The lack of rich people doesn't imply freedom - people who are forced to hunt, gather, fish or farm for subsistence only with no reward beyond that are enslaved to the need to produce food and find shelter, but that differs from a society where there's sufficient food and shelter, it's just hoarded by those who have too much
Additionally the presence of rich people doesn't imply a lack of freedom - you could have a "safety net" system where everyone is guaranteed housing and enough grains and beans/similar to survive, and if they want more they can work for it (some of the taxes from this go towards compensating farmers and builders), giving people the freedom to not have to worry about survival, while also allowing for people to earn lots of money and buy nice things if they want and/or can
Hops are highly sensitive to the soil acidity and minerals in terms of the compounds the plants produce, so sharing plants is largely infeasible, plus because it's the US many of them are trademarked so there's no sharing for that reason
I get it's a big jump, but I've been clear I'm restricting it to the most popular types of beer and explained why US bred and grown hops had the good fortune to be the most aromatic disease resistant hops, so I still don't think it's unreasonable
Again, none of this applies for styles beyond 3-7% golden beer fermented with yeast only, and even then there's a few exceptions for certain styles where the aromatics are different (eg bitter, which is less about the aromatic hops and more about the earthy notes of the bittering hops), but for the most popular lagers and pale ales I think it holds
So there's obviously a split between objective fact and opinion and conjecture, but:
Outbreaks of powdery mildew in the early 20th century meant it became somewhat infeasible to grow most aromatic and flavoursome hops, leading to research and breeding programmes to produce disease resistant hops with other desired characteristics
Most of the mildew-resistant hops were wild and from the US and Canada
Hop breeding and research started in the UK but ended in the 2000s
Oregon State University has been breeding hops for almost 100 years
The USDA also has their hop research center in Oregon
The US is responsible for 40% of hop production, of which over 98% is in Oregon, Washington and Idaho
Cascade hops, from the USDA research center in Oregon, started the craft beer movement due to the combination of high flavour and disease tolerance
German hop research started in 1926, but only had any real success after the 1980s
So essentially, the US has just got very lucky when it comes to hop production with good soils and disease resistance, while German beermaking was set back leading other styles to become and remain popular, such as very lightly hopped wheat beers, sour beers where the acidity comes from the fermentation instead of hops, and more recently Belgian style beers that are stronger abv so the stronger alcohol taste substitutes for some of the strength of the hops
There probably are also studies, but they tend to look into mechanisms/variations whereas this is more of a series of coinciding factors which don't really need much research to make sense
That's why I said average at best - average beer is going to taste way better than bad beer and also perfectly acceptable, I don't mean it in a negative way, just that in the standard 3-7% golden beer fermented with only yeast category, Cascadian & New Zealand hops provide the best and widest array of tastes regardless of what you're after, as that's where the soil is best and where the breeding is generally done
This looks to be completely political, their profits are huge and from the article it seems like the closures are largely just reshuffles, with the real job losses coming in management... I really wouldn't be surprised if they end up refilling the positions though and just wanted to make a point that they don't like being taxed on their huge profits
If you're drinking beer from hops that aren't from the US (or New Zealand but that's a way smaller market) then there's a very good chance your beer is average at best (unless it's a stout, wheat beer, bitter, sour etc. rather than a lager or pale ale, but those two are most likely)
The issue is, genocide deniers are very keen to dispute any readily available facts - Holocaust, Armenian Genocide, Holodomor, etc deniers, along with flat earthers and other far-fetched conspiracy believers are willing to reject swathes of evidence and released documents that show intent and execution; I could link you interviews with Uyghurs saying they were forceably steralised or reeducated from respected sources (and am happy to) but it seems like you've already made your mind up so will just be selectively blind when reading them
That's a really valid point, my recent experience of terminally online radical left wingers has been lemmygrad, .ml, hexbear etc. whereas my experience of terminally online radical right wingers has been... I guess a few people in piracy/libertarian communities? which aren't even the authoritarian right wing groups - I think it's not unreasonable to say liberals are likely to be more reasonable than authoritarians, so if I'm coming across vocal liberal right wingers and vocal authoritarian left wingers (with the liberal left wingers being ignored/less vocal as they're in the majority) then of course the right wingers are going to seem most reasonable
Tankies when someone who defends any western action appears: fucking right wing nutjob
Other instances when someone who is traditionally considered left wing appears: fucking right wing nutjob
Right wingers when someone left of centre appears: I don't think you're right but you make valid points on xyz
Now which way are people going to drift based on those interractions?
You can't complain about how splintered the political landscape is without ditching the "us vs them" mentality and finding common ground (of course with the caveat that fuck people who make discrimination a key part of their personality and people who celebrate oppression as clearly they aren't reasonable people)
Even better, my location history proves I regularly go on 5 hour drives in the middle of the night so it's not at all out of character that I drove to the middle of the woods where the body was found at 3am
You're jumping over points here a lot... Yes children who were raised to be a piece of shit will probably raise their children to be a piece of shit, but it doesn't necessarily mean they'll be the ruling family.
There's examples of hereditary rule where the ruler is a great and largely fair leader, such as Pedro II and Elizabeth I, as well as the opposite, such as Kim Jong Un and Ferdinand VII, as well as great and tyrannical elected leaders, and great and tyrannical leaders who came to power militarily.
I don't think it's a lack of creativity - our brains try to turn all sorts into faces and monsters and whatever else as it's evolutionary beneficial to turn that shadow into a lion because there's a small chance it could be, or that rock into a face because it could be a friend or foe, even down to looking at a mouse gripping something while eating and thinking "it's like us"... When you consider that, of course aliens are going to look somewhat familiar as we've learnt to identify human traits better than nonhuman traits
if your R&D costs make your business unprofitable, something's going to come along and topple it, same as how "smoking" isn't a cause of death but lung cancer is a very major cause of death
The lack of rich people doesn't imply freedom - people who are forced to hunt, gather, fish or farm for subsistence only with no reward beyond that are enslaved to the need to produce food and find shelter, but that differs from a society where there's sufficient food and shelter, it's just hoarded by those who have too much
Additionally the presence of rich people doesn't imply a lack of freedom - you could have a "safety net" system where everyone is guaranteed housing and enough grains and beans/similar to survive, and if they want more they can work for it (some of the taxes from this go towards compensating farmers and builders), giving people the freedom to not have to worry about survival, while also allowing for people to earn lots of money and buy nice things if they want and/or can