This Is Ridiculous, Even for the New York Times

Chateau Lafite Rothschild 1983–a steal at $1,142 per bottle! But only $3.99 with Income Equality.

Oh, the tragedy! Dadburned income inequality!

According to a tear-jerker of a piece in the New York Times this week, **Income Inequality** has “erased your chance to drink the great wines” (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3897073/posts).

Well, gee. If you’ve got 100 bottles of Chateau D’If 1989 on the wall in 1990, and only 50 left in 2000, and now just ten in 2020–duh, waddaya know, the price went up! The facts that nobody can make a 1989 wine after 1989 is over, and that as the supply goes down the price goes up, just maybe have a bit more to do with it than any **Income Inequality**.

Oh, boo-hoo! Now the world’s great wines are priced out of my reach! And all because of **Income Inequality**! Back when we had INCOME EQUALITY, even the mailroom clerk could afford the world’s great wines, along with first editions of literary classics and his very own Maserati.

Fascinating Fun Fact: **Income Inequality** totally disappears whenever there’s a Democrat in the White House!

So if you want the prices of the world’s great wines to drop down to $1.98 a gallon… well, you know what to do!

3 comments on “This Is Ridiculous, Even for the New York Times

  1. There are some people that don’t seem to understand supply and demand. No matter what sort of economic system one lives in, supply and demand will have its say. If you regulate pricing and hold it to a very low level, supply will be drained and, while products will be inexpensive, there will be no products available to sell. This is exactly what happened in the last years of the Soviet Union, when black markets were the only source of some products.

    Free markets increase the availability of products, because there is incentive to create more products. There is also incentive to bring products to market at lower prices and we have seen this in operation many times. For example, 30 years ago, a home computer was expensive, but now they are quite inexpensive, due to free-market forces.

  2. Ha, good one! When I grew up in the 1950’s none of the many kids on my residential block had a mom who worked outside the home, yet we all were well-fed, well-dressed and went on yearly family vacations. So what changed? The gov’t got bigger and bigger so taxes got higher and higher, and moms had to go to work to keep the standard of living called the American Dream.

Leave a Reply