Wine Fine:The price of drink

Reason ^ | 8/1/2002 | Mike Lynch

[WindMinstrel]

A fed-up consumer calls it "socialism." A fed-up retailer calls it "state-sponsored gouging." They’re referring to an Ohio law that requires vintners, distributors, and retailers to jack up the price of a bottle of wine a total of 135 percent before it hits the shelf. As a result, wine costs up to 50 percent more in Ohio than in other states, translating into $100 million a year that Buckeye State residents could spend on something else.

"I don’t know how this could possibly benefit the public," Tom Jackson, president and chief executive officer of the Ohio Grocers Association, told the Cleveland Plain Dealer, which documented the stupidity of the state’s wine control regime in early March. The paper claimed Ohio is the worst among 17 states that regulate the price at which wine is sold.

It may be the worst, but all 50 states have a strictly enforced three-tier regime to regulate the sale of alcohol. Vintners must sell to wholesalers, wholesalers to retailers, and retailers to the public. Twenty states allow vintners to sell directly to consumers, through either mail order or the Internet. Not one state allows small vintners to bypass the first middlemen and sell directly to retailers.

The protectionist regimes are generally safe in state legislatures, but they are coming under increasing attack through the courts and the Internet. The Institute for Justice, a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit legal group, is challenging a New York law that prevents direct wine sales from other states. Wine lovers can also take matters into their own hands. In Ohio, for example, wine enthusiasts buy direct from out-of-state stores. The law requires them to register these purchases and pay the markup. But as The Plain Dealer notes, "many bypass that step."

[Roscoe]

Is it your contention that it is, in fact, not true, or merely that it is not proven to be true?

Let's see the evidence. [crickets]

[general_re]

Then you don't intend to answer the question?

[eno_]

Pop quiz Roscoe: What business are Jesse Jackson's sons in?

[eno_]

Does it suprise you Roscoe screeches racism about this? Yup, a Jesse Jackson shakedown. It doesn't get get to be any more clear cut a racket than that. Racism, oh yeah, that's the ticket, Roscoe. Be a man and apologise.

[Roscoe]

Let's see the evidence. [crickets]

[Roscoe]

Yo! Roscoe! You listenin? -- Eno_

Yeah, I'm listening, bigot.

[PhilipFreneau]

My wife and I travel to a neighboring state approximately twice a year to purchase wine. I drink at least a bottle a week, so our savings are significant.

[general_re]

I don't honestly know enough about the situation to have an opinion on it. But assuming arguendo that it is true that there are racial preferences in how distributorships are given out, I fail to see how calling attention to it is racist or bigoted. The truth may certainly be uncomfortable for some, but that's hardly racism. If it is not true, on the other hand, it should be easy enough to refute without resorting to labeling the charge "racist" either.

[AppyPappy]

Simply decriminalzing pot without a regulatory framework is likely to work best

Yeah and everyone should get a new car for free. And be able to fly by flapping their arms.

[general_re]

Answer the question. (crickets)

[Roscoe]

it should be easy enough to refute

Let's see the evidence. [crickets]

[WindMinstrel]

My major irritation on this matter is that of the poor selection in this area. Sure, you can look around and eventually find the wine you like, but it's quite often a hassle. There are some that you just can't get because the CT distributors don't carry it. Seems silly that I can't order it online.

[general_re]

Assuming arguendo that racial preferences exist within the liquor industry, is it bigotry to call attention to that fact? (crickets)

[eno_]

Rosecoe, do a Google search before you dig you hole any deeper: Try "Jesse Jackson" and "beer distributorship." The brewery is on the hook for this fraud, too, but how are you going to tell me this wasn't a racial shakedown?

[Roscoe]

>i>Assuming arguendo

Let's see the evidence. [crickets]

[AppyPappy]

Hence my disclaimer - "assuming it is true". Is it your contention that it is, in fact, not true, or merely that it is not proven to be true?

It is intellectually dishonest to make a qualified assumption and then ask someone to prove it isn't true. It is almost impossible to prove something isn't true.

[eno_]

It's been a while since it was on the front page, but Jesse Jackson and asscoiates shaking down the breweries is pretty widely known, and one of his most successful scams.

[general_re]

It is intellectually dishonest to make a qualified assumption and then ask someone to prove it isn't true.

Which is why I didn't ask him that. I merely ask if he feels that contentions of racial bigotry are untrue, or if he feels they are simply unproven. I didn't ask him to prove they were untrue, just what his opinion was.

[general_re]

Assuming arguendo that racial preferences exist within the liquor industry, is it bigotry to call attention to that fact? (crickets)

[sinkspur]

I drink at least a bottle a week..

Hey, I like that! The next time I get asked how much wine I drink, I'll use it.

Like Robert Mondavi, who's still thriving in his late 70's, my wife and I drink a bottle a day, usually red. Wine is such a fascinating drink and complements food perfectly.