State of Washington plans to build more liquor stores. Do you care?
Well, when this very story ran in the Seattle Times two weeks ago, plenty of you did.
The objection (oddly enough) was not that the State needed to raise more money to cover a gaping shortfall, it was that folks were really re-visiting the nasty notion that the State is in the hard booze business... alone. The hypocrisy here is that the State, for decades, has played the "control of consumption" card to protect all of us from the evils of over-indulgence. Then they announce plans to bring more liquor to the people. More booze bought by more people equals more money. I'm no economics major here, but I'm getting the idea that the State would like to sell more alcohol. Which brings me to this next terrible idea...
Think of this for a second, what if you could only buy a car at a state-controlled car dealership?
State-ran grocery store? What if Home Depot or Lowes were operated by the State. Think of yourself wanting to start a business selling home improvement supplies, lumber, tools and lawn and garden equipment and being told "No!". You couldn't enter that business because the State had a monopoly on it. A monopoly. That's right, the same practice that gets Microsoft in trouble and hauled off to court every other week.
How does Washington remain in this position of control when in other states you and I can walk into a Walgreens, Safeway or Costco and buy a bottle of whiskey or rum? The practice excludes private enterprise. How is this allowed? To my knowledge, Indian tribes can sell hard liquor from stores that resemble convenience stores. So they can run them but, non-tribal... forget it. I'd like someone to fill me in on how we got here and why this practice is tolerated.
The picture above is from a grandfatherly gentleman I met at a winery in New Zealand in the late eighties. As you can see, he's self-serving his jug.
A far cry from what I've discussed above.
To fill your own bottle of wine, beer or whiskey from a vat or cask and go home... if only we could.
No comments:
Post a Comment