Hard times

Well then:

Americans' love affair with top-shelf booze cooled last year as the recession took a toll on high-priced tipples.

People drank more liquor but turned to cheaper brands, according to a report by an industry group. They also drank more at home and less in pricier bars and restaurants in an effort to save money.

Industry growth slowed in 2009, with the amount of liquor sold by suppliers up 1.4 percent. That's the smallest increase since 2001 and below the 10-year average of 2.6 percent.

The lowest-priced segment, with brands such as Popov vodka that can go for less than $10 for a fifth, grew the fastest, with volume rising 5.5 percent, after edging up 0.6 percent in 2008. Meanwhile, the most expensive brands, priced roughly $30 or more for a 750 ml bottle (think Grey Goose, owned by Bacardi), fell the most, tumbling 5.1 percent.

Look. I'm all for cheap booze. But if the liquidationist view of economic collapse had any merit whatsoever, vodka consumption would be swept away with inefficient industries, unproductive farms, overextended banks and the fortunes of irresponsible investors. I think I can speak for Scott, Erik Loomis, and others in judging this recession a complete failure if it fails to drive down vodka consumption by at least 30 percent. If you're going to anesthetize yourself with liquor, at least allow yourself the pleasure of tasting the sin.

Read more...

Predatory Lenders

What happened to my old bank provides a pretty instructive example of the practices that contributed to the Bush Depression.

Read more...

Cracking Down on Ratings Agencies

This is a very important step, and hopefully something like these proposals will go forward. As with the collusive accounting practices that were a major part of the Enron scandal, the principal-agent problems with the ratings agencies are indeed severe -- it's not just that the ratings agencies have their own independent interests, but that those interests are intertwined with the companies they were allegedly scrutinizing. Which means stronger regulation is essential. (And speaking of corporate "free speech," I'm amused by the recently rejected argument that the First Amendment immunizes credit agencies from being sued for deceptive ratings. Does the First Amendment mean that laws against perjury are illegal too?)

Read more...