Recession and cheap beer

Have you noticed that Busch beer is only $4/ six pack (at least at our liquor store) ...much to Adam's delight- he likes cheap beer.
I prefer to drink less quantities of more delectable beer so I'm in the boat with all the other people who are a little pissed about the hops shortage and the fact that a decent six pack costs 10 bucks. Particularly, because my very favorite beer ever, Orange Blossom has been altered to not my favorite beer- due, I believe, to a change in the hops variety used in the recipe... Buffalo Bills please change it back; I will pay an extra dollar.

Anyways onto the relevant topic of Busch beer being $4 and economics; that's pretty cheap, even for cheap beer. Why when all of the other brewers are increasing prices is Anheuser-Busch decreasing prices. Well when the economy is bad- like it is now, people feel, well, bad. And when we feel bad we drink more beer- there's that American escapism again.
Since every one's broke most people are more likely to drink cheap beer, thus much more Busch is sold for $.67 per beer, further increasing profits to the large domestic breweries and reducing profit to the delightful micro brews and increasing the probability that what happened to my favorite beer could happen to yours, but for your sake, I hope not.

Pharmacuticals

This is another post on Health care, it's not that this is a health care economics blog- it's that health care is important and the health care system is functioning at such a low efficiency and moral level that it's just really apparent that there needs to be critical analysis.

The Wall Street Journal reports that: Drug makers, facing declining sales in the U.S., have begun targeting the working poor in developing countries. When news like this is presented, it becomes clear that positive health outcomes are not the priority for pharmaceutical companies. This just proves that these greedy bastards are just modern apothecary hacks.

On a related note, did you know that: the vaccination schedule for today's children recommends over thirty shots before a child turns two; the time frame when over 80% of brain development occurs. Autism controversy aside (not enough conclusive research in any direction) the board of physicians who recommend under the guise of CDC these shots are many times the developers of the drugs themselves, and actually receive a cut for the price of each shot administered? Many others promoting these drugs are pharmaceutical reps. In my opinion, there is a massive conflict of interest and the future of our nation versus the astronomical profits of a few are at odds.