If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NBC News)   Washington State's privatization of liquor sales leads to surge in liquor sales...in Idaho   (nbcnews.com) divider line 144
    More: Followup, Idaho, sales lead, Idaho Statesman  
•       •       •

7563 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Jul 2012 at 7:14 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



144 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-07-30 05:31:48 AM  
This tax hike has pissed many people off. The consequences are predictable.
 
2012-07-30 05:40:30 AM  

AbbeySomeone: This tax hike has pissed many people off. The consequences are predictable.


I agree. The per liter charge they also add is ridiculous. Even with Costco prices it's still cheaper in Oregon, though it wouldn't be worth the gas to get there for most people.
 
2012-07-30 05:57:50 AM  
Repete
 
2012-07-30 05:58:07 AM  

SnarfVader: AbbeySomeone: This tax hike has pissed many people off. The consequences are predictable.

I agree. The per liter charge they also add is ridiculous. Even with Costco prices it's still cheaper in Oregon, though it wouldn't be worth the gas to get there for most people.


Back when I was child (eons ago) some of our cousins who lived near the Washington/Oregon border would cross over to Oregon to do their shopping. The did this to avoid Washington's sales tax.

Of course this was back in the day when gas prices were really low.
 
2012-07-30 05:58:49 AM  

cman: Repete


Oh FFS

Wrong am I indeed
 
2012-07-30 06:04:38 AM  

cman: cman: Repete

Oh FFS

Wrong am I indeed


Don't worry. You won't be the only one to say that.
 
2012-07-30 06:05:43 AM  

Bathia_Mapes: cman: cman: Repete

Oh FFS

Wrong am I indeed

Don't worry. You won't be the only one to say that.


Too damn similar to the other thread. Has same source and all.
 
2012-07-30 06:19:56 AM  

cman: Bathia_Mapes: cman: cman: Repete

Oh FFS

Wrong am I indeed

Don't worry. You won't be the only one to say that.

Too damn similar to the other thread. Has same source and all.


True, but that thread was about Oregon's liquor sales increasing because of Washington's privatization. This thread is about it happening in Idaho as well due to the same reason, which is why it's tagged "followup".
 
2012-07-30 06:21:16 AM  

Bathia_Mapes: cman: Bathia_Mapes: cman: cman: Repete

Oh FFS

Wrong am I indeed

Don't worry. You won't be the only one to say that.

Too damn similar to the other thread. Has same source and all.

True, but that thread was about Oregon's liquor sales increasing because of Washington's privatization. This thread is about it happening in Idaho as well due to the same reason, which is why it's tagged "followup".


Can we just all agree that I am a moron and let it be that?
 
2012-07-30 06:26:48 AM  

cman: Bathia_Mapes: cman: Bathia_Mapes: cman: cman: Repete

Oh FFS

Wrong am I indeed

Don't worry. You won't be the only one to say that.

Too damn similar to the other thread. Has same source and all.

True, but that thread was about Oregon's liquor sales increasing because of Washington's privatization. This thread is about it happening in Idaho as well due to the same reason, which is why it's tagged "followup".

Can we just all agree that I am a moron and let it be that?


That was never in dispute.

/sorry, had to
 
2012-07-30 07:29:48 AM  
All the people who voted in favor of this owe me the difference it added to my liquor bill. If you defend it with "how could I have known" or "the free market will correct it" you owe me double.

The "no on 1183" saw this coming and we warned you, but we were outshouted by Costco's ads, and most of all by the public being an idiot when it comes to actually reading what it votes for.

So .. If you voted in favor of 1183, you owe me the difference in my typical monthly booze bill, $50 should cover it, since now I have to drive to Bellevue (22 mi round trip) to get what I used to get in my State Store 1/2 mi away.

// Laphroaig 750 ML from $54 ($49 on sale) to $73 "on sale" without taxes applied. Balvenie Caribbean Cask was $57, now $79. Other results typical.

/// The occasional sale on crap like Crown Royal is more than offset by the massive bump in taxes built in to the new pricing tiers, so once in a great while you save $5 on a large bottle of low end booze, but over all things are 20%, 30% higher than what we were paying once all the taxes are included.
 
2012-07-30 07:30:36 AM  
I don't know about Washington, but the Bama state stores charge farking $40 a fifth for Maker's. Which you can get in Atlanta for $23.
 
2012-07-30 07:31:10 AM  

Bathia_Mapes: True, but that thread was about Oregon's liquor sales increasing because of Washington's privatization. This thread is about it happening in Idaho as well due to the same reason, which is why it's tagged "followup".


Next it'll be Canada.
 
2012-07-30 07:35:21 AM  

Bathia_Mapes: True, but that thread was about Oregon's liquor sales increasing because of Washington's privatization. This thread is about it happening in Idaho as well due to the same reason, which is why it's tagged "followup".


Still, though. Wouldn't it be easier to just link to that thread, or do we have to copy and paste all our posts from it?
 
2012-07-30 07:36:50 AM  
Why are any states selling alcohol?

Does the state run a monopoly on cigarettes also?

WTF people. The government has no place in producing goods for sale to consumers. Yet you people seem to think the gobment selling booze instead of private companies a good thing.

No thank you. And also wtf is gobment jacking up taxes on boozes in wash. Oh yeah because its a cash grab just like all this other horse shiat that is going on. The gobment wont moderate its spending so it will just keep taking. Ive almost had enough.
 
2012-07-30 07:42:25 AM  

Generation_D: or "the free market will correct it" you owe me double.


Um, does this look like a "free market" to you?
 
2012-07-30 07:42:32 AM  

zippyZRX: Why are any states selling alcohol?

Does the state run a monopoly on cigarettes also?

WTF people. The government has no place in producing goods for sale to consumers. Yet you people seem to think the gobment selling booze instead of private companies a good thing.

No thank you. And also wtf is gobment jacking up taxes on boozes in wash. Oh yeah because its a cash grab just like all this other horse shiat that is going on. The gobment wont moderate its spending so it will just keep taking. Ive almost had enough.


Um, can you point to anyone who's saying this?
 
2012-07-30 07:43:04 AM  

AbbeySomeone: The consequences are predictable.


And they will never be the same
 
2012-07-30 07:44:18 AM  
Hmm, it is like running a 100-yard dash and setting the starting blocks back 27 yards. This is obviously the fault of private companies.
 
2012-07-30 07:44:25 AM  

Generation_D: All the people who voted in favor of this owe me the difference it added to my liquor bill. If you defend it with "how could I have known" or "the free market will correct it" you owe me double.

The "no on 1183" saw this coming and we warned you, but we were outshouted by Costco's ads, and most of all by the public being an idiot when it comes to actually reading what it votes for.

So .. If you voted in favor of 1183, you owe me the difference in my typical monthly booze bill, $50 should cover it, since now I have to drive to Bellevue (22 mi round trip) to get what I used to get in my State Store 1/2 mi away.

// Laphroaig 750 ML from $54 ($49 on sale) to $73 "on sale" without taxes applied. Balvenie Caribbean Cask was $57, now $79. Other results typical.

/// The occasional sale on crap like Crown Royal is more than offset by the massive bump in taxes built in to the new pricing tiers, so once in a great while you save $5 on a large bottle of low end booze, but over all things are 20%, 30% higher than what we were paying once all the taxes are included.


Let's do a carpool to PDX instead of another Fark party. Rent a van, we'll hit a few strip clubs, food carts, liquor store and Powell Books. Smokes are cheaper as well.
 
2012-07-30 07:46:19 AM  

zippyZRX: Why are any states selling alcohol?

Does the state run a monopoly on cigarettes also?

WTF people. The government has no place in producing goods for sale to consumers. Yet you people seem to think the gobment selling booze instead of private companies a good thing.

No thank you. And also wtf is gobment jacking up taxes on boozes in wash. Oh yeah because its a cash grab just like all this other horse shiat that is going on. The gobment wont moderate its spending so it will just keep taking. Ive almost had enough.


And here we have exhibit A for why a massive tax hike was passed in Washington State: The blithering free market forum poster.

Yes, there is certainly an argument to be made for the state not running liquor stores.

No, that does not give people like you license to assume the replacement, sight unseen or unresearched, will be better.

Also, WTF, most state store systems have been in place since the 1930s, who suddenly woke up the masses of John Galt fellating forum trolls into this army of righteous indignation? The state licenses and sanctions booze sales. Some states also require it be sold in special little stores. There's negatives with that, but as we just found out in Washington State, plenty of positives as well.

// Never thought I'd defend the state stores, but the replacement system we got has been so far worse for anyone but the absolutely lowest end consumer. Which is to say most people that respond to things like "the free market is superior" without researching how it is being structured and set up. All markets have rules. The rules we got put more cost into a free market than we paid in the old way.
 
2012-07-30 07:51:30 AM  

AbbeySomeone: Generation_D: All the people who voted in favor of this owe me the difference it added to my liquor bill. If you defend it with "how could I have known" or "the free market will correct it" you owe me double.

The "no on 1183" saw this coming and we warned you, but we were outshouted by Costco's ads, and most of all by the public being an idiot when it comes to actually reading what it votes for.

So .. If you voted in favor of 1183, you owe me the difference in my typical monthly booze bill, $50 should cover it, since now I have to drive to Bellevue (22 mi round trip) to get what I used to get in my State Store 1/2 mi away.

// Laphroaig 750 ML from $54 ($49 on sale) to $73 "on sale" without taxes applied. Balvenie Caribbean Cask was $57, now $79. Other results typical.

/// The occasional sale on crap like Crown Royal is more than offset by the massive bump in taxes built in to the new pricing tiers, so once in a great while you save $5 on a large bottle of low end booze, but over all things are 20%, 30% higher than what we were paying once all the taxes are included.

Let's do a carpool to PDX instead of another Fark party. Rent a van, we'll hit a few strip clubs, food carts, liquor store and Powell Books. Smokes are cheaper as well.



I doubt the wife would be in, but hey anything that saves a few bucks on booze.
 
2012-07-30 07:53:21 AM  
At least this seems a little better thought out than the dry counties we have here in Texas. They do not allow the sale of liquor at all, depriving themselves of ALL revenue related to it's sale but they lack any mechanism to keep booze purchased in adjoining counties out so they still get to deal with / pay for all possible downsides of it's consumption. County lines on major roads are easy to spot becuase they are lined with liquor stores on one side.

This is still pretty stupid but all things are relative when it comes to voter-approved measures, I suppose.
 
2012-07-30 08:03:07 AM  

Bathia_Mapes: because of Washington's privatization.


And not the crazy high taxes. Yeah, um no.
 
2012-07-30 08:05:21 AM  

Generation_D:

Also, WTF, most state store systems have been in place since the 1930s, who suddenly woke up the masses of John Galt fellating forum trolls into this army of righteous indignation? The state licenses and sanctions booze sales. Some states also require it be sold in special little stores. There's negatives with that, but as we just found out in Washington State, plenty of positives as well.


So the state farks you, then double farks you when they were supposed to stop farking you, and you say "Boy things were POSITIVE back when I was only getting half farked. Godamn free market."

Oh well, you guys did the right thing. Now that the law allows private sales, everyone can biatch for them to lower the tax rate, and with any luck in a few years your system will be more normalized.

I really hated moving to virginia from georgia... state run stores in VA. Way smaller, way less selection, and more expensive. Awesome...
 
2012-07-30 08:06:03 AM  

zippyZRX: Yet you people seem to think the gobment selling booze instead of private companies a good thing.


who thinks that?
 
2012-07-30 08:06:46 AM  

Dancin_In_Anson: Bathia_Mapes: because of Washington's privatization.

And not the crazy high taxes. Yeah, um no.


28% is ridiculous. It should be 9.75 like beer and wine.
 
2012-07-30 08:07:02 AM  

zippyZRX: Why are any states selling alcohol?

Does the state run a monopoly on cigarettes also?

WTF people. The government has no place in producing goods for sale to consumers. Yet you people seem to think the gobment selling booze instead of private companies a good thing.

No thank you. And also wtf is gobment jacking up taxes on boozes in wash. Oh yeah because its a cash grab just like all this other horse shiat that is going on. The gobment wont moderate its spending so it will just keep taking. Ive almost had enough.


It's about taxes. For cigarettes the goods are pretty much indistinguishable so the state just sells the manufacturers tax stamps on a per-pack basis. For booze this obviously doesn't work due to the variety of different products so the state runs a warehouse where all the booze is bonded before going out to distributors or wholesalers (depending on the state). This might not be universal but it's definitely the most common model.
 
2012-07-30 08:09:47 AM  
So, it's the private companies' fault that they can't set lower prices with massive government taxes than the government can without taxing itself?

Weird.

AS a side note, I'd ask when the government will learn that placing massive taxes to profit from behavior doesn't work because the taxes themselves reduce the behavior itself, but the better question is "When do governments learn?"
 
2012-07-30 08:13:56 AM  
Washington privatized its liquor market but added a 10 percent distributor fee and a 17 percent retail fee to replace money the state lost when it shut down its state-run liquor stores.

I'll bet that the 6.5% sales tax is also calculated on the full amount, so you get to pay sales tax on these fees. I can hardly wait for some idiot to start proclaiming that Washington State's liquor stores "prove" that privatization doesn't work.

/Punitive taxation doesn't work.
 
2012-07-30 08:15:53 AM  
This is similar (from a tax revenue perspective) to what happened in SC about 15 years ago. The state government allowed video poker and reaped huge revenues from it. Then they outlawed it on moral grounds. Then the state lost all of that delicious video poker revenue and everybody shiat themselves.

Or, consider GA versus FL. FL charges no state income tax, whereas GA charges 6%. People are buying houses in FL and making it their primary residence to save that $6,000 on every $100k they earn. The result is that the highest income earners are leaving GA and taking their tax revenue with them.

States are in competition for revenue. And the losers in the fight are the lower income people. People with means can afford to avoid the taxes. Go, go government!
 
2012-07-30 08:19:32 AM  
Socialized alcohol never works.
 
2012-07-30 08:19:47 AM  

zippyZRX: WTF people. The government has no place in producing goods for sale to consumers. Yet you people seem to think the gobment selling booze instead of private companies a good thing.


So, they closed the state owned distilleries and breweries as well? That sucks.

Ha Ha Washington, learn that privatization of anything means you will pay more, yachts for CEOs don't buy themselves. LOL

Give it a decade, they are hellbent on privatizing everything from education to roads. And the corporate swine have a veritable army, made up of their future victims, ready to fight for their right to get farked in the arse.
 
2012-07-30 08:21:17 AM  

Cybernetic: Washington privatized its liquor market but added a 10 percent distributor fee and a 17 percent retail fee to replace money the state lost when it shut down its state-run liquor stores.

I'll bet that the 6.5% sales tax is also calculated on the full amount, so you get to pay sales tax on these fees. I can hardly wait for some idiot to start proclaiming that Washington State's liquor stores "prove" that privatization doesn't work.

/Punitive taxation doesn't work.


In Maryland it's a proven fact that you can use a tax both to discourage unwanted behavior and bring in massive revenhe from it. It's a free lunch!
 
2012-07-30 08:21:39 AM  

Captain_Ballbeard: zippyZRX: WTF people. The government has no place in producing goods for sale to consumers. Yet you people seem to think the gobment selling booze instead of private companies a good thing.


So, they closed the state owned distilleries and breweries as well? That sucks.

Ha Ha Washington, learn that privatization of anything means you will pay more, yachts for CEOs don't buy themselves. LOL

Give it a decade, they are hellbent on privatizing everything from education to roads. And the corporate swine have a veritable army, made up of their future victims, ready to fight for their right to get farked in the arse.


Did you read the article?
 
2012-07-30 08:28:12 AM  

steelkidney: So, it's the private companies' fault that they can't set lower prices with massive government taxes than the government can without taxing itself?

Weird.

AS a side note, I'd ask when the government will learn that placing massive taxes to profit from behavior doesn't work because the taxes themselves reduce the behavior itself, but the better question is "When do governments learn?"


I've always heard the opposite - placing massive taxes to reduce a behavior doesn't work because the government becomes dependent on those taxes, and will tend to avoid eradicating the behavior.

(for example, the tobacco industry)
 
2012-07-30 08:28:27 AM  
REPEAT
 
2012-07-30 08:30:06 AM  

Cybernetic: Washington privatized its liquor market but added a 10 percent distributor fee and a 17 percent retail fee to replace money the state lost when it shut down its state-run liquor stores.

I'll bet that the 6.5% sales tax is also calculated on the full amount, so you get to pay sales tax on these fees. I can hardly wait for some idiot to start proclaiming that Washington State's liquor stores "prove" that privatization doesn't work.

/Punitive taxation doesn't work.


Washington may be liberal with respect to many policies, but in reguards to taxes we're pretty much maximally regressive. It's a great state to be rich in, a bad state to be poor in. That this "fark you, I got mine" revenue structure carries over to liquor shouldn't really be seen as a surprise. That it discourages the behavior and diminishes the marginal happiness of lower income people disproportunately is seen as a net benefit. Weirdly, those who are best off in Washington often lead the charge to change this regressive structure; but the bootstrappy peasant class usially beats them back.
 
2012-07-30 08:34:00 AM  

Cybernetic: Washington privatized its liquor market but added a 10 percent distributor fee and a 17 percent retail fee to replace money the state lost when it shut down its state-run liquor stores.

I'll bet that the 6.5% sales tax is also calculated on the full amount, so you get to pay sales tax on these fees. I can hardly wait for some idiot to start proclaiming that Washington State's liquor stores "prove" that privatization doesn't work.

/Punitive taxation doesn't work.


The tax on retail booze is 20.5% paid at the register in addition to the sales tax, which varies by county and city. The sales tax is only on the sticker price. We also pay a per liter tax of $3.7708, also taken at the register. A 750 ml bottle of cheap vodka priced at $11.95 on the shelf costs nearly $19 at checkout.

And I agree about the punitive taxation. I just stopped buying liquor here. I'll only buy it if I'm in Oregon for some other reason.
 
2012-07-30 08:39:34 AM  

Dancin_In_Anson: Bathia_Mapes: because of Washington's privatization.

And not the crazy high taxes. Yeah, um no.


I never argued anti privatization. I am arguing that the form of privatization we got was obviously going to be worse than before in terms of cost on most items, and in terms of variety obtainable (we don't really have competition on the wholesale side, just 2 large out of state wholesalers who are already price fixing)

People didn't care, people voted "free market" without looking at the fine print. Now some of those same people are "lalalala I can't hear you" when evidence is presented their vote was a mistake.

Calling something a "Free" market does not automatically make it lower cost. It just says there's different rules in play. Those rules can still be massively set up to jack up costs. I feel like I'm arguing against religion in church trying to explain it though.
 
2012-07-30 08:41:58 AM  
added a 10 percent distributor fee and a 17 percent retail fee

So government adding 27% in fees to a product is privatization? Who knew? They should privatize food sales next to boost sales.
 
2012-07-30 08:43:02 AM  

Tickle Mittens: Washington may be liberal with respect to many policies, but in reguards to taxes we're pretty much maximally regressive


Is this some kind of talking point? How is Washington state maximally regressive?

I remember reading about the lack of state income tax, and how Washington state was screwed because home valuations fluctuated, leading the state to have to (OMFG *gasp*) deal with fluctuations in the gravy train. If only the state taxed income, which is a more dependable source of revenue than those nasty moving property valuations, Washington would be in good shape.

Here in California, people are griping about the low rate at which property is taxed because of Prop 13. If only the state could generate more property tax revenue, we wouldn't have so many budget fluctuations due to those nasty income levels going up and down, since property values are more stable over time.

/if only the state could keep increasing taxes forever, there wouldn't be any state budget problems!
 
2012-07-30 08:43:49 AM  
So basically everything the anti-privatization people said was going to happen is happening.
 
2012-07-30 08:44:51 AM  
Crying won't help you
Crying won't do you no good
When the levee breaks
Mama you got to move.

I don't know. That's what came to mind. To drown out the thoughts of liberals blaming privatization and conservatives blaming taxes
 
2012-07-30 08:46:21 AM  
Washington privatized its liquor market but added a 10 percent distributor fee and a 17 percent retail fee to replace money the state lost when it shut down its state-run liquor stores.

Even if that covers all store owners taxes (and I'll bet it doesn't), I find it just a tad hard to believe the state was making that much profit after expenses before. This isn't about replacing lost revenue, it's about trying to make more.

Privatization of government services is an argument for another thread, this is simply nothing more than an attempted cash grab by the state
 
2012-07-30 08:46:36 AM  

Generation_D: Calling something a "Free" market does not automatically make it lower cost.


It also doesn't automatically actually make it the free market.
 
2012-07-30 08:55:46 AM  
Too bad Washington State is so tax happy. But it's about time you alcoholics started paying your fair share.
 
2012-07-30 09:03:51 AM  
Why would anybody be surprised that another right wing crackpot economic idea failed ? Look at privitization of electric utilities in the DC area a few years back. The first rate increase after privitization was 72%.

When you debate conservatives you debate failed ideas. The proper way to treat a failure is to ignore them. Not to pretend that they have a credible alternative idea.
 
2012-07-30 09:09:44 AM  
So why are costs now higher under privatized sales?

/makes no sense to me
//unless they kept everyone on the state payroll
 
2012-07-30 09:09:49 AM  

Benjimin_Dover: added a 10 percent distributor fee and a 17 percent retail fee

So government adding 27% in fees to a product is privatization? Who knew? They should privatize food sales next to boost sales.


The educated and sober voters of washington state did, apparently.
 
Displayed 50 of 144 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report