Inferior Good: Diminishing Marginal Stupidity in Action

Buy Local?

2009-07-08T17:20:00.000-07:00

Check out Joe Dresser’s rant against the buy local movement, which he sees as “nonsensical and… jingoistic”. Though his post may be a bit uncharitable, I tend to agree.

I recognize that there may be a certain romance associated with goods produced close to home (as with anywhere else), but otherwise simply being local isn’t enough to make something worthy of my purchase.

I get that the term “local” is about more than geography for some people, but I humbly submit that the terms “environmentally sustainable” and “artisan” describe this ethic much more clearly and accurately while avoiding the natavist, anti-cosmopolitan nature of the word “local”. It may be possible to optimize quality and environmental impact by purchasing local goods, but this is not necessarily so in many cases. Further, the term “local” is easily adopted as a simple marketing tool by producers with values quite divergent from those of the core buy local community.

[Ed: Why am I not surprised that a wine importer doesn’t view the buy local movement positively?] Fair enough, but consider also that Mr. Dresser’s vocation is probably consistent with his quite heartfelt appreciation for the world’s many wonderful wine traditions. I imagine that buy local might appear like a narrow minded assault on the diversity he thrives upon.

Hoodwink or hyperbole?

2007-08-13T09:12:00.000-07:00

Patrica Cohen’s recent NY Times article on Heterodox Economists is very disappointing. The gist is that mainstream economics won't make room for heterodox views on trade and free markets.

First, as Alex Tabarrok points out, it is absurd to cast the profiled economists as embattled outsiders fighting the oppressive mainstream, for those mentioned in the article are most prominent.

Second, the profiled economists make some ridiculous claims. For example, Dani Rodrick states:

“I fall into the methods of the mainstream, but not the faith,” which he defines as the belief that more markets and free trade are always good and government regulation is always bad...

Assuming the article correctly characterizes Mr. Rodrick’s beliefs, Mr. Rodrick is guilty here of gross exaggeration or tremendous sloppiness.

I don't think I've ever read or heard an economist say that more markets are always better than government regulation. I learned about the concept of market failure in Econ 101. Does not every other economics student do the same? I’d be shocked if 99% of economists did not concede that there are at least some cases in which a government solution may prove optimal.

Scarcity

2007-07-27T16:22:00.000-07:00

The Stranger’s Charles Mudede shares his view that Tyler Cowen and other “capitalist economist[s]” fail to understand that the problem of scarcity is manufactured by owners of the means of production.

First, when Economists talk about scarcity, they simply mean that people can’t have everything they want and that therefore, they must make choices. Put another way, resources are limited but desires are potentially unlimited. It’s not clear to me that Mr. Mudede grasps this meaning.

One example of a scarce resource is time, for all of us have a limited time here on earth. While we may want to live forever (unlimited desire), the fact is that we cannot (limited resource).

Another example of scarcity is the fact that people can only physically be in one place at one time. I physically can’t be in London and Kumasi and Seattle at the exact same time. Rather, I must choose one.

Certainly, Mr. Mudede is correct that abundance is important, for it entails more choice. If there were only one good movie in existence, then it probably wouldn’t be too hard to make time to see it. But in fact, there are probably thousands of good movies, not to mention there are many fun things to do besides watching movies. If one could live forever and one could be and do everything at once, then choice would be unnecessary. But of course, due to scarcity, we must make choices about how we spend out limited time, our limited money, our limited attention, etc. I must decide how many and which movies I will watch, and when I want to do so. Every time I watch a movie, I forgo something else that I could have done instead (aka opportunity cost).

Perhaps Mr. Mudede can identify with the phrase: So many movies, so little time. Notice the phrase wouldn’t make much sense if it were So few movies, so little time or So many movies, so much time. This is because abundance and scarcity both play a role in the meaning of this phrase. There are abundant movies one might like to watch, but one only has a limited amount of time that may be spent watching movies.

That being said, Mr. Mudede is correct that scarcity is sometimes manufactured. For example, cartels like OPEC collude in an attempt to create scarcity of oil. Governments attempt to create a scarcity of the legitimate use of force within their own borders. Labor unions create scarcity (by opposing immigration, for example) to protect their wages. Firms attempt to devise innovative products and services that will be hard for their competitors to copy, because they know that scarcity is associated with profit.

In a sense, I think one can plausibly argue that manufactured scarcity is a central problem for Africa. For example, Africa has many natural resources and of course talented, intelligent people. Yet, the lack of institutions and laws sufficiently defining and protecting property rights stifles the domestic accumulation of capital and foreign investment in Africa (see Hernando De Soto’s “The Mystery of Capital”). In this way, I suppose one could argue that African States are essentially manufacturing scarcity of capital. Of course, capital is already scarce to the extent that it is not unlimited, but surely African States have made capital scarcer in Africa than it might otherwise be.

I doubt however, that this is what Mr. Mudede had in mind. Rather, I suspect that he feels an item is scarce only when there’s not a reasonable amount to go around. So for example, he might say that food and energy are not scarce, because clearly the world can produce enough to provide all of earth’s inhabitants with some reasonable allocation of those products. So the problem isn’t that there’s not enough stuff to go around, rather the problem is the way that stuff is allocated.

A refreshing change of pace

2007-07-26T14:58:00.000-07:00

Last night I had a $5 Bairrada. It was one of the more enjoyable wines I've had in months, as: A) It was light to medium bodied; B) It was very juicy, beckoning me to take sip after sip, and C) at only 12% alcohol, it featured a welcome lack of throat burning activity. It was truly a pleasure to taste my food and wine though an entire meal (no numb tongue half the way through), to have each drink feel refreshing and to share an entire bottle's worth with my wife w/out getting all that drunk.

WBW #26 2002 La Font du Vent "Les Promesses"

2006-11-08T15:26:00.000-08:00

Long time no post. Sorry I’ve been neglecting you lately. I’ve been out of town each of the last 4 weekends. We put in new floors in the basement and new lighting in the living room. Additionally, work has been very busy. Blogging lost out.

In any case, I know you've been waiting on the edge of your seat to find out what I consumed for WBW #26. I will torture you no longer. It was the 2002 Cotes du Rhone La Font du Vent “Les Promesses”, produced by Domaine Font de Michelle. This inexpensive and enjoyable wine is made from Grenache and Syrah by skilled Chateauneuf du Pape producers Jean and Michel Gonnet. For more information on Domaine Font de Michelle, check out The Wine Doctor.

$8.99 from Esquin Wine Merchants, Imported by Robert Kacher Selections.

Give 'em a fair trial and then hang 'em

2006-10-23T11:40:00.000-07:00

I check Craig Camp’s wine blog just about every day. He has an interesting perspective on wine and so far (based on only a few data points mind you) my palate seems fairly aligned with his.

I was a bit troubled by a link in one of his recent posts, however. The linked web page calls for a boycott of Krug-Mondavi in response to a labor dispute. I commented on Mr. Camp’s blog that it’s not clear to me that Krug-Mondavi actually did anything wrong. Mr. Camp responded:

The agriculture industry's track record of mistreating and underpaying its workers is well documented. Try picking grapes for a buck a bucket for a couple of days and then decide if the Union's demands were reasonable.

I was disappointed in his response, but perhaps not all that surprised. Here is my response to Mr. Camp:

Mr. Camp, it seems that your argument may be summarized as follows:

1) The agriculture industry's track record of mistreating and underpaying its workers is well documented.
2) Krug Modavi is a company engaged in industrial agriculture.
3) Therefore, Krug-Mondavi is guilty of mistreating and underpaying its workers.

I believe this logic suffers from a fallacy in which exceptions to the general rule are ignored. Here’s another example of similarly flawed logic:

1) Craig Camp finds recent release Alsatian Rieslings to be disappointing.
2) The Albert Mann 2004 Riesling is a recent release Alsatian Riesling.
3) Therefore, Craig Camp will not like Albert Mann 2004 Riesling.

Of course, we know you quite enjoyed the Albert Mann 2004 Riesling.

My intention here is not to be a persnickety punk, but rather to highlight the dangers of generalization. Of course, generalization is very useful tool with which we may simplify our complicated world. But imprudent use can be very hurtful.

You seem to be encouraging people to boycott Krug-Mondavi. This is a direct threat to the employees and owners of this company. Their lives could be materially damaged by this boycott, were it to be successful. Do you think it responsible to attack people’s livelihood in this manner before first knowing the facts?

If Krug-Mondavi truly behaved unscrupulously, then by all means take action. But in my view, we all deserve to be innocent until proven guilty.

Perhaps this particular issue is an emotional one for Mr. Camp. I know there are certain issues that cause an emotional response in my self that makes it difficult for me to see things objectively. It happens to me all the time really, but I work hard to avoid letting my knee jerk reaction get the best of me (not always successfully of course).

I think our world would be a much better place if we’d be a bit more careful about our use of generalizations. This is especially true for often contentious issues such as politics, race and religion.

UPDATE: Craig Camp posts this reply:

So by your own logic, as you admit you don't know the facts why are you bothering to comment. As you refer to the Mann Riesling, it is the exception to the rule, I can assure you that C.Krug/Mondavi are not when it comes to the treatment of agricultural workers. Perhaps if this boycott was successful it
would help the lives of these workers - a problem that is more pressing than helping the wealthy owners of these wineries. You could not have any other reason for taking up their banner other than you are indeed "persnickety".

This saddens me a bit. I was absolutely not trying to be an a*shole. I simple felt that the linked to webpage didn’t sufficiently support a very serious action such as boycott. I’d hoped we’d have a good discussion on the topic. Perhaps Mr. Camp had information on Krug’s past practices that he’d link to, for example.

Also, I’m simply suggesting that Krug should be treated as innocent until proven guilty. Isn’t that a basic concept in free societies? I’m in no way “taking up their banner”.

I find it distressing when a conversation turns from facts and issues to impugning people's motives. Why didn’t he just a) show me his evidence, b) grant he’s not positive Krug is in the wrong, or c) ignore my comment? Instead, he repeated his unsupported assertions and essentially called me a liar.

UPDATE II: Mr. Camp apologized in his latest comment to me. It appears that he mistook my intended tone. This certainly happens from time to time, and undoubtedly some of the responsibility is mine (I should have communicated more clearly my intentions… though of course I specifically said I wasn’t trying to be persnickety!).

He also provided this link to a blog entry talking about the poor conditions that vineyards workers face. I accept his apology of course, misunderstandings happen all the time.

[Ed. Update II was posted after Mr. Camp posted his comment at this blog. Whit intented to update earlier but was unable to do so.]

Wine Blogging Wednesday #26: Where's Wino?

2006-10-11T17:50:00.000-07:00

Beau at Basic Juice is hosting this month’s installment of Wine Blogging Wednesday.

Beau asks that each participant pen a tasting note for a red wine from Spain, France, or Washington (USA) or a white wine from Italy, Oregon (USA), or New York (USA). Beau will post each tasting note apart from the wine's name and region. Then, we will try to match each tasting note to its corresponding wine. Whoever gets the most correct will earn a prize.

So I'll post my tasting note today, but I'll not reveal the wine's name, region, etc. until after the game is over.

Here’s my tasting note:

This light to medium bodied red blend has a floral character and provides pleasingly restrained blueberry fruit. The wine is quite bright and fresh. While it had enough structure to successfully accompany my grilled rib eye, it’s definitely a juicy wine; it has a succulence that makes ya want to gulp it down.

Join in on the fun over at Basic Juice!

Anti-intellectualism and outrage

2006-10-09T16:54:00.000-07:00

Check out DCB’s rant about "anti-intellectual crybabies" that act as though "being/getting outraged by politics is a positive character trait and indicative of thoughtfulness."

Boys and girls of Columbia University, many things in life are not unambiguously good or bad. If you find yourself full of rage over an issue, count back from ten and ask yourself if the issue’s really as simple as you think it is. And even if you conclude that yours is clearly the correct perspective, remember to respect other’s freedom to voice alternative viewpoints.

Buying wine by importer

2006-10-09T14:27:00.000-07:00

Getting great stuff on the cheap feels good. With clothing it’s easy; if it looks good and fits, then you buy it. But what about wine? How do you know which bottles in the bargain bin are worth picking up?

Of course, there’s brand name. But beyond brand, what do you go by? You could go by varietal and/or appellation. But there’s immense variation among varietals made by different producers. And there’s also a lot of variation within each appellation and, frankly, I just don’t know the appellations well enough to shop like this.

So I often shop by importer. To be sure, some importers are more consistent than others, so you won’t want to try this with any old company. Personally, I’m fairly confident that I'll like (or at least find interesting) most wine imported by Therry Thiese, Louis/Dressner, Robert Kacher and Kermit Lynch.

On Saturday, my wife and I stopped by Urban Vines during a walk around the neighborhood. I perused the discounted odd bottles displayed upstairs. Based on price and importer, I purchased the 2003 Clos Roche Blanche Cabernet (Louis/Dressner), the 2004 Clos de Tue-Boeuf "Le Buisson Pouilleux" (Louis/Dressner) and the 2002 Domaine Sainte-Eugenie Corbieres (Robert Kacher). I’ll let you know how they work out.

[Ed. What about asking the merchant for assistance?] Good point. If there's a trustworthy sales person that knows your taste, definitely ask them for assistance. But keep in mind that a salesperson that doesn't know you may encourage you to buy discounted items just for the sake of clearing out inventory.

ADDENDUM: Here is a recent NY Times article about harvest time at Clos Roche Blance and Clos doe Tue-Boeuf. Also, you can find some of Eric Asimov's and wine auctioneer Ursula "Gavel Goddess" Hermacinski's favorite impoters at The Pour.

Who's the maniac?

2006-10-06T11:15:00.001-07:00

I was driving through downtown yesterday, heading home from Pike & Western Wine Shop (where I picked up the Deiss wine I blogged about on Tuesday). On the way, I passed a group of people calling for, among other things, the impeachment of President Bush and his indictment for war crimes. One protestor hoisted a professionally printed sign with the message "Impeach Homicidal Maniacs". Many of the other signs featured similar messages.

Do people think hyperbole will further their cause, or are they simply disconnected from reality? I can understand a person disagreeing with Mr. Bush’s policies (I certainly disagree with many of them). I can understand a person believing he’s incompetent, or perhaps even of questionable character. But a homicidal maniac? Please.

Nooooooooooo!

2006-10-04T10:10:00.000-07:00

The title of this post is taken from the title of a friend’s recent email to me, which carried a link to a CNN article bearing this ominous title: Beer drinkers beware: 4 percent of U.S. hops crop burns.

According to the article, the US produces about 24 percent of the world’s hops. So I suppose then that about 1 percent of global hops production went up in flames.

Is a 1 percent decrease in hops supply significant enough to increase prices in any meaningful way (what is the price elasticity of demand)? Will this have a significantly larger effect in North America than elsewhere (are transportation costs significant)? Were the destroyed hops some sort of standard product, or were they specialty hops? We shall see. Keep your fingers crossed.

Thank you Cafe Campagne

2006-10-03T18:47:00.000-07:00

I've been wine crazy for a fairly short time. Yet, through much drinking and reflecting, my palate is slowly becoming a little bit more experienced and discerning.

Unfortunately, I’m also now more likely to notice when a restaurant lacks a decent wine list. Too often the wine offerings are sweet, structureless wines that compete with, rather than complement, the food.

So these days, I appreciate it when a restaurant has a good wine list. Even better is a place with an extensive selection of wine by the glass, which allows me the flexibility to pair wines by dish (and of course with The Wifey pregnant, it’s great to not have to buy an entire bottle just for myself).

Café Campagne is one such establishment; it has a great wine list, including an excellent by the glass selection. Additionally, the food is solid and the atmosphere is warm and comfortable.

My wife and I enjoyed a pleasant dinner at Café Campagne just the other day. I ordered a three course, fixed price meal starting with a bacon and onion tart, continuing with vinegar and honey braised chicken, and finishing with Munster cheese.

As I’ve said before, I like putting experts in control. So I asked the Sommelier to select me an Alsatian wine with each course. The relatively crisp and clean 2003 Edelzwicker Reserve Albert Boxler was very nice with the tart, and the tawny Port like 2000 Banyuls Cuvee Mediterranee
Domaine Pietri-Geraud was good with the cheese.

But my favorite wine of the night was the 2000 Pinot Noir Burlenberg Marcel Deiss. This wine gives you plenty of black cherry and smoke over a firm structure. It overpowered the chicken unfortunately, but was enjoyable none the less. This wine is better suited to rich red meat with mushrooms, or perhaps game.

Some web searching and an email to the old importer (New Castle Imports) led me to the NW distributor (Odom Corporation), which in turn directed me to Pike & Western Wine Shop. I ordered two bottles for $27 each, which should be in by Thursday of this week. I love it when a plan comes together.

For more on Domaine Marcel Deiss, check out Bertand Celce’s blog and Jamie Goode’s web site. For tasting notes on the 2000 Pinot Noir Burlenberg Marcel Deiss, visit Tom Stevenson and Stephen Tanzer. (Photo: The Stranger/Annie Marie Musselman)

The worst wine ever

2006-10-03T15:53:00.000-07:00

Steve De Long has a playful post and poll devoted to determining the worst wine ever. In the comments section of his post, De Long reproduces some pretty unflattering tasting notes from Wine Spectator:

Cantina del Taburno Greco Taburno 2000: (50 pts.) Repulsive. Totally flawed. Tasted twice, with consistent notes. 2,830 cases made. (JS)

Domaine de la Romanée-Conti La Tâche 1983: (50 pts.) Simply awful. Smells and tastes of burnt rubber, sulfur and rot–it has serious flaws. Dry, lean and disgusting. DRC should be ashamed for having released this wine.–La Tâche vertical. (PM)

Perhaps it’s not good form to make fun of bad wines. But it may be useful to ask somebody about their least favorite wine experience, in so much as doing so may help reveal the kind of wines they don’t like.

The worst wine I’ve ever had is the 2002 Renwood Grandmère Zinfandel. I imagine it tastes quite like a mixture of sweet blueberry syrup, sweet raspberry syrup and rubbing alcohol. As you may have gathered by now, I’m not a big sweet wine guy, except perhaps for dessert.

Intellectual honesty

2006-10-02T16:55:00.000-07:00

We're all riddled with inconsistencies. It's refreshing to read the work of a seemingly self-aware, intellectually honest fellow that's willing to own up to his inconsistencies. That being said, the last line of the post is a bit of a setup:

That said, in the heat of argument, what would you rather have sitting between the two combatants? A bottle of Buckie or a .44 Magnum?

It's true of course, that you'd probably rather have two combatants armed with cheap wine than firearms. But undoubtedly, we could find situations where we'd want the two folks to have a gun rather than a drink; two people being attacked by a bear, for example. I'm probably being too picky here for I'm sure his point is that, all in all, firearms are more destructive and dangerous to everday folks than cheap wine. Perhaps so.

Speaking of self-awareness and objectivity, check out one of my favorite papers on political disagreement.

Expectations matter

2006-09-29T17:23:00.000-07:00

If you serve me a white wine dyed to look like a red wine, I probably won’t know it. Everything else equal, I’ll probably enjoy a bottle labeled "Grand Reserve" more than a bottle lacking a classification. I'll probably like a wine with a classy looking label more than one sporting a cute critter. And I’ll probably like a wine more if I think it's made by a mustachioed, beret wearing old Frenchman rather than a white coat wearing beverage technician from the U.S.

At least, that’s the gist of this fascinating article by wine science guru Jamie Goode and featured in The World of Fine Wine. Mr. Goode reports that one’s perception of wine is more than just taste, smell and touch (mouth feel), for scientific research suggests that expectations are also extremely important.

Our expectations are formed by things like the wine’s appearance, other’s perception of the wine (professional reviews, friend’s comments), label information (varietal, appellation, classification), label and bottle appearance (critter label = plonk?), how recently and frequently we’ve experienced similar wine and our knowledge of wine.

Additionally, Mr. Goode notes that individuals experience the same wine differently. For example, a wine’s color may be more central to my experience than yours. Furthermore, a given individual may experience the same wine differently over time. What seems great today may seem merely good next week.

Does this mean tasting notes are useless? No, but you might consider using them more cautiously. And keep in mind that your own tasting notes are influenced by the context in which you consume a given wine, so maybe your wine opinions should be a little more tentatively held.

[Ed. Is this really breaking news?] No, this isn’t the first time I’ve heard about these types of studies and it’s true that some of the conclusions are a bit self-evident. For example, I take it for granted that my expectations influence my experience. What sets Mr. Goode’s article apart is his attempt to explain the biological process through which we experience wine, rather than simply report the findings of a few studies. I’m thinking I should pick up a copy of Wine Science and/or The Science of Wine.

Lushes make more money

2006-09-26T10:43:00.000-07:00

Go ahead and lay down the cash for that nice bottle of wine, for you’ll make it back in higher pay. Andrew Gelman reports that tipplers earn substantially higher pay than teetotalers do (hat tip to Marginal Revolution). Here’s an excerpt from a Bloomberg article:

Men who visit a bar at least once a month to drink socially bring home 7 percent more pay than abstainers, and women drinkers earn 14 percent more than non-drinkers, according to the study by economists Bethany Peters and Edward Stringham.

So drink up ladies and gents.

Nominal versus material inequality

2006-09-18T15:38:00.000-07:00

Check out Will Wilkinson’s excellent post on inequality. He points out that, while nominal inequality is increasing, material inequality is decreasing. That is, the difference between the material living conditions of the poor and the rich is shrinking.

Intellectual property rights and fashion

2006-09-18T14:43:00.000-07:00

Here’s an interesting WSJ article on intellectual property rights and fashion. Apparently, some prominent fashion designers are lobbying for three years of copyright-like protection on original works of fashion (similar protections exist in Europe).

The key question is innovation; would copyright-like protection encourage innovation or stymie innovation? Who would benefit from such a law? What would the unintended consequences be?

I suspect counterfeiters would benefit from passage, since they probably compete to some extent with the knockoffs that would be handicapped by the legislation (illegal counterfeit fashion features a fraudulent designer label, whereas a legal knockoff is similar in design to a designer item but does not carry a fraudulent label.)

You can read a previous post of mine on intellectual property rights and food here.

Not good

2006-09-18T09:17:00.000-07:00

Seventy to 90 percent of the Iraq detentions in 2003 were ''mistakes,'' U.S. officers once told the international Red Cross.

That’s from this chilling article on the U.S.’s global network of overseas prisons. My buddy Clark Kent pointed out that .300’s pretty good in baseball, so maybe I’m evaluating this thing incorrectly. Seriously though, those 30 to 10% of correctly detained folks better be pretty valuable to justify all the innocents.

What do you have that will change my life?

2006-09-13T14:42:00.000-07:00

A few days ago, fellow imbiber E.F. Glutton walked into a local wine shop and asked "What do you have that will change my life?" Our favorite sales person fetched, from his personal stash, a bottle of the 2001 Damijan Bianco, Collio (about $30). Lucky for me, Mr. Glutton invited me over to his house to enjoy the Damijan and others, paired with his fine cooking. I had a wonderful time and greatly expanded my vineanshauung. Mr. Glutton’s life was changed. Definitely a good night.

First off was the 2005 Hanna Estate Russian Rivery Sauvignon Blanc, Slusser Road. This wine gives you plenty of fat citrus fruit and grassiness while still being dry and crisp. A nice wine for around $15.

After enjoying my contribution to WBW #25 with some bree, we drank the 2001 Gary Farrell Chardonnay Russian River Valley, Rochioli – Allen Ranch (about $30) with an excellent cod filet. This is the richest wine I’ve ever had and actually liked. It is a very rich, fat, modern, fruit-forward wine that gives you some oak and bright fruit. This isn’t really my style of wine, but it taught me that very rich Chardonnay need not be flabby, for this wine wasn’t.

Next was the much anticipated feature wine of the night, paired with delicious pork tenderloin. Damijan is made by biodynamic grower and winemaker Damijan Podversic, a former student of Josko Gravener. This Ribolla Gialla from Friuli looks a bit like apple cider in the glass. The wine is tannic for a white, quite dry and offers a variety of muted flavors I have trouble describing. It tastes like no wine I’ve had before… it completely stumped me. We served the wine cold, though I see now it’s actually meant to be served at room temperature. I suspect we unwittingly muted the wine's potential by doing this. Craig Camp notes intense orange spiced flavors and feels the Damijan could be confused for a red in a blind tasting.

The wine didn’t change my life, but it expanded my conception of wine. The wine apparently did change E.F. Glutton’s life. He said it was an "incredible expression of what wine can be when you don’t adhere to the mass production model". I think he liked it!

Next we enjoyed a bottle of the 2004 Mary Edwards Pinot Noir, Russian River Valley (about $37) with a deftly grilled lamb chop. Said E.F. Glutton, "These folks are world class Pinot makers. They blow my mind every time. Rich, complex, great mouth feel, unmistakable New World Pinot." The wine is lush and fruit forward in the modern style, though I remember thinking it had more sweetness than I would have liked. Frankly, this was our fifth bottle of wine that night, so my recollection is pretty hazy.

Lastly, we had a few glasses of the 2003 Chateau d’Aussieres Corbieres, but I have absolutely no idea what that tasted like. You can find Kim Marcus' impression of the wine here.

This was a really great night. E.F. Glutton’s food was excellent. Further, I learned a lot about wine. I learned that rich Chardonnay need not be flabby, that sparkling wine can be much more than a simple palate cleansing accompaniment to food, and that artisan winemakers can produce wines that taste like nothing I’ve ever imagined.

[Ed. Also, Whit was reminded that gulping down 2.5 bottles of wine will put a hurtin’ on oneself. The next morning wasn’t very pleasant for him.]

WBW #25 1998 Champagne Brut Millesime Pierre Peters

2006-09-06T22:03:00.000-07:00

Becks & Posh is hosting Wine Blogging Wednesday #25. This month's theme is Champagne.

I drink sparkling wine fairly often. I mostly buy inexpensive Cava and Prosecco, though I’ll occasionally do American sparklers or splurge on Cremant d'Alsace. I never buy Champagne.

That may change however, for the 1998 Champagne Brut Millesime 'Pierre Peters' really opened my mind. This is a very bubbly, deep and delineated Champagne made from 100% Chardonnay. My immediate thought after taking my first sip was, er… beer. The wine has a very pronounced yeasty character. Second, I got some hints of Sherry or perhaps White Port. Lastly, I got some minerality. Drinking companion E.F. Glutton described the muted citrus fruit as "juice from lemon slices that have been in the fridge for a couple of days". He also detected nut flavors. I’m quite sure my inexperienced palate isn’t doing justice to this wine, so do read the impressions of Pierre Rovani, Stephen Tanzer and Wine Spectator.

According to their website, the Peters family, originally from Luxembourg, established their holdings in Champagne sometime around 1840. Pierre Peters, the namesake of this wine, took over the operation in 1940. The current manager of the business, Francois Peters, produces over 13,000 cases annually from the family's 43 acres of chalk soil vineyards. Check out Terry Thiese’s 2006 Champagne Catalog for more on the Pierre Peters estate and its wines.

I found the 1998 Brut Millesime 'Pierre Peters' arresting. I’m still deciding whether I like it or not, but I’m definitely very glad I tried it. It really expanded my conception of sparkling wine and made me excited to try more Champagne. I simply had no idea sparkling wine could taste like this.

E.F. Glutton and I enjoyed several other palate expanding wines the same night we drank the Pierre Peters. If you’re interested, you can read about them here.

Thanks to Sam Breach for the great theme.

$49.99 at Esquin Wine Merchants, imported by Michael Skurnik Wines (a Terry Thiese selection).

UPDATE: The roundup is here.

Croaky!

2006-09-04T01:03:00.000-07:00

Wild animals can kill you.

Label Loathing

2006-09-01T13:28:00.000-07:00

I try not to take myself too seriously. I employ self-deprecating humor often. Hell, I showed up to work today (casual Friday) wearing a brown and yellow polyester shirt and sporting a Mohawk (more of a fauxhawk I suppose).

Though I sometimes enjoy wearing gaudy clothes, I prefer clean and simple wine labels. Classic even. Cute critter labels repel me. The Cayuse Bionic Frog label is probably the ugliest I've seen.

According to a recent article in Seattle Magazine, such grotesque er, whimsical labels communicate that the wine inside is carefree, fun and unpretentious. The labels are supposed to be inviting.

Well, they really turn me off. Maybe I just have a stick up my ass when it comes to wine labels.

[Ed. Well, there is that picture of you in SC with a bottle up your ass]. Yes, but the label on that bottle of 1996 Chateau Corbin Michotte was perfectly tasteful.

The best college football programs

2006-08-31T11:17:00.000-07:00

Check out the Dow Jones College Football Success Index. The index ranks each college football program’s contribution to the professional football by measuring its alumni’s performance in the NFL, popularity in the NFL draft, and NFL draft value (the quotient of performance and draft popularity).

The results are pretty interesting, if a bit rough (the creators didn’t control for a number of factors, like player injuries for example).

Florida State, Florida and Georgia take the top three spots in terms of performance, while Miami, Georgia and Ohio State are the highest in terms of draft popularity. North Carolina, Auburn and Virginia were the top three from a draft value perspective. Southern schools dominated the top ten in all three categories.

Are you in rigor mortis, or are you just happy to see me?

2006-08-24T11:03:00.000-07:00

Reuters reports that Chinese police are cracking down on funeral striptease acts:

Striptease used to be a common practice at funerals in Donghai's rural areas to allure viewers. Local villagers believe that the more people who attend the funeral, the more the dead person is honored.

Personally, I like strippers. But the villager’s conception of honor seems off to me. I don’t believe one can buy honor, though perhaps one can buy the appearance of honor. [Ed. That's just it Whit, appearances are very important to these folks.]

That being said, I like funerals that have a bit of levity. I’d like my own funeral to be a big party. A funeral should of course help provide closure for those left behind (after all, funerals are really about the living, not the deceased), but a funeral can also be a chance for family and friends to unite under happy memories. It seems there are professional funeral planners out there ready to help guys like me.

UPDATE: Tyler Cowen and Scott Adams chime in.