Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

ALCOHOL: Keep the state liquor stores

Letter by Mark E. Olson, Olympia on July 20, 2010 at 2:33 pm with 19 Comments »
July 21, 2010 9:15 am

Large retail companies like Costco would like us to believe that doing away with state liquor stores would save us money. It might save them money but allowing more alcohol into society will almost certainly cost the taxpayers more.

Alberta, Canada, did the same thing some years ago. After a few years of study it was found that there was a significant increase in fetal alcohol syndrome, drukn-driving accidents and mortality as well as a decrease in taxes collected.

Our state liquor stores serve as a curb on demand, if nothing else, and clearly can and probably do benefit our society. Large corporations seem to only exist for short-term gains.

I urge all citizens to weigh their options carefully before eliminating the state liquor stores.

Leave a comment Comments → 19
  1. nokoolaide says:

    What Mark would like us to beleive is that more alcohol sales equals less tax revenue? The truth is the State no longer has the ability to gouge the tax payers with their inflated prices thru their monopoly. Your story does not make sense, and if it doesn’t make sense, its not true.

  2. Mark….why point to Alberta, Canada when there are several American states that got rid of the hold over blue laws from Prohibition.

  3. olypharmer says:

    This letter makes perfect sense & backed by research.Alcohol,B&O and sales taxes are based on percentages.If you decrease dollar volumes you decrease taxes.Fetal alcohol syndrome is real and irreversible as is a drunken driving fatality.

  4. nwcolorist says:

    If there is enough reliable evidence to support the statement that alcohol problems increase with a change to private sales, I would be inclined to vote to keep it as it presently here.

  5. gowenray says:

    Curiously, Mark Olson has failed to point out the most significant example. What happened when the State of California went private?

  6. nokoolaide says:

    Oly, sounds like you would like to ban alcohol altogether. What ever happened to freedom loving Americans? How much do you think it cost the state to pay the rent,, wages and benefits of the thousands of outlets and employees? I also believe you are incorrect on how you think taxes are collected on us sinners? If you search taxes by state, why do they break it down as percentage for sales tax, gallons for gas, pack for cigarettes, gallons for spirts, beer and wine? Either way, Washington State is right at the top for all of them!

  7. Curb demand. Is that part of the state charter for alcohol sales? No. Just another falsehood from the nut bowel.

  8. Mr Olson,
    In New Orleans you can buy alcohol their just like you can coffee here in WA. and when I lived their for few months Their was no more DUI accident there then they are here their was no more child being born with fetal alcohol syndrome then their is here if fact theirs I would believe they are more crack babies here then there are babies there with alcohol problems . I see more people here walking around the street and the mall with coffee here then you see people drinking alcohol there (except for bourbon St which it’s legal) even though they sell it pretty much the same way coffee sold here. Being sold in a state run store doesn’t prevent anything. Beside if watched Steven Segal show on A&E their was not a lot dui stops

  9. donjames says:

    Curiously, the same folks who are against privatizing liquor sales, here, are likely all for legalizing marijuana.

    It is also funny that the writer chose to use Alberta as his example rather than, or at least without mentioning, British Columbia, which also has private liquor stores.

    Cherry picking much?

  10. dj – any evidence to suggest a correlation between anti-privatization and anti-prohibition views? I, for one, am pro-privatization and anti-prohibition.

  11. Flanagan says:

    More than likely, Mark is employed by the state in one of their useless liquor stores. If the stores go, so do his pay check, his medical and his pension.

  12. Here is a way for the state to save money. Privatize the sale of liqour and get the state employees off the books. Now if we could only privatize the Governor.

  13. A good friend’s husband runs a state liquor store. She is anti-privatization and uses the exact same arguments. Me thinks the State is sending out talking points.

    I’d like to know if the State is campaigning in this effort. Shouldn’t they be neutral, letting the citizens campaign and decide?

    Oh, I’d like to see the logic behind how state stores keeps demand down.

  14. modyfied says:

    Lets look on the bright side…. If alchohol is privatized, the state will then find the next vise to tax…State run Marijuana sales! Whoo hoo!

  15. donjames says:

    “dj – any evidence to suggest a correlation between anti-privatization and anti-prohibition views?”

    Nope. Thus the use of the qualifier “likely” in my sentence. But if I were a betting man, I could make a fortune on that bet.

  16. dbreneman says:

    The state should only be providing those services that private concerns cannot. There are plenty of people capable of selling liquor. Let the state concentrate on police, fire and the prevention of fraud.

  17. tubbythetuba says:

    I’m not sure, but I don’t think the state makes any money with booze sales….If they do, keep it….if they don’t, deep six it faster than you would a sticky booger on your finger.

  18. Sumner401 says:

    I fail to see how selling booze in any store, Costco, Fred Meyer or what have you will somehow cause millions more people to drink, let alone drink when they are pregnant.
    Are people really that weak that just seeing a bottle of Gin is going to make them drink it?

  19. ArchieMoore says:

    What a stupid letter!

We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0