I-1183 Liquor Initiative

[Special T]

The owner of the business will lose their business under 1183.  Costco did not put up 20mil because this will benefit the state!  More jobs will be lost in the private sector than gained by this.

By this same kind of logic we need complex laws for living and paying taxes. It keeps lawyers, accountants busy that might otherwise have to do some other kind of work. The IRS is a great way of keeping good paying jobs in this country!
Think of all that great jobs that are in King county because of all the local regulations. Health inspectors, Invasive species contoll officers, and all forms of the permitting and consulting businesses that help keep you legal! 

[pianoman9701]

Dreamunelk, there's no way this'll result in a net loss of jobs. No possible way. The state is so noncompetitive with their pricing that when this privatizes, the cost of a bottle will drop drastically and immediately, keeping more people buying in-state instead of crossing state lines to buy elsewhere. More business ALWAYS means more jobs, always. As I said before, I feel badly for the state employees that will lose their jobs. But the net difference will be an increase in employment. Booze will be cheaper and the companies that sell it will be more prosperous. Get used to the idea that capitalism means no monopolies run by the government. This is the way a free market society is meant to run.

And, as soon as we can put every employee for the IRS, the US Dept. of Education, and the Dept of Health and Human Services out of work, the better we'll all be for it. Our government is out of control and this is only one step toward correcting that.

[Wenatcheejay]

To me, it is amazing there is even an debate to this.

[bigtex]

I saw the liquor store in Chewelah had a big sign to vote "no" for 1183 in their window...how does that work with a state leased building?  I know state vehicles can't have political stickers on them...?

There are two types of liquor stores in WA. State stores which are leased by the state and ran by state employees. Contract stores are ran much like a private business in that the employees are not government employees, the store manager is the one running the store and pays the lease payments, the store essentially contracts with the state to sell liquor. Most contract stores are in smaller towns, considering how small Chewelah is I would assume it is a contract store and thus not leased by the state.

Ditto. Contract Stores are privately owned and run.  The owner of one told me the last time this stuff was on the ballot it would hurt them badly.  They wouldn't be able to afford the inventory.  I got the impression the State "fronts" them the inventory.  That wont happen if this passes. 

What?  The state fronts the store owner the booze to sell?  How does the store owner get all the other merchandise to sell?

The state and the private store under operate under a contract, thus being called a contract store. Essentially the state provides the store the liquor, and a portion of the money goes to the private owner and a part goes to the state. Whereas at state run stores all the profits go into the govt account for distribution among many funds.

[Dhoey07]

The state will get their money whether this passes or not.  Either they get it from the state run liquor stores like how it is now, or by the 27% tax on the profit that the distributers and stores will make.  The reason it this was stopped last year was because the state wouldn't have gotten their portion of the pie (27% tax).  So now, i really don't care either way

[spookgus]

I have no problem with privatizing liquor sales. The main problem I have with this initiative is that if you are not big enough, you can't get a piece of the action. I'm split.

[Atroxus]

I have no problem with privatizing liquor sales. The main problem I have with this initiative is that if you are not big enough, you can't get a piece of the action. I'm split.

I am not overly fond of the size restriction either. But I would rather hurry up and get the state out of the retail business, and get the other parts of the initiative fixed later on.

[Tacomahunter]

If Liquor is available in stores I wont be able to stop myself from drinking, ill have to buy it cause I have no self discipline. ( Sarcasm ) LOL

To me, it is amazing there is even an debate to this.

[sisu]

A state should never be in competition with private enterprise.
Washinton State would like to wipe your ass if it could for a dollar.

[oldcamper]

I am going to have to go with a no, becouse I just don't see any other store being able to accuratly control the alcohol. Or the workers selling to friends.

[ICEMAN]

I am going to have to go with a no, becouse I just don't see any other store being able to accuratly control the alcohol. Or the workers selling to friends.

Ok...., so should the stores currently selling wine and beer stop selling this, or is your concern only over hard liquor?

[MikeWalking]

I am going to have to go with a no, becouse I just don't see any other store being able to accuratly control the alcohol. Or the workers selling to friends.

 

[Wenatcheejay]

I am going to have to go with a no, becouse I just don't see any other store being able to accuratly control the alcohol. Or the workers selling to friends.

Ok...., so should the stores currently selling wine and beer stop selling this, or is your concern only over hard liquor?

There is the same argument as to why guns should not be sold in private sales. I pity this generation.