I don't know what accounts for it, but cheap bear definitely does not have the same outcomes. Budweiser, Coors, etc. are just not very good.
You're right that tastes can vary. Some people do prefer the cheap stuff, somehow.
But you're applying a blatant double standard here. You're saying that we should realize that some people prefer the cheap stuff, and then simultaneously turning around and saying that "almost always" preferring the expensive stuff is a cover. No, it's just taste.
You have to decide: is it legitimate to prefer different kinds of beer, or is it a cover? If it's a cover, it has to work both ways. If it's not, then you can't accuse people who don't want to drink Miller Lite of being secret alcoholics just because they want something that costs more than 50 cents a can.
There is no double standard at play here. The guy who likes <some craft beer> has found something he appreciates and enjoys, and there is nothing wrong with that.
The guy who elevates himself above the hordes and their cheap beer, on the other hand...it isn't really about the product anymore.
cheap bear definitely does not have the same outcomes.
Some products aren't filtered as much. Some have different blends of ingredients. Some are fermented more or less. And so on. But those things seldom impact the actual price in any material fashion, instead are subjective choices of the brewer based upon their market.
Filtering is interesting, because at one point the premium products (in many categories -- beers, wines, coffee, etc) earned their position because they were filtered more, while the cheap swill of the masses where the slurry products full of bits and grinds. As filtering became mainstream and inexpensive, unfiltered and raw -- doing less -- became the sign of a premium product.
Maple syrup was original graded based on its use as a sugar substitute, so the lightest least maple-y syrup was given the highest grade, and the stuff that actually tastes like maple syrup is not the Grade A stuff.
I've wondered about this for a long time. It's made me feel weird liking the "lower-grade" maple syrup more. I want all the maple-y goodness, not just sugary liquid. Thanks for pointing that out, didn't think I'd learn that in a beer thread.
You're right that tastes can vary. Some people do prefer the cheap stuff, somehow.
But you're applying a blatant double standard here. You're saying that we should realize that some people prefer the cheap stuff, and then simultaneously turning around and saying that "almost always" preferring the expensive stuff is a cover. No, it's just taste.
You have to decide: is it legitimate to prefer different kinds of beer, or is it a cover? If it's a cover, it has to work both ways. If it's not, then you can't accuse people who don't want to drink Miller Lite of being secret alcoholics just because they want something that costs more than 50 cents a can.