Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

Tag: liquor sales

Jan.
26th

FIRCREST: Let voters decide on liquor sales

It is disheartening to see state Sen. Steve O’Ban and other Pierce County legislators propose to take power from Fircrest voters (TNT, 1-26). Under his proposal, voters could no longer decide whether Fircrest should be wet or dry.

Personally, I would probably favor allowing citywide sale of liquor by the glass. However, state legislators and City Council members should not team up to strip the vote from Fircrest citizens. Legislators should not accommodate the chronic difficulties some Fircrest officials have in convincing Fircrest’s citizens of good policy.

Not long ago, the Fircrest City Council attempted special treatment so Wal-Mart

Read more »

Dec.
10th

LIQUOR: Mom-and-pop stores are suffering the hangover

Re: “The liquor store hangover” (TNT, 12-9).

The front-page article depicts the hangover the state of Washington, Safeway, Walmart, etc., along with the liquor distributors, have inflicted on the mom-and-pop liquor retail business.

Granted the new owners should have known about all the fees associated with buying into this business of liquor sales, but that alone is no excuse for the crippling taxes laid on those who don’t have the resources big retailers enjoy. The article notes that Oregon is reaping substantially from our state’s overly regressive and oppressive tax system on booze.

Putting the squeeze on the mom-and-pop

Read more »

June
11th

LIQUOR: Convenience worth the higher price

Now that private retail stores are selling liquor, people are squawking about the prices. There are those who say that if they had known that the price of booze (at least, their particular brand) was going to increase they would have voted against privatization.

Come on, folks; it was really never about the pricing for me (although oddly enough, my favorite brand decreased), it has always been about the ability to buy liquor without having to drive several miles and play “beat the clock” with the state-controlled stores.

So you have to pay a few bucks more. At least now

Read more »

June
6th

LIQUOR: Passage of I-1183 a good thing

Contrary to the view expressed by a News Tribune editorial (6-5), voters did not make a mistake when they voted for Initiative 1183.

It is the purpose of government to accomplish things for the public welfare that cannot be done well by the private sector. Retailing of alcoholic beverages (or any other commodity) can, and normally is, done effectively by the private sector. Generally, in fact, the private sector tends to be highly competitive in performing the retailing function, leading to consumer convenience; a myriad of purchase options; and moderate, competitive pricing.

With the passage of I-1183, purchasing of

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: Confusion all too understandable

I’ve heard a lot of complaints about the consequences of Initiative 1183 thus far – a high price on liquor at chain stores, especially.

Many ask: Well, what did you expect? Reflecting on this point, though, how could people know? I’m 19, a very recent voter, and I spend hours pouring over arguments from both sides on almost every proposal and trying to decipher the grossly complicated language. It’s like studying for finals.

Seriously, who has the time to do this? Who has the resources?

I do believe this was a major failing on the voters’ part, but it’s indicative

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 »