3 ms·

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

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.