Washington state liquor monopoly; beginning to crumble? (Seattle: foreclosure, homes)

[bambambino]

We all know that the state is not run efficiently.

Any company can make money if the prices are high enough and they don't have competition.

The really good companies can "run a biz", negotiate better prices on inventory, pay fair wages and price their products comparably.

I believe there are companies out there that can do all of the above, still pay the CRAZY taxes [on booze] and also save consumers money. I think the state could even make more money if they privatized an lowered taxes.

What the hell, let's privatize everything.... even the parks.

[70Ford]

Washington state liquor sales headed for privatization | Reuters

Nov 8 (Reuters) - A ballot initiative strongly backed by Costco to close state-run liquor stores in Washington state and allow sales of hard spirits in supermarkets and big-box retail outlets took a wide lead in early returns on Tuesday.

[hamellr]

Originally Posted by 70Ford

Washington state liquor sales headed for privatization | Reuters

Nov 8 (Reuters) - A ballot initiative strongly backed by Costco to close state-run liquor stores in Washington state and allow sales of hard spirits in supermarkets and big-box retail outlets took a wide lead in early returns on Tuesday.

Too bad the bill was so geared towards Costco being the main beneficiary of this. It'll be interesting to see how this shakes out.

[Seacove]

I'm normally supportive of Costco because they take care of their employees (and avoid ones that don't). I voted no on this simply because I'm fine with the state liquor stores - not much of a hard liquor drinker outside of restaurants and don't even know where the state liquor stores are locally. Now that its passed, I guess we'll see liquor in all the larger stores. Meh. I've lived in states where liquor is pervasive. I always thought less of it made WA a little tidier, a little safer. I'm not sure how hugely broadening the availability of hard liquor is good for the state, but whatever.

[Ira500]

Originally Posted by Seacove

I'm normally supportive of Costco because they take care of their employees (and avoid ones that don't). I voted no on this simply because I'm fine with the state liquor stores - not much of a hard liquor drinker outside of restaurants and don't even know where the state liquor stores are locally. Now that its passed, I guess we'll see liquor in all the larger stores. Meh. I've lived in states where liquor is pervasive. I always thought less of it made WA a little tidier, a little safer. I'm not sure how hugely broadening the availability of hard liquor is good for the state, but whatever.

I'm with you Seacove. In my typical fashion, I voted on the losing side.
Liquor is going to be sold in four times as many outlets now, and we'll be adding to the unemployment ranks laying off the state liquor employees, who had decent jobs with benefits.
In fact, I'm less inclined to shop at Costco now. But you may get some good deals buying those two gallon size bottles of Jack Daniels

[Seacove]

Exactly and what person needs a pallet of vodka? I won't stop shopping at Costco because produce is cheaper there but I don't see the positives of this at all. Those state employees were fine, it was all fine. And the idea that they would fund programs to address excessive liquor use? How is that logical? You create a problem and fund to address it?

[Transmition]

Originally Posted by hamellr

Too bad the bill was so geared towards Costco being the main beneficiary of this.

It wasn't really, if the store size minimum was closer to 100,000sqft then it would have been, but at 10,000 it opens up to all medium-sized grocery stores and larger.

The state liquor stores are pretty crappy, at least now there will be competition.

[j_k_k]

From my standpoint the main reason to vote against it was that the biggest spender would have lost/wasted all that money. The tragedy was that it wasn't possible for both sides to lose. The actual benefit or detriment of the initiative itself, for me, became completely lost in disgust at corporations buying law--and it was happening on both sides, so far as I'm aware.

[70Ford]

Originally Posted by Transmition

It wasn't really, if the store size minimum was closer to 100,000sqft then it would have been, but at 10,000 it opens up to all medium-sized grocery stores and larger.

The state liquor stores are pretty crappy, at least now there will be competition.

Yeah, I remember them being pretty crappy. At least they were the last time I was in one....which was like 2 years ago or something, LOL

[Oldgoat38]

...the state has the hard liquor monopoly. And, it's a winner for the state.

The stores are very well stocked and run (and they'll get special orders for you if you are willing to wait a week or so). People come from all the surrounding states to stock up here because NH undercuts all the others.

NH has no sales or income tax so this is one of the big money makers.

I can give you a long list of things I don't like about NH but, my point here is, state liquor monopolies can work fine - some do, some don't.