalization of a regulatory structure that's not common to the rest of the world?
The author makes the unbelievable assumption that these laws are to help the small producers. How much money does the small producers pay the the law makers? There lies the problem.