MORE REASON TO VOTE YES on 1183 even though it shafts small businesses.

http://www.theolympian.com/2011/10/10/1832439/2-bidders-want-to-control-state.html

Robert Mack did an article on this, and the lies that have been aired concerning privatization of liquor sales. I don't drink, but I'm voting to remove the State from the equation. There will be no competition if the State retains control. The idea that every 7-11 and Mom and Pop store will have liquor is just flat wrong. Only a few will, and that is only if they are far enough away from other liquor sources.
Either way it's no skin off my nose, but I would think that anyone who thinks booze costs too much would vote for competive sales.

I was wondering who was really behind all of the ads we're being bombarded with that are against 1183. This article confirms what I already suspected.

Here is a column by Bruce Ramsey (I almost wrote Ray Ramsey) that talks about who is funding the for and against, and sheds some light on the facts.

Bruce Ramsey, Seattle Times

Agreed, I think the State should be out of the liquor business; and the ads against 1183 are just plain annoying.

WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN????

1 Beer equals 1 glass of wine or 1 shot of hard alcohol, so if these people were so concerned about kids gaining access to beer or wine, why are they not trying to ban the sale of beer in gas stations or other convenience stores?

Because it isn't about that...there only concern is price controls for distributors, not the consumer.

My

I am not troubled by the state liquor monopoly. Unlike the wingnut teabaggers and their Republican allies, I do not hate the state or federal government. But I am also not against private sales. For me the issue lies strickly with the laying off liquor store workers in this economy, thus adding to the unemploment roles, should this bill pass. If we had a booming economy I might actually be pursuaded to vote for this measue. But since that is not the case, I will once again be voting against.

Why would it? Costco is not going to hire more people simply because they're putting liquor on their shelves. They're not expanding the square footage of the store, they're merely substituting one product for another. They'll add liquor and reduce some other product's presence. Same with every other store.

The distribution centers will likely absorb the laid off government workers. The delivery drivers will simply make more stops each day on their routes.

Additional hires will be negligible.

Fixed it for ya.......

Sounds like Fred's got a problem with prior planning.

Shoulda picked it up after church on his way to work.

Gee...thanks.

Can't say I'd put it quite that way...especially since it doesn't happen to be true. But I'm used to the Fox News/Rush Limbaugh perception (ie, distortion) of liberal views and have learned to accept them as badge of honor.

The real plus will be being to buy that bottle on the way to fishing instead of on the way home. YEE HA!

A dozen Herring and a bottle of Makers Mark please.

Personally, I'd pick it up on the way to church to help me through the sermon.

I bet some of the cheaper stuff will put you closer to god.

I usually see Him before I finish the bottle.

One of the local beverage distributors has "No on 1183" stickers on all of their rigs.......things that make ya go "hmmmmmm"

Don't suppose that $5.00 increase in the cost of an annual Costco membership has anything to do with the fact Costco has spent multiple millions trying to pass two liquor initiatives...another thing that makes ya go "hmmmmmm". Kinda like when WA tribes spent millions to defeat the initiative that would have expanded non tribal gambling in this state. Every tribal casino I'm familiar with raised their food prices and cut back on their "reward" programs after that successful effort.

In December 2005 when the smoking ban went into effect it signalled the beginning of the end for a number of businesses, primarily non indian casinos. Two of my clients had these types of businesses, and over the next year things tanked for them regardless of what they tried. One closed early, and ended up sorta okay. The other, well, I will likely foreclose on his properties by the end of the year. Sad situation, and I can't fault the client for what happened.

Regulatory change can have a major impact on existing businesses. I am not a fan of the WLSCB stores, but I have worries about my beer and wine distributor clients and the effect this would have on them. Obviously they have some concerns as well. I'm not certain how the proposed initiative would change the distribution chain for beer & wine, but it will likely change, and profit margins will likely fall.

I bet I'm the only person in WA state that has never been in a Liquor store. I'm voting No.