Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't fault Costco, but I do fault a government monopoly on liquour sales.
Once again, you seem to be ignoring what was written in the story. The initiative is also being fought by privately own beer and wine sellers. Not exactly a monopoly. And even if it is, it is a monopoly that benefits the people of Washington which might be an indication that the people of Washington like things just as they are.
Why the heck do you need government employees, collecting salaries from the public, and collecting state benefits and retirement (paid by the taxpayer) to sell a bottle of booze.
So where does the booze go, oh yes as you mentioned THEY SELL it! And where pray tell do the profits from the sale of that booze go?!?
Here in Pennsylvania Tom Corbertt ran on the pledge to close the state run liquor stores (personally I like our state stores, good prices great selections) yet he hasn't closed a one. Why? Because they make money! Money that pays for the staff's salaries, benefits and oh yeah other state programs! I suspect that Gov. Corbett figured out that the citizens of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania would have to pay higher taxes absent the money made by the state's liquor stores.
So where does the booze go, oh yes as you mentioned THEY SELL it! And where pray tell do the profits from the sale of that booze go?!?
Here in Pennsylvania Tom Corbertt ran on the pledge to close the state run liquor stores (personally I like our state stores, good prices great selections) yet he hasn't closed a one. Why? Because they make money! Money that pays for the staff's salaries, benefits and oh yeah other state programs! I suspect that Gov. Corbett figured out that the citizens of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania would have to pay higher taxes absent the money made by the state's liquor stores.
yeah, i guess there was no chance that they could actually cut the waste out of government instead.
it always winds up being stick it to the people in the end.
I don't fault Costco, but I do fault a government monopoly on liquour sales.
I don't fault them either. As I noted, I'm sure they expect it to be worth their time and money should they ultimately be allowed to sell alcohol in their stores. This is what businesses do - they spend money to make money.
And I really don't fault the people who work in the state-run stores wanting to protect their livelihoods.
I guess the residents of WA will ultimately have to decide which is more to their benefit.
Once again, you seem to be ignoring what was written in the story. The initiative is also being fought by privately own beer and wine sellers. Not exactly a monopoly. And even if it is, it is a monopoly that benefits the people of Washington which might be an indication that the people of Washington like things just as they are.
Uh, what have private beer and wine sellers got to do with anything? Beer and wine are currently sold through private businesses, liquour (as I specified, meaning hard liquour, not beer, wine, wine coolers) is sold through state owned stores by state employees. Hence government monopoly. How does paying government workers to sell booze benefit the people of WA? Seems to me it benefits the government workers and penalizes everyone else.
Costco didn't have to shell out $22 million.
That was a choice they made, no doubt based on what they believe will be an excellent return on their investment.
Yes, it is an obscene amount of money, but, that is the nature of the free market, is it not?
If the market were free, Costco would not have had to spend $22 million for the right to have voters decide whether they can sell booze in Washington.
yeah, i guess there was no chance that they could actually cut the waste out of government instead.
Ah, even if they cut out "actual waste" whatever you might decide that might be, the fact that the state has an non-tax revenue source for unwasteful programs would seem to be a good thing, but such a conversation would require some degree of intelligence on the other side of the conversation.
If the market were free, Costco would not have had to spend $22 million for the right to have voters decide whether they can sell booze in Washington.
Again, Costco did not have to spend one single dime. Someone at corporate decided that they needed fancy advertising and to blitz the airwaves. They could have just had a guy in a sandwich board walk up and down at Pike's Market.
They chose to go big.
Uh, what have private beer and wine sellers got to do with anything?
Is it beyond the possibility of hope that some folks might learn to read?
From the OP's pasted story:
Opponents are mostly beer & wine sellers that do not want to have to compete with whiskey and vodka, along with the state liquor store employees.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
