Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

Tag: Costco

June
7th

LETTERS: Writers get it right and wrong

The writer who complained about “the tyranny of a tax-happy government” (letter, 6-6) should remember that those taxes that the rich don’t pay and the corporations don’t pay are ones the rest of us have to pay.

If you want police, firefighters and good roads, taxes have to be paid. If the rich get richer and don’t pay their fair share of taxes and the corporations get tax breaks or take their profits off-shore, that means the rest of us have to make up the difference.

The letter writer (TNT, 6-6) who complained that “those who write initiatives

Read more »

June
5th

LIQUOR: Thanks, Costco, for hurting families

Re: “Where’s concern for the employees?” (letter, 6-5).

Kudos to Wendy Weidman for giving a voice to the ex-liquor employees. To some, 900 may not seem like a large number, but it”s 900 families who now have to struggle even more.

My son-in-law is one of the 900 who lost his job. He and his wife work hard to raise their three sons. These employees not only lost a valuable source of income but now must struggle further to meet their basic needs to survive. Unemployment will help, which by the way is also taxed as income, but how

Read more »

June
4th

LIQUOR: Tax isn’t the only difference

I realized that the new retail liquor system was going to continue our paying the highest liquor taxes around. I was not prepared for the retailers to climb on board the rip-off approach so quickly.

Here’s what I don’t understand: According to your article, Costco’s “shelf price” for a 1.75 liter bottle of Maker’s Mark here is about $46. When taxes are added, that price increases to around $62 – close to the old state liquor store price and all because of taxes, right? Then why is it that Costco charges about $33 for the same bottle in its California

Read more »

June
4th

LIQUOR: Electorate swallowed corporate swill

We in Tacoma are lucky. Why? Two reasons: 1. Our liquor system was recently privatized, and 2. The News Tribune printed a letter to the editor from a disgruntled voter.

Rarely do such events combine to make such a timely point, and that point is this: Those who swallow the swill of corporate advertising are bound to end up choking on it.

The letter writer showed his obvious lack of research by bemoaning the taxes that were so clearly stated in the initiative he supported – the initiative written and financed by corporate interests.

Let this be a warning

Read more »

June
4th

LIQUOR: Blame Costco, not the state

The recent letters complaining about the new liquor prices once again demonstrate the level of ignorance among the citizens of this state. Anyone pointing a finger at the  state of Washington for being “greedy” or “deceptive” obviously has no clue as how an initiative works.

The state does not and cannot write an initiative. That process is exclusively reserved for “the people.” Unfortunately big corporations such as Costco can take advantage of the process by deceiving the public through distorting the truth and outright lies. Anyone who visited Costco and questioned the signature gatherers knows they were told the prices

Read more »

Nov.
15th

COSTCO: Advocate for consumers?

I got a good chuckle out of Robert Mak’s K5 News Up Front interview with the Costco CEO. The Costco CEO stated, “it wasn’t for profit” but that Costco was an “advocate for consumers.” Is he trying to make us believe that Costco spent $22 million to “advocate for consumers” just so consumers can buy more liquor? Once again, the 99 percent was duped by corporate greed. How sad.

Nov.
4th

I-1183: A winner for the consumer

Initiative 1183 has become a contest of misinformation. The initiative has desirable objectives:

• Ending the state’s monopoly over the sale of liquor and providing a private sector market-driven approach.

• Reducing the state-imposed minimal price increase of 40 to 50 percent to a minimum private sector increase of 27 percent.

• Providing state and local governments with increased revenues that they can use for priority purposes.

The initiative sets 10,000 square feet as the minimum for liquor-selling private sector stores and allows the state Liquor Control Board to provide licenses to smaller stores where the board determines there is

Read more »