Thanks Privatizers...

[Uncensored2008]

Why isn't he advocating for gov't to take over every industry if they can do it for cheaper?

I think he is.

Well I guess I'm being unfair, I'm sure given enough time Huggy will do exactly that.

TM has already, why not Huggy?

 

[Dr.Drock]

Why isn't he advocating for gov't to take over every industry if they can do it for cheaper?

I think he is.

Well I guess I'm being unfair, I'm sure given enough time Huggy will do exactly that.

TM has already, why not Huggy?

It's interesting living in a world with a group of people who say we need gov't to make sure we stay healthy by not drinking too much soda, but we need gov't to make alcohol cheaper so we can drink more of it.

(I understand it doesn't make it cheaper, just the position Huggy types take)

 

[Pho_King]

You are a troll that knows less than nothing about Seattle. I was not being dishonest. One of the segments of the local news report had bar owners complaining that they could not buy the varieties of spirits they used to be able to easily purchase from the state owned liquor stores and said they would probably have to increase the prices of drinks by as much as 50%.

I know the history of Costco very well. I mentioned them in the OP because they put in a major portion of the money that "sold" this idea to the public. This will NOT be better for the average citizen. It is just another example of business tricking people into voting against thier own best interests.

PS.. I know Costco did not take non bisiness members in the past because I have applied for membership and because I didn't have a business check at the time I was denied.

You are the one that has his head up his ass.

You decried the privatization as having increased the cost of alcohol 50%. You claimed such an increase had taken place, when no such increase has occurred. You then modifed the claimed results (that have still not happened) to 30%. And claimed that only business owners can purchase from Costco. And not a ******* thing is true.

On top of that, you think that all the residents of Washington ought to subsidize the drinking purchases of the citizens.

Its not trolling to point out your factual errors, dishonest statements, and generally lazy reasoning. I am not sure if you can do better, but I hope you will try.

**** you moron. "I" didn't make the "claims". I provided appropriate links.

"I" don't really give a rat's ass about alcohol...as I rarely drink it. What I care about is big money overwhelming reason and convincing idiots like yourself to vote for things that do not help the community nor save it money.

yes, dumbphuck, YOU did make the claims, which YOU think were backed up by the links provided. And then YOU backtracked on the % of increase (all the while failing to admit that your imaginary inflated numbers could not have possibly come to pass), and then YOU provided false information on Costco, which I refuted, and then back up my refutation with a LINK.

But it all makes sense- your refusal to accept responsibility for the shit-filled ideas you put forth, along with some links that you think back up your retardness, and your desire to have your neighbor assist you with your alcohol costs. You are a baby. And like a baby you are unable to take responsibility for yourself.

 

[Oldstyle]

Washinton State recently voted to privatize liquor sales and get the state out of the liquor buisness.

Results?

A bottle of your favorite hooch costs 50% more.

Availability?... Not so much. State used to stock EVERYTHING.

Private sellers? They only stock the fast movers.

Thanks to you assholes that think privatizing is better.

Did I mention how much I hate you people?

Liquor privatization in Washington state upheld | KING5.com Seattle

I'm interested in how privatization doubled the cost of liquor? In North Carolina, you have to buy liquor through the State run liquor stores and the cost is substantially higher than what you can buy the same liquor for in liquor stores across the border in Virginia. As for availability? The State basically told liquor producers what they were willing to pay for their product for the month and the producer either agreed to that price or that product wasn't sold in North Carolina for a month. They would literally just inform you that Bacardi light rum wasn't available. So what you basically had was the State extorting lower prices out of the producers but not passing those prices on to the citizens of the State. Trust me, if you are a drinker...then North Carolina is NOT your preferred State.