Josh, are you serious? Please click these links and realize you're talking crazy talk, because ratings like this from visitors all over the country don't happen when people act like you're alleging they do. I've been going there for 3 years and have been treated excellently throughout my patronage, despite me being a relative beer newbie when I started shopping there. I have literally never, ever heard anyone with an opinion of CBX like yours. I'm very confused.
Hopturn - they have and do carry Holy City, just must not have been on tap when you visited?
All Reviews »
And -- The Junction Kitchen & Provisions. Bathroom is unisex but there is a proper free-standing changing table in there, and wipes! And Ms. Pacman/Galaga for a quarter?? Fuggedaboutit...
Big ups, Kinsey!
FWIW - you can add Charleston Harbor Fish House to the "Both Restrooms" list, although the bathrooms are shared with the larger complex so you'll be carrying your little one outside a bit. Maybe multiple times in a night...so I heard from a friend...
@mat - A simple visit and conversation would reveal the info that they are in a growth mode.
A simple visit would not reveal the kind of in-depth cost analysis you're looking for.
Sorry if that wasn't clear. P.S. sweet moustache.
"Would anyone care to actually do the math based on Pettigrew's numbers and figure out if brewers could actually afford to hire more people with lower taxes? Or, wait, is this about profit margins?"
The tax rates aren't "my numbers." They are the tax rates. Breweries have different costs of production based on where they are, how big they are, etc., and that cost is going to vary from batch-to-batch based on ingredients, packaging, etc. $5 is a common price for a pint in a brewery's taproom, but even that is not universal. It just helps illustrate that $0.13 isn't as paltry a sum as it might sound.
If your expectation was that, when asked for my opinion on Brook's efforts in DC yesterday, that I do a multi-week case-study on a specific beer in a specific brewery and break down all the costs involved, I'm sorry to disappoint you.
The reality is that ALL of the brewers in Charleston are in a growth mode. I won't link you to multiple articles about expansions, etc. A simple visit and conversation with any of them would reveal this info.
Here are some links that might help. I personally wouldn't trust anything called "Pettigrew's numbers" either. Sounds like a terrible prog rock band.
Okay, I'll bite.
"The main talking point of the booze lobby is economic; they would reinvest a tax cut into their businesses. What business, booze or otherwise, would not say that?"
They all would. Of course they would. Is the argument here that brewers shouldn't act as businesses? Or that businesses shouldn't act in their own self-interest? Does not compute.
"Their federal tax was reduced in 1977 to $7/barrel for the first 60,000/year."
There were 96 breweries in this country in 1977. There were 4,269 last year. The landscape of this industry is completely different than it was 40 years ago. The dollars, voice, and support for craft beer is such that it's time to revisit this issue. Just because we've had inflation, does that mean the current excise tax rates are "right"? Are you suggesting the wise men that dreamed up $7/barrel 40 years ago foresaw the 45-fold increase in breweries that would occur over the next 40 years? Methinks not.
"The small brewers focus on more alcoholic 'craft' beers."
This belies ignorance of the craft category. We in SC underwent a (thankfully temporary) "high-gravity" craze after Pop the Cap, but craft brewers produce a huge range of styles, with a huge range of ABVs. Some of the most popular styles right now - session pales/IPAs, Berliner Weisse, Gose, etc. - are even less than 5% ABV. Regardless, craft brewers seek to bring creativity and choice to a market of adults that can legally consume it. Again, the basis of your argument is confusing, and is starting to have inklings of neo-Prohibition...
"It could scuttle a trade agreement that the US is negotiating with the European Union. It would also invite retaliation by other countries."
Do you have a source for this? Or is this just conjecture? Are we now arguing that there should be no change in any federal tax or regulation affecting domestic business without a entirely equal change in tax/regulation affecting foreign businesses in the same space?
Regardless, the act also decreases the excise tax on imports. If anyone is interested in the specifics:
Barry Clark, you have a bright future with AB InBev.
All Comments »
Powered by Foundation
© Copyright 2016,
Charleston City Paper