Time to change NC’s outdated ready-to-drink cocktail laws
NC law should not force consumers toward malt-based alternatives simply because those products fit more neatly into older regulatory categories.
My wife and I work hard to stay healthy, a big part of which is eating right, eschewing sugary and pre-packaged foods. Sometimes this is to the chagrin of our two teenage boys who — despite our best efforts — work tirelessly to make our pantry and refrigerator resemble the sad, barren grocery store aisles...
Say you want a fidget spinner. Well, if you have a few bucks for one, then you go buy it. Same goes for a burger. Lots of choices, lots of options. Then, say, you want a mixed drink at your favorite local restaurant. If the town or city in which you live allows so-called liquor-by-the-drink,...
I made a presentation recently to a community GOP club, a group of kind people who were smart, engaged, and curious. Much like many of the other groups I speak to and with. Most recently, I spoke about the N.C. Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission and how it keeps a stranglehold on the production, sale, distribution,...
Results of a recent poll do not mean what the N.C. Sustainable Energy Association thinks they mean.
I don’t understand all the fuss about the proposed Buffet Rule. I think it should be the guiding principle for government at all levels.
The Founders had no need to spell out your right to choose your own light bulb and toilet. They protected that right just the same.
No time for academic tomes? Don't worry. A popular television show teaches much of what you need to know about market forces.
Why would you pay someone more for a service that you don't use, than for one that you do? Ordinarily, it doesn't happen that way. When customers choose not to engage the services of a musician, handyman, or babysitter, they don't expect to pay a premium above what it would cost to actually have them work. In telecommunications, customer preferences should be allowed to guide the choice of communications services.
How many resources should we devote to fixing a problem, when the technology to fix it, potentially, is 'out there,' and we could, if we chose, use it to try to make the situation better? Sometimes the solution to a problem is so relatively costly that we decide not to address the problem at all or look for a more cost-effective route. Fortunately, markets usually offer many alternative ways to accomplish the goals we are after.
When it comes to money and happiness, economists make two points. First, that more money or wealth leads to greater happiness (as a general rule). And second, that additional dollars are always used to satisfy additional but lower priority wants than previous dollars, everything else equal. If money can't buy you love, it can buy you happiness, at least indirectly.
Surveys that allow us to 'choose' among market alternatives, without incurring any cost, are not the same as market decisions. No wonder the results of surveys and questionnaires differ from behavior, when choices are costly.