British Columbia - the future home of higher liquor prices - petition to save the LDB
 

BCGEU - Don't Drop Public Liquor

a friend of mine showed me this interesting article

most people i talked to thought that liquor prices will go down if we privatize but they are WRONG it will go UP

petition to save the LDB and keep our liquor prices the way they are

Petition Don't Drop Public Liquor - Stop the privatization of LDB



http://i49.tinypic.com/w2f49t.jpg

signed.

signed

Yeah, because all these "facts" aren't biased AT ALL. If the LDB is privatized, guess whose members' jobs are at risk? The BCGEU has a vested interest in scaring people about privatization.

How about this: if you're REALLY concerned about the high price of liquor, go after the government to knock down the FUCKLOAD of taxes they pile on everything. A bottle of Yellow Tail that costs $18 here can be had at Fred Meyer - right, in the grocery store! - in Bellingham for $5. What's the difference? Duties and taxes. A lot of which no doubt goes to exorbitant BCGEU salaries.

That's a very poorly written petition and some of the information seems incorrect.

Prices are cheaper in Alberta, even taking tax into account. If you go to http://www.liquorstoresna.ca/ and compare the BC and Alberta flyers; cheaper across the board from beer to hard booze.

Smaller liquor stores have to compete with the big ones like liquor depot so prices are often below the ones in these flyers, making for options for consumers.

Looks like some disgruntled employee has started a campaign.

EDIT- link fixed.

Yellow Tail is $18 in BC? The chardonnay is like 12 bucks here.

Seems kind of wrong to connect profits from booze to funding for services and putting words like schools, hospital, kids on the beer bottle.

Attachment 12250

Taxes and fees pile on a fuckton; but to be fair if the gov't wanted to really benefit by saving everyone money, they should keep the existing distribution and simply offer a privatized takeover.

As it stands, BC gets some of the best selection in terms of liquors and (relatively speaking) fair prices. I do think that some of the stuff is completely out of whack though. Like the fact that beer is so ridiculously expensive, and yet my dad's friend (who is a wine collector) will easily spend $10-25000 a year on wines here...because the LDB refuses to put a market price on it and will instead simply put on their standard markup.

Signed and also emailed MLA Coleman.

Prices for alcohol in Canada will always be more than in the US, even with a fully privatized distribution and retail system.

Sure - your mass-market swine like Molson Canadian, Yellowtail Shiraz, and Smirnoff Vodka is cheaper in Alberta, but the niche stuff is just as expensive as it is here, if not more. If you live in a small community say in the interior or up north, having a government distributor and retailer does ensure that you get a decent selection of product that you wouldn't necessarily get in a fully private system.

Sure, it's a bit of an ethical stretch, but these days, how do we fund social programs? No one wants to pay more sales tax, more property tax, or user fees. And why shouldn't the public profit from alcoholism? After all, we still have government health insurance.

Sin taxes make a lot of sense.

Someone please give a 411 on how our liquor system works...
Public or private owned...it doesn't matter cause the government has the final say with the taxes they apply on it.

It's an election year! I'm loving all the empty, impractical promises the government is making in a desperate attempt to maintain a grip on power!

It's a well recognized fallacy to evoke funding to schools, hospitals, kids or some other morally stimulating appeal as part of an argument; the fact remains however, cut $890 million of revenue and either services will need to be reduced or it will need to be collected through some other means - neither of which the large majority of British Columbians are willing to accept. If British Columbians were really, really adamant that liquor prices need to be decreased, the better solution, I suggest, would be slashing the governments markups by 50% or more, thereby reducing costs but maintaining the revenue stream.

The government maintains a monopoly on the distribution of liquor in the province, much like ICBC. Although restaurants, bars, private stores sell liquor, they buy it from the government.

Not an employee - the BC Government Employees Union... the union that represents the liquor store employees. Privatization could potentially mean the loss of some of their members' jobs... so of course they're against it and will say anything they can come up with to scare people about it.

The BC LDB controls the distribution and also acts as a retailer. Restaurants, bars, and private stores either have to buy their liquor from BC LDB, or if they choose to import specialty products that BC Liquor does not carry, they have to give a cut to the BC LDB.

Almost every private store in BC gets a licensee discount of about 17%. There are a few licensees who have a 30% discount, but there are literally only a handful of them in the province and they have been grandfathered as a result of Expo '86. So the next time you walk into a private store and complain about the prices compared to BC Liquor, remember that most stores literally operate on a margin of 20-30% which isn't a lot.

Yes, of course its biased. Those who follow my rants know me to lean conservative(which means liberal in prov. politics) and even I have to say this is starting to stink.

I do NOT like that they are equating privatization to ripping food off the homeless people's cardboard tables, as that is effectively OUR money and I really wish those in government would use that term, recognize it and own it. It's basically like saying "but we NEED to take your money so we can give it back to you!"

I'm really left with the fundamental idea that the liberals know they are sunk, are going to be out for awhile, so they are trying to pay back any outstanding favors now, because they won't have a chance for the next 8ish years.

I would like to hear that Clark's intentions are to stay as the leader of the opposition in the event of an election loss. That would at least show commitment.

I hate those evil unions... they're all commies I tell ya!

It's an intelligent persons' responsibility to evaluate the facts presented in any argument presented to them, because in truth, almost every argument is presented with a degree of bias. Some of what the BCGEU says will hold water, some of it will not, but it would be tough to find an institution on either side of the debate presenting a completely unbiased position.

By attacking the Union, when you should be attacking the facts it presents, you're no better than they are for creating the silly beer bottle thing.

I don't necessarily agree with the system that it's place right now, but you're saying that you'd be willing to throw away economies of scale just so that you have control over your money and pay more for a good or service?

There's an entire economy built around the current system of distribution and retailing. So you'd be willing to rip it apart and probably end up paying more for a bottle of say Central City Imperial IPA? But, hey, I'll save a toonie on my 26 of Absolut Vodka!

Oh...here's a general overview

Right now, everything is done 'in-house' meaning the gov't sets pricing, hires workers, assumes risk and owns/operates warehousing and stores.

Of course, being gov't, everyone is unioned up the asshole.

Now, to privatize, you simply start removing pieces from that(very general) equation. So you can sell off stores. Or you can sell off warehousing and distribution. Or both. In that case, a private company takes on the risk, hires their workers and in turn buys/leases the facilities.

Now...if you buy from the same places, and have the same size facilities and have the same number of customers then you pay the same whether you are a private company or gov't or just little old me. Even more, if the gov't says that in the privatization deal, they will get the same money out regardless...then we have a problem. As a guy that has studied and worked in supply chain, there are only so many 'inefficiencies" you can squeeze out of a warehouse.

So ALL of this comes down to:

"being gov't, everyone is unioned up the asshole."

That's the piece of the equation that this whole thing is about. Replace $30/hr with $10/hr...there's your profit. The government kicks out some of the unionized workforce and replaces with no pension/minimal benefits people that don't get themselves on the news come contract negotiation and election time.

Now-I'm evil. I don't really give a fuck. One less union to worry about. Hell, I say throw the fucking stores in there too and be done with it.

But I just want someone to be honest about the whole thing instead of sugar coating it.

BUT...this whole thing has back room written all over it and that is where prices end up going up, and not down-because we shook hands on it long before it was ever public.

This will probably line up nicely in the BC Rail/HST chapter of the liberal handbook, "Lies:Past, Present and Future"

As has been stated in previous posts, unionized government liquor store employees now earn a very reasonable starting wage instead of the exorbitant one they once did. Unionized labour is not evil, it's just a different approach to business and has the capability of being an exceptionally efficient one. Costco is the quintessential example of a very efficient, profitable business with well compensated unionized employees.

Go across the broader and check the prices of hard liquor. It's not cheap Washington after they privatized the system. People are now going to Oregon to buy liquor.

A 1.75-liter bottle of vodka $46.35 in Washington.

its obvious price would go up.... why would they think otherwise...


hell striking example WA state

I just believe it's retarded to sell-off a revenue generating entity. It's like selling off an egg-laying chicken to pay for a few dozen pieces of chicken nuggets. What's the potential revenue lost by doing this? It's not a risky business. Alcohol will always be in constant demand. Speaking of which, Grolsh tallboys, at BCL, are on clearance for $2.10!

they privatize to appease their corporate buddies who slip them some change and then offer them a nice paying job when/if they're done their political stint

its how its always been that's why the conservatives want to get rid of health care

its why they privatized the oil industry

:rant:rant:rant

Two recent articles on the issues that have arisen post-abandoning the public system in Washington state.

I believe the demise of the public liquor distribution system in Washington State is a result of short sighted voters not carefully considering the consequences of privatization, instead blindly hoping for some moderate benefit and voting as such. I'm concerned that British Columbian voters will do the same and support this move, both because of some of the comments in this thread and precedence. Don't form your opinion on public liquor based on preexisting political allegiances, do your own due diligence. Regardless of the Union involved, the current system has nice and plentiful stores, great selection, decent prices on most things, and is a huge tax benefit to all of us.

BCGEU gave strike notice today over wage disputes :p