Gambling industry wagers on name change.

How good is Australia?

Well, fourth in terms of Olympic Gold medals, which just goes to show that money can’t buy happiness, gold medals for blokes, cocaine in Paris, or even a podium position of gold medals despite our girls’ efforts.

But don’t despair, Australia punches above its weight elsewhere, like getting gold for punching holes in the atmosphere with the most greenhouse gases per capita globally, yoohoo! Or punching defenceless critters in the face with the top place earthworks Barossa Shiraz 2022, $20. A shiraz was the original earthworks, back in 2003, and how aptly named? in mammalian species extinctions, and we’re defnitely on the podium for partner abuse and murder, perhaps because our women win more than blokes?

Earthy, warm, nostalgic redolence of the Barossa.

But there is one realm where Aussies really are head and shoulders (more correctly head and tails) above the rest of the world - losing the most money to gambling.

Go for gold guys, and odds are it’s blokes leading the charge in this race, yet those woke (whatever that means), girly, Greenies and Indies want to change this by banning all gambling advertising.

Apparently if we don’t allow Australia’s big gambling companies to advertise the most effective way to lose money to them, Australians will take their gambling losses offshore.

Huh? Offshore companies can’t advertise either. But let’s not let truth get in the way of good marketing, and why would this be any bigger disaster than what happens now?

Allegedly free-to-air TV would have to switch off permanently, newspapers would fold and all sport would cease immediately, which is interesting on a number of levels, not least that Channel 7 seems to be doing a great job of killing off FTA anyway, but it’s nice to have a scapegoat other than poor management and the big bogey of woke Government interference is perfect, whatever woke means.

More interesting is the establishment of yet another organisation that sounds like it has our best interests at heart. “It’s a nuanced argument”, says the spokeschip for the newly created Responsible Wagering Australia.

Maybe not a nuanced argument, but it’s certainly a nuanced marketing to change the industry “umbrella term’ from ‘gambling’ to ‘wagering’, all soft and fuffy and just some harmless fun, and not unlike the Tree Preservation Plant, which is actually all about telegraph poles.

Or the Healthy Forests Australia, which is the mob that chops them down.

Ahh, who can smell the sweet scent of the tobacco lobby? Who can forget Scotty and his coal campaign…”don’t be afraid”, or the oil industry creating its own science about exhaust emissions?

Pass the asbestos please Mr Hardie.

But before we get all high, mighty, and self-righteous, the alcohol industry is no better, bucking every push to air the truth with “it will be too expensive, and kill the industry”.

Well, like gambling, it’s still legal to do it, and hopefully healthy in moderation but we shouldn’t be clouding the truth or advertising to the vulnerable, such as blokes.

‘In vino veritas’ seems both paradoxically and contradictorily apt. Find some in these: for $20 really is punching above its weight. 9.1/10. earthworks Barossa Cabernet Sauvignon 2022, $20. Barossa cabernet is a muchunderrated thing, and in this case, I reckon better earthworks South Australia Tempranillo 2022, $20. I f the cab is surprisingly good value, this is an even bigger surprise. A really very friendly red with a twist and easily the pick of the bunch in this kitchen. 9.3/10. earthworks South Australia Rosé 2023, $20. Unusually for a rosé this has a predominantly white it no harm and contributes to the speed and ease with which the bottle will be consigned to the recycle bin. 9/10. earthworks South Australia Riesling 2023, $20 . It is unusual to

A homecoming if that’s if you’d simply like it to be. 8.9/10.

SA heritage but not Clare or Eden Valley or Coonawarra, or Adelaide Hills or even Riverland, so where’s it from? No matter, it’s a simple wine but a good standard