Well, dunno what to make of this story from NPR about shifts in liquor consumption.
Seems sales of spirits rose last year, but mostly because people are going for the cheap stuff and shunning the high-end.
So that means Scoresby instead of Glen Garioch, Sauza instead of 1800 Añejo.
Does this indicate the triumph of American adaptation to hard times or of an innate preference for quantity over quality?
I mean—we’re talking nationwide sales, not just frat houses.
Me? Well I’ve bought pretty much nothing in the way of spirits since I moved to Washington and I discovered that there was indeed a place that offered higher prices and less selection than the state-run liquor stores of Virginia. I did buy 500ml of Tanqueray last month, but that was for a recipe for flank steak with gin and spice sauce.
But posting this has given me a thirst. I think I’ll have just a wee dram of the Speyburn I brought with me.
Friday, February 5, 2010
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Sweating spirituality 2
Further to my post of last October about three deaths in an Indian-manqué sweat lodge: the self-styled shaman who charged nearly $10K per head for the experience has been charged with three counts of manslaughter.
As of this writing James Arthur Ray has been arrested and tucked into the Yavapai County slammer. Bail set at $5M.
Let’s see how the guy who earns $9.4M per year putting on retreats (as well as seminars, DVDs and possibly Amway and Tupperware parties) deals with the intense experience of being in a cell with the Arizona branch of the Crips.
It’ll bring new meaning to the term “spiritual warrior”.
As of this writing James Arthur Ray has been arrested and tucked into the Yavapai County slammer. Bail set at $5M.
Let’s see how the guy who earns $9.4M per year putting on retreats (as well as seminars, DVDs and possibly Amway and Tupperware parties) deals with the intense experience of being in a cell with the Arizona branch of the Crips.
It’ll bring new meaning to the term “spiritual warrior”.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Disorder in the courts
As an antidote to the whole “you vill haff positive thoughts und you vill enchoy it” thing in the corporate world, I offer this report from the LA Times: seems a County judge (now retired) has been slated by the State Commission on Judicial Performance for getting a little whacky when presiding at the final hearing on a settlement in a civil lawsuit.
The case involved a woman suing Windsor Fashions for requiring that she give personal information when using a credit card. The case was settled in the plaintiff’s favor; she was awarded $2500, her lawyer got $125K and other customers who appeared in the case got $10 gift certificates from the store.
What Klein did was order that everyone—plaintiff, attorney and ancillaries—be paid in $10 vouchers from the shop.
(No word on whether there’s an expiration date on them, or if there are service charges deducted every month the cards aren’t used.)
A couple of things are interesting about this—well, aside from the obvious deviance of his ruling.
First—his pronouncement happened in January 2009. He retired last November. And the Judiciary Commission only got round to censuring Klein now.
What exactly were they deliberating in this matter? I mean—they’re all de facto lawyers themselves on that commission. Is there no honor amongst mouthpieces? Or at least a common desire to scotch the precedent that could start the profession on the slippery slope to payment in Betty Crocker coupons?
Next—did no one notice before it got to the commission that by ordering payment of judgment and fees in store vouchers Klein was in essence making the store’s outlay a wash, since they have to be redeemed in the, you know, offending shop?
Third—I’d really like to have seen what a lawyer who gets 125 large in fees on a $2500 case would find of interest in the shop in question. No mention of whether said attorney is male or female, but the merchandise on offer in this place is hardly upmarket. Perhaps if s/he is outfitting a bridal party of 11 bridesmaids and a flower girl, plus 16 prom dresses for the neighborhood. Uh, and costumes for a community theatre revival of Saturday Night Fever. And two road companies.
I have to say it’s stories like this that make a native Angelena positively qvell.
The case involved a woman suing Windsor Fashions for requiring that she give personal information when using a credit card. The case was settled in the plaintiff’s favor; she was awarded $2500, her lawyer got $125K and other customers who appeared in the case got $10 gift certificates from the store.
What Klein did was order that everyone—plaintiff, attorney and ancillaries—be paid in $10 vouchers from the shop.
(No word on whether there’s an expiration date on them, or if there are service charges deducted every month the cards aren’t used.)
A couple of things are interesting about this—well, aside from the obvious deviance of his ruling.
First—his pronouncement happened in January 2009. He retired last November. And the Judiciary Commission only got round to censuring Klein now.
What exactly were they deliberating in this matter? I mean—they’re all de facto lawyers themselves on that commission. Is there no honor amongst mouthpieces? Or at least a common desire to scotch the precedent that could start the profession on the slippery slope to payment in Betty Crocker coupons?
Next—did no one notice before it got to the commission that by ordering payment of judgment and fees in store vouchers Klein was in essence making the store’s outlay a wash, since they have to be redeemed in the, you know, offending shop?
Third—I’d really like to have seen what a lawyer who gets 125 large in fees on a $2500 case would find of interest in the shop in question. No mention of whether said attorney is male or female, but the merchandise on offer in this place is hardly upmarket. Perhaps if s/he is outfitting a bridal party of 11 bridesmaids and a flower girl, plus 16 prom dresses for the neighborhood. Uh, and costumes for a community theatre revival of Saturday Night Fever. And two road companies.
I have to say it’s stories like this that make a native Angelena positively qvell.
Monday, February 1, 2010
Corporate crock
The WSJ reports a new trend in corporate approaches to keeping employees contributing to the bottom line—those employees not getting $500K bonuses from Goldman Sachs or AIG. Rather than treating staff with consideration (given that those remaining after multiple rounds of layoffs are expected to do the jobs of their sacked colleagues), acknowledging their work, giving them a share of the results, and like that, management are sending them to thinking happy thoughts seminars.
I swear I’m not making this up. It’s in the Journal.
I suppose paying $10K for a “happiness coach”, sucking up the four hours of staff time and diverting a few plates of pastries and fruit to the seminar is more cost-effective than actually paying them for the work they do.
Plus, it has the advantage of putting all the onus of attitude adjustment on the employees. Hey—you’re feeling down because we’ve given you more work than can be humanly done, slashed your salary and; cut your benefits: suck it up and think positive. See? All fixed.
Yeah, right.
If they really cared about happy thoughts they’d stock bars on every floor with Stoli, Oban and Asombroso Añejo.
I swear I’m not making this up. It’s in the Journal.
I suppose paying $10K for a “happiness coach”, sucking up the four hours of staff time and diverting a few plates of pastries and fruit to the seminar is more cost-effective than actually paying them for the work they do.
Plus, it has the advantage of putting all the onus of attitude adjustment on the employees. Hey—you’re feeling down because we’ve given you more work than can be humanly done, slashed your salary and; cut your benefits: suck it up and think positive. See? All fixed.
Yeah, right.
If they really cared about happy thoughts they’d stock bars on every floor with Stoli, Oban and Asombroso Añejo.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)