4 ms·

Obviously the government should think about the welfare of the general population, not just the winemakers. Instead of destroying wine, the government should se

Obviously the government should think about the welfare of the general population, not just the winemakers. Instead of destroying wine, the government should sell it at market prices.

zahma 3y ago
You must not have read the article all the way through: the problem — if we can call it that — is a decrease in consumption but not in viniculture, hence the issue of a market glut. I do not know which kinds of wine are to be destroyed, but I’d hazard a guess that it isn’t the kind that ages well.
- pessimizer 3y ago
  A decrease in the consumption of wine can be fixed with a decrease in the price of wine.
  - happymellon 3y ago
    Not always, and not always possible. There is definitely more non-alcoholic consumption in the UK, with the major supermarkets allocating larger sections for AF beer. I don't know about the situation in France, but it would hit exports here in addition to Brexit problems. I presume you are implying that the folks who aren't going sober will just consume more to offset if prices decrease, but there is going to be a limit to the amount they can.
  - ahoka 3y ago
    But then you domino other producers to stop being profitable. Also, people will not want to drink more low quality bulk wine if it’s cheaper.
gizajob 3y ago
The government could also just pile it up in the town squares of France, as freebies from the EU for everyone. Would be gone in a day. Seems strange to “destroy it” when the public will do it for free and it’s been subsidised and paid for. Unlikely I realise, but it’s not like wine goes off. Maybe they need the space for the next load of wine they’re going to cellar and then destroy… Plus the article says the alcohol from the destroyed wine can be reused - seems like a bit of an effort to go through given the alcohol content of around 12%.
- ffhhttt 3y ago
  Those people then will buy less wine negating the entire point of this whole thing.
  - gizajob 3y ago
    Yes but at the same time, the people have paid for the wine - so the government is saying “you can’t have this wine you paid for, you have to buy more, even though you’re buying less wine”. The operation might stimulate an interest in wine and drinking, causing an increase in wine sales afterwards.
    - ffhhttt 3y ago
      Why would they buy it in the first place then? The entire point of this is to decrease the oversupply of wine. If anything this would make it worse assuming some proportion of the wine they bought would’ve been exported. > the people have paid for the wine Yes, it’s definitely unfair. So are gazilions of other subsidies paid out by most governments.
danielfoster 3y ago
I'm not defending bailouts of winemakers, but based on my knowledge of the industry, the government would simply be unable to sell the wine at market prices. They would probably need to be sold at a loss. France has been over-producing low-quality wine for a long time, mostly in the south as referenced in the article. These bottles normally sell for 2-5 euros at retail within Europe. There is a massive amount of competition at this price point. Also not mentioned in the article is that French wine is falling out of favor in lower price categories. Spanish and Portugese wines are growing in popularity as are so-called "natural" wines.
- mytailorisrich 3y ago
  Excess production of wine not wanted by the market will continue since the government is effectively, and nonsensically, susidising it.
  - ffhhttt 3y ago
    A lot of other countries are doing something similar with diary or other food products. You don’t want to lose the capacity to produce vital products like wine or cheese in case some unexpected event happens. What if 30% of all wineries close and you have a severe drought in a few years. It would result in a extreme humanitarian tragedy…
mytailorisrich 3y ago
The government should stay out of it. If winemakers produce wine that the market does not want they should change or go under.
- Symbiote 3y ago
  Wine is at the extreme end, but the subsidy is to preserve food security and jobs in rural communities. It applies to a wide range of agricultural goods and basic products of those goods (cheese, wine etc).
  - mytailorisrich 3y ago
    Wine is not really critical for food security, even in France. Their wheat farmers are. No, in France there are two aspects: first, the wine lobby is powerful. Second, vineyards and wine are seen are very symbolically important for the country and its identity, down to how the countryside looks.
ffhhttt 3y ago
That would being down the market price which is exactly what they’re trying to avoid. Maybe they could send/smuggle it to others countries (e.g. Scandinavia) and sell it at 50% of what they paid though.

Obviously the government should think about the welfare of the general population, not just the winemakers. Instead of destroying wine, the government should sell it at market prices.

zahma 3y ago

You must not have read the article all the way through: the problem — if we can call it that — is a decrease in consumption but not in viniculture, hence the issue of a market glut. I do not know which kinds of wine are to be destroyed, but I’d hazard a guess that it isn’t the kind that ages well.

pessimizer 3y ago
A decrease in the consumption of wine can be fixed with a decrease in the price of wine.
- happymellon 3y ago
  Not always, and not always possible. There is definitely more non-alcoholic consumption in the UK, with the major supermarkets allocating larger sections for AF beer. I don't know about the situation in France, but it would hit exports here in addition to Brexit problems. I presume you are implying that the folks who aren't going sober will just consume more to offset if prices decrease, but there is going to be a limit to the amount they can.
- ahoka 3y ago
  But then you domino other producers to stop being profitable. Also, people will not want to drink more low quality bulk wine if it’s cheaper.

gizajob 3y ago

The government could also just pile it up in the town squares of France, as freebies from the EU for everyone. Would be gone in a day. Seems strange to “destroy it” when the public will do it for free and it’s been subsidised and paid for. Unlikely I realise, but it’s not like wine goes off. Maybe they need the space for the next load of wine they’re going to cellar and then destroy… Plus the article says the alcohol from the destroyed wine can be reused - seems like a bit of an effort to go through given the alcohol content of around 12%.

ffhhttt 3y ago
Those people then will buy less wine negating the entire point of this whole thing.
- gizajob 3y ago
  Yes but at the same time, the people have paid for the wine - so the government is saying “you can’t have this wine you paid for, you have to buy more, even though you’re buying less wine”. The operation might stimulate an interest in wine and drinking, causing an increase in wine sales afterwards.
  - ffhhttt 3y ago
    Why would they buy it in the first place then? The entire point of this is to decrease the oversupply of wine. If anything this would make it worse assuming some proportion of the wine they bought would’ve been exported. > the people have paid for the wine Yes, it’s definitely unfair. So are gazilions of other subsidies paid out by most governments.

danielfoster 3y ago

I'm not defending bailouts of winemakers, but based on my knowledge of the industry, the government would simply be unable to sell the wine at market prices. They would probably need to be sold at a loss. France has been over-producing low-quality wine for a long time, mostly in the south as referenced in the article. These bottles normally sell for 2-5 euros at retail within Europe. There is a massive amount of competition at this price point. Also not mentioned in the article is that French wine is falling out of favor in lower price categories. Spanish and Portugese wines are growing in popularity as are so-called "natural" wines.

mytailorisrich 3y ago
Excess production of wine not wanted by the market will continue since the government is effectively, and nonsensically, susidising it.
- ffhhttt 3y ago
  A lot of other countries are doing something similar with diary or other food products. You don’t want to lose the capacity to produce vital products like wine or cheese in case some unexpected event happens. What if 30% of all wineries close and you have a severe drought in a few years. It would result in a extreme humanitarian tragedy…

mytailorisrich 3y ago

The government should stay out of it. If winemakers produce wine that the market does not want they should change or go under.

Symbiote 3y ago
Wine is at the extreme end, but the subsidy is to preserve food security and jobs in rural communities. It applies to a wide range of agricultural goods and basic products of those goods (cheese, wine etc).
- mytailorisrich 3y ago
  Wine is not really critical for food security, even in France. Their wheat farmers are. No, in France there are two aspects: first, the wine lobby is powerful. Second, vineyards and wine are seen are very symbolically important for the country and its identity, down to how the countryside looks.

ffhhttt 3y ago

That would being down the market price which is exactly what they’re trying to avoid. Maybe they could send/smuggle it to others countries (e.g. Scandinavia) and sell it at 50% of what they paid though.