Slog
News & ArtsTuesday, November 8, 2011
Booze / Politics / Election Why I'm Never Shopping at Costco Again
Posted by Goldy on Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 11:53 AM
The knee-jerk, government-shouldn't-be-in-the-booze-business crowd will have plenty to drink to when Costco's $22 million Initiative 1183 wins tonight—and it will win, by a comfortable margin—but you booze-hounds are missing the bigger picture: Washington's initiative process is now officially open to the highest corporate bidder.
Yeah, I know, it's been heading in that direction since Tim Eyman first made a lucrative profession of it back in the late 1990s, but I-1183 and last year's Coke & Pepsi sponsored I-1107 mark a turning point in our history when large corporations finally started spending tens of millions of dollars in pursuit of hundreds of millions of dollars in returns. It's great for stockholders, but will ultimately prove to be a disaster for the citizens of Washington state, when corporate interests with unlimited resources dive into the business of directly marketing to voters self-serving policies that could never survive a deliberative legislative process.
But, you know, I'm rational enough to admit defeat. And since we have neither the political will nor skill to reform the initiative process, from here on out it will only get worse. Yet another way in which Washington, politically, is totally fucked.
So enjoy the hundreds of millions of extra dollars Costco will ultimately earn from selling jugs of Kirkland brand vodka in Washington state, Mr. Sinegal, but don't you ever again pretend that you are some sort of responsible corporate citizen, because you're not. And you'll never get another dime of my business again.
2
And just how much did you spend at Costco last year, Goldy?
More to the point - you're telling me that that corporations sponsor self-serving voter initiatives? Or, in the case of our state's liquor wholesalers, sometime self-servingly fight voter initiatives? Heaven forbid!
More to the point - you're telling me that that corporations sponsor self-serving voter initiatives? Or, in the case of our state's liquor wholesalers, sometime self-servingly fight voter initiatives? Heaven forbid!
3
if we had a deliberative legislative process anymore i might be more upset. perhaps it's the initiative process that needs to go.
5
Goldy, I expect you to keep on top of the youth-drinking and DUI stats you used to scare people into voting no, and reporting honestly about what they show, even (and especially) if they do NOT increase.
6
I'm with you, Goldy.
This is an outrageous perversion of Representative Democracy...Oligarchy, American Style.
This is an outrageous perversion of Representative Democracy...Oligarchy, American Style.
7
Yeah, because if liquor distributors had just spent more to defeat 1183, it would have been a triumph of democracy over corporate money.
Geez, Goldy, you're not even trying anymore. "Private liquor sales BAD corporate money!!!", "red light cameras GOOD corporate money!!!", repeat as needed.
At least Mudede is consistent in his nonsense (or so unintelligible it's hard to call him a hypocrite). You've got seemingly random positions that you support with contradictory arguments. I'm embarrassed for you.
Geez, Goldy, you're not even trying anymore. "Private liquor sales BAD corporate money!!!", "red light cameras GOOD corporate money!!!", repeat as needed.
At least Mudede is consistent in his nonsense (or so unintelligible it's hard to call him a hypocrite). You've got seemingly random positions that you support with contradictory arguments. I'm embarrassed for you.
8
Oh please. Whining about money is just what losers do when they can't accept that the voters think differently than they do. Be it Eyman or otherwise.
The problem is not money in politics, it's lazy and stupid voters.
I like 1183 and hate Eyman.
The problem is not money in politics, it's lazy and stupid voters.
I like 1183 and hate Eyman.
10
So you don't like the means used to secure the passage of the initiative. Fine. What about the ends to be achieved? Do you actually have anything to say about the merits of the legislation?
11
Oh, Goldy? This is another example of your laziness. Did you know that we had a school board race here in Denver that attracted over $400k in spending by both sides?
Corporate money is everywhere, and the passage of one initiative in a coastal state that is demographically a flyover state had little, if any, impact in that development.
Corporate money is everywhere, and the passage of one initiative in a coastal state that is demographically a flyover state had little, if any, impact in that development.
13
It's Costco that wrote the state's constitution, right? No? Well, at least they're responsible for the interpretation of the law that got the initiative process to its current broken state, right? No? Well then, how dare anyone or anything use an existing process to further their own interests.
14
The initiative process will ultimately kill us all. I'm sick of people who get worked up about a state initiative but can't name a single one of their representatives in Olympia.
15
there are endless examples, but the initiative process in this state is some of the best evidence to support the conclusion that... american democracy='dead as fucking dead'.*
*in the words of eric stoltz
*in the words of eric stoltz
17
Shit, corporations have *finally* figured out they can influence the political process by throwing gobs of cash at it. This can't be good.
18
Actually, one of my solutions for ending the current wealth imbalance is to try and find Super Luxury Goods that only the rich can afford...and want.
So I have suggested that we openly sell Senate Seats for say, $1B dollars. We'd end up with the same jokers anyway, but this time the money would go back into our pockets.
Same with Initiatives. Make the fee for any Initiatives about, oh, $50 million to $500 million. Make it $1 billion if you want to guarantee it will win. Revenue problem solved.
19
California has had this problem for at least a decade, and maybe two. Votes are absolutely for sale via advertising. If it didn't work, corporations wouldn't spend all of those billions (trillions?) on it.
20
Shame on us for providing such an exploitable political system. Blaming a corporation for making the most of it is like blaming a lion for being "vicious". It is in their nature. We, the people need to take back control of our political system.
From everything I've read, Costco is actually a very good corporate citizen, as far as corporations go, which might not be saying tooo much. I understand that they are very good to their employees, and are union-friendly.
http://www.seattlepi.com/business/articl…
From everything I've read, Costco is actually a very good corporate citizen, as far as corporations go, which might not be saying tooo much. I understand that they are very good to their employees, and are union-friendly.
http://www.seattlepi.com/business/articl…
21
Costco is probably one of the most subjectively ethical places you could shop for most items they carry, especially alcohol and groceries.
Also, we've all heard the rumor from "someone that totally knows" that Kirkland brand vodka is made by Grey Goose, so... there's that, if that's your thing.
Also, we've all heard the rumor from "someone that totally knows" that Kirkland brand vodka is made by Grey Goose, so... there's that, if that's your thing.
22
I'm pretty sure Goldsteinberg is leaving Costco because they stopped carrying those extra small Trojans the boys from Sigma Alpha Mu like.
24
This is taking toys and going home at its worst. I suppose that last time when the distributor monopoly pushed cash into killing non state run liquor, you protested by no longer buying from your local retailer?
Having high moral standards is hard to apply when you watching the outcome of two assholes fighting.
Having high moral standards is hard to apply when you watching the outcome of two assholes fighting.
25
@ 20, don't bother posting facts like that here. Liquor is eeeeeeeeeevviiiiiiiiiilllllllllllllll....
27
The dipshit "No on 1183" people didn't do themselves any favors by running a campaign based on scare tactics and lies.
"FIREFIGHTERS and POLICEMEN say 1183 will GET OUR CHILDREN DRUNK and RAPE THEM and puts us at TOO MUCH RISK of complete ANARCHY and it will also BURN DOWN ORPHANAGES in our VULNERABLE VIRGINAL COMMUNITIES"
Seriously, y'all? You can't campaign against it based on it being a giant cash-grab by a corporation? You have to break out the "think of the children" bullshit?
Frankly I'm almost glad Costco won even though I don't like 1183. I'd hate to hand the race over to a bunch of fearmongering dickholes.
"FIREFIGHTERS and POLICEMEN say 1183 will GET OUR CHILDREN DRUNK and RAPE THEM and puts us at TOO MUCH RISK of complete ANARCHY and it will also BURN DOWN ORPHANAGES in our VULNERABLE VIRGINAL COMMUNITIES"
Seriously, y'all? You can't campaign against it based on it being a giant cash-grab by a corporation? You have to break out the "think of the children" bullshit?
Frankly I'm almost glad Costco won even though I don't like 1183. I'd hate to hand the race over to a bunch of fearmongering dickholes.
29
Fuck off goldy.
I would take the Koch brother's money if it would drive a stake through the heart of the WSLCB. I'm fucking tired of this state having a morality police, and this is the first step in destroying it.
I would take the Koch brother's money if it would drive a stake through the heart of the WSLCB. I'm fucking tired of this state having a morality police, and this is the first step in destroying it.
30
I never paid any attention at all to the pros and cons of this initiative. All I needed to know was that a corporation, not able to get the result they wanted from the legislature, decided to write their own law and buy it via the initiative process. Kemper Freeman is doing the same thing with 1125. It's disgusting. These matters should be decided by elected officials.
31
Because the beer and wine distributors that have a monopoly on grocery sales now and funded the no vote weren't buying your votes?
Goldy's ridonkulous posturing shows off his effete and impudent snobbery attempting to masquerade his temperate moral nannyism on the evils of liquor.
Goldy's ridonkulous posturing shows off his effete and impudent snobbery attempting to masquerade his temperate moral nannyism on the evils of liquor.
32
So if this initiative were to fail it would be a victory for the little people who fought bravely for our children and the millions of people who will be destroyed in the carnage on our roads, right?
Because it was little people who bankrolled the opposition, right?
For a smart guy you write some stupid shit, Goldy. And threatening a boycott, with all that stuff you must buy at Costco on the pitiful salary Keck pays you? Weak.
Because it was little people who bankrolled the opposition, right?
For a smart guy you write some stupid shit, Goldy. And threatening a boycott, with all that stuff you must buy at Costco on the pitiful salary Keck pays you? Weak.
33
It's still up to the voters, look at how many initiatives Tim Eyman have failed...I-267 & I-745 in particular (bankrolled by the Construction industry). Hell, just look at I-933. All of these initiatives failed at the ballot box despite being wholly financed by special interests.
34
When you sit back and try to figure out why your political opinion carries zero weight with most folks, refer back to this post (or, you know, the last dozen or so).
You just don't have the analytical skills for the job. You're loud, though, so there's that.
You just don't have the analytical skills for the job. You're loud, though, so there's that.
35
Good, you're not wanted there. Only those who like supporting local businesses / employers should go there. The Stranger likes neither.
36
I wish I could've voted NO against both campaigns. NO against buying your way onto the ballot, and buying all those YES votes, with millions of corporate dollars, and NO against the anti's campaign of outrageous lies and overt misinformation.
The only thing I could do, in good conscience, was vote NO against all the intiatives because they used big money to buy their way onto the ballot, a total corruption of the initiative process. Our constitution's framers would roll over in their graves if they knew that the process they created had been so co-opted by big moneyed interests.
The only thing I could do, in good conscience, was vote NO against all the intiatives because they used big money to buy their way onto the ballot, a total corruption of the initiative process. Our constitution's framers would roll over in their graves if they knew that the process they created had been so co-opted by big moneyed interests.
37
@30, the legislature has been too chickenshit to look at this issue for 80 years. The temperance movement is alive and well in the likes of MADD and churches. They are very activist on this issue. I'm glad Costco stood up to them.
38
You're all fucking missing the point, perhaps intentionally, perhaps because you're to stupid to get it. This isn't about this initiative, it's about the initiative process in general, which has pretty much made Washington state a turf war for big corporations to fight over.
The initiative process is almost always the wrong way to legislate. That was my point when I stumbled into politics with my "Horse's Ass" initiative, and that is my point today.
The initiative process is almost always the wrong way to legislate. That was my point when I stumbled into politics with my "Horse's Ass" initiative, and that is my point today.
40
Your side lost when it came to booze in 1933. This is just mopping up some leftovers, on that front.
Re: the initiative process, why not try to get the whole thing removed via your PAC if we hate it so much?
Re: the initiative process, why not try to get the whole thing removed via your PAC if we hate it so much?
41
@38 And next year it may make us the first state to legalize marijuana. Good and bad things come from it. At the end of the day we all have the same vote and if we decide to buy ad campaigns well that is really our fault. It is trivially easy to educate yourself on these things.
42
@39 because he's been childishly and annoyingly dancing around the fact he just doesn't like for people to have easier access to booze. Seriously, it's annoying. Man the fuck up and just say it outright. You're willing to speak up and out about damn never everything else, which is awesome, but it's fucking tiring on this front.
43
This whole charade was a lose - lose situation. The opponents lied through their teeth and played the fear card, and the proponents finally spent enough to get their way. And what do we get? An end to the WSLCB stores, which weren't really a problem and an increase in the WSLCB enforcement wing, which consists primarily of teetotalling fascist assholes with giant chips on their shoulders, hellbent on fucking over every underpaid server in the state who makes an honest mistake. Personally, I left that item blank on my ballot - I could not in good conscience vote for either shitty alternative.
44
Yes we're all hypnotized hill folk Goldy and we need the wisdom of public employee unions to guide us.
45
Seriously, Goldy? Your response to a negative reception of your post is to jump into the comments thread and, no exaggeration, say, "NUH-UH, YOU'RE ALL STUPID!"?
Some fucking journalist.
Some fucking journalist.
46
We get your "point" Goldy, ill-defined and misguided as it is.
Corporations have always had an inordinate sway in politics, initiatives or no. You're just fixating on this because one particularly well known company is associated with it. Normally I'd be upset over this, but I realize the anti 1183 money is just as corporate and polluting as the pro 1183 money. It's just that the anti 1183 oligarchy is less recognizable and makes for a poorer strawman for folks with an agenda. Folks like you.
Ultimately, my views just happen to align with Costco's on this one. And I've noticed that most folks voting for this initiative have followed the same thought process. We're not voting for a company, we're happening to agree with them on this particular subject.
Corporations have always had an inordinate sway in politics, initiatives or no. You're just fixating on this because one particularly well known company is associated with it. Normally I'd be upset over this, but I realize the anti 1183 money is just as corporate and polluting as the pro 1183 money. It's just that the anti 1183 oligarchy is less recognizable and makes for a poorer strawman for folks with an agenda. Folks like you.
Ultimately, my views just happen to align with Costco's on this one. And I've noticed that most folks voting for this initiative have followed the same thought process. We're not voting for a company, we're happening to agree with them on this particular subject.
47
@ 38, "You're all fucking missing the point, perhaps intentionally, perhaps because you're to stupid to get it."
I'm honestly laughing at this. You really have no respect for anyone who doesn't blow smoke up your ass, do you?
We've all read your hysterical anti-1183 posts, which finally stopped because you probably couldn't reasonably address the issue. We KNOW you have a huge emotional investment. We also KNOW that corporate money in the initiative process is not new, not in any way unique to this ballot measure, and even the scale of money spent tells us nothing in the post Citizens United world. You're just acting out.
I'm honestly laughing at this. You really have no respect for anyone who doesn't blow smoke up your ass, do you?
We've all read your hysterical anti-1183 posts, which finally stopped because you probably couldn't reasonably address the issue. We KNOW you have a huge emotional investment. We also KNOW that corporate money in the initiative process is not new, not in any way unique to this ballot measure, and even the scale of money spent tells us nothing in the post Citizens United world. You're just acting out.
48
Oh noes, condemned to by toilet paper what, six rolls at a time only? And from some neighborhood store rather than the nearest Mega-Lo-Mart? Barbaric.
50
Goldy if you like top-down government so much take your condescending ass back east where you belong. Apparently a majority of King County and the state like having a say how THEIR money is spent.
52
What's sad is that the leg could have opened sales to big stores and charged them a huge fee to do so. Costco has been willing to spend what, 30-40 million on this so far? How about a 100 million upfront fee and whatever percent profit the states stores made on gross sales? We could have put a solid dent in the budget gap and at the same time allowed specialty stores at a much reduced fee.
But as usual Olympia dithered and now we'll get it with none of that.
But as usual Olympia dithered and now we'll get it with none of that.
53
@52 that's pretty much the moral of the story, not Goldy's absurd booze-bad nonsense. Initiative systems themselves, like we have, are of no legitimate use. But if we're stuck with them, then our legislators need to be willing to go to Goddamn war on our behalf over and because of them on a daily basis. Genteel and lazy politics need to be executed.
54
Goldy, you are full of shit in your comment #38. Many posts (including mine) made exactly the point that the real issue is the political process, not the particulars of this inititive. You are ignoring those comments, becuase as usual, you ignore what you don't agree with. You seem to specialize in having dogfights with straw-men in your comment threads, while ignoring stronger comments.
I completely agree with you that our initititvie process is horrible and fucked. Boycotting and blaming Costco for using the legal framework that we the people of Washington put into place in the first place is crazy, especially since Costco is a pretty decent corporate citizen.
It was a hard vote for me, but in the end I found the "No on 1183" people every bit as distasteful, and I like cheap booze.
I completely agree with you that our initititvie process is horrible and fucked. Boycotting and blaming Costco for using the legal framework that we the people of Washington put into place in the first place is crazy, especially since Costco is a pretty decent corporate citizen.
It was a hard vote for me, but in the end I found the "No on 1183" people every bit as distasteful, and I like cheap booze.
55
If Goldy never shops at Costco again, does this mean he doesn't buy Coke or Pepsi products anymore, either?
57
"The knee-jerk, government-shouldn't-be-in-the-booze-business crowd will have plenty to drink to when Costco's $22 million Initiative 1183 wins tonight"
And in response to this knee jerk reaction, is yet another knee jerk reaction? Seriously Goldy, Costco offers paying wages to all its employees, something thats an annoyance to the shareholders. As much as I dont like Costco flooding millions into this, the CEO is not a corperate shill and you are a moron for suggesting that we boycott them when theres really no other alternative to buy bulk products. You are asking people to spend even more of their money because you have a (rather large) bug up your butt.
And in response to this knee jerk reaction, is yet another knee jerk reaction? Seriously Goldy, Costco offers paying wages to all its employees, something thats an annoyance to the shareholders. As much as I dont like Costco flooding millions into this, the CEO is not a corperate shill and you are a moron for suggesting that we boycott them when theres really no other alternative to buy bulk products. You are asking people to spend even more of their money because you have a (rather large) bug up your butt.
58
Should we direct our anger and frustration at Costco for playing the game, or should we direct it at our government for allowing this to happen?
Maybe I should buy some stock in Costco. You know, play the game, too.
Maybe I should buy some stock in Costco. You know, play the game, too.
59
@5: "Goldy, I expect you to keep on top of the youth-drinking and DUI stats you used to scare people into voting no, and reporting honestly about what they show, even (and especially) if they do NOT increase."
Ha! At least this would be a bright note on the stupidest reasons people demanded that we vote no, FOR THE CHILDREN.
Ha! At least this would be a bright note on the stupidest reasons people demanded that we vote no, FOR THE CHILDREN.
60
@38 I get it, though you could have added a little more context to help frame the issue. I've ripped you for your supposed anti-alcohol stance before, but I understand what you are saying here.
Costco challenged the WSLCB's mandatory markup & licensed distributor policy about a decade ago, trying to get volume discounts and use their own supply chains. They took the case to the SCOTUS, and lost. The legal advice they (correctly) received was to try to change WA state law regarding liquor. They failed to buy off the state legislature, though they certainly tried. The next, and possibly final, option was the initiative. They appear to be winning that one.
What angers Goldy is that the initiative process was a Progressive change that, like the 17th Amendment, was intended to prevent monied interests from buying legislators. Now those monied interests are just buying the people's votes, which have turned out to be quite a bargain.
Costco challenged the WSLCB's mandatory markup & licensed distributor policy about a decade ago, trying to get volume discounts and use their own supply chains. They took the case to the SCOTUS, and lost. The legal advice they (correctly) received was to try to change WA state law regarding liquor. They failed to buy off the state legislature, though they certainly tried. The next, and possibly final, option was the initiative. They appear to be winning that one.
What angers Goldy is that the initiative process was a Progressive change that, like the 17th Amendment, was intended to prevent monied interests from buying legislators. Now those monied interests are just buying the people's votes, which have turned out to be quite a bargain.
61
@38:
If you're going to call people stupid because they point out that you make no sense, you should probably re-read twice to make sure you're not making a stupid mistake in the process. It looks really dumb, like the "get a brain, morans" guy. Wait, was that you?
PS: is it possible for someone "to [sic] stupid to get it" to intentionally miss the point? How do you intentionally miss something you're "to stupid" to get?
You're all fucking missing the point, perhaps intentionally, perhaps because you're to stupid to get it.
If you're going to call people stupid because they point out that you make no sense, you should probably re-read twice to make sure you're not making a stupid mistake in the process. It looks really dumb, like the "get a brain, morans" guy. Wait, was that you?
PS: is it possible for someone "to [sic] stupid to get it" to intentionally miss the point? How do you intentionally miss something you're "to stupid" to get?
62
"... corporate interests with unlimited resources dive into the business of directly marketing to voters self-serving policies that could never survive a deliberative legislative process."
Exactly. You're completely right. Ignore these moronic commenters.
Exactly. You're completely right. Ignore these moronic commenters.
63
Goldy,
I warned you when you came over here from the 'Ass. The Slog commentariate is dominated by an extremely self-obsessed narcissistic group. What they want more than anything is access to what they want when they want it. And fuck everything else. They laugh with a superior aire at anyone who acts on any other motivation.
I warned you when you came over here from the 'Ass. The Slog commentariate is dominated by an extremely self-obsessed narcissistic group. What they want more than anything is access to what they want when they want it. And fuck everything else. They laugh with a superior aire at anyone who acts on any other motivation.
64
@61: OH NO! A typo in one of the thousands of words Goldy writes everyday! More than enough justification to dismiss everything he writes!
65
@63
And some of us have begged and pleaded for evidence that states with more liberalized alcohol access laws are doing worse off than Washington across a variety of measurable metrics provided by neutral parties. We get nothing.
This uppity "progressive except the stuff I think is morally inappropriate!" shit is obnoxious. In for a penny, in for a pound.
What they want more than anything is access to what they want when they want it. And fuck everything else.
And some of us have begged and pleaded for evidence that states with more liberalized alcohol access laws are doing worse off than Washington across a variety of measurable metrics provided by neutral parties. We get nothing.
This uppity "progressive except the stuff I think is morally inappropriate!" shit is obnoxious. In for a penny, in for a pound.
66
@64. Apparently you ARE too stupid to get the point. A typo? Sure. But when one is on such a moral high horse as you are, it is always best to make sure ones grammar is a correct as it can be.
You are an inconsistent whiner Goldy. Admit your defeat on this.
You are an inconsistent whiner Goldy. Admit your defeat on this.
67
@61 " It looks really dumb, like the "get a brain, morans" guy. Wait, was that you?"
At last years Tea Party Tax Day protest in Westlake, that was me. Its actually not that hard to create a costume like that.
At last years Tea Party Tax Day protest in Westlake, that was me. Its actually not that hard to create a costume like that.
69
The truth is the Olympia D's wouldn't touch this for years to avoid taking on their state employee union donors. Opening up the system for some private dollars would have made the state more money and kept them in the game. They chose to stick with the union money and now lost. So, union money buying influence in Olympia is OK, but Costco putting money behind an intitiative is bad. Whatever Goldy.
70
@64: Well, you have to admit a typo (if you actually know to / too) when calling whole swaths of people stupid makes you look... stupid.
And I dismiss most of what you write because you take emotional stakes in issues and then work backwards to semi-rational arguments while screeching stridently and insulting anyone who disagrees with you. Tell me again how Costco's 1183 money is so damnable and merits a boycott, while the liquor wholesalers' anti-1183 money doesn't merit a mention or a boycott? Any chance it has to do with your preferred outcome on 1183?
You're a hack. Sorry, but it's true. One day you may grow into a reasonable writer capable of measured analysis, and you'll look back on stuff like this and cringe. Or maybe you'll stay a hack, forever tilting at windmills, completely convinced that your emotional positions are a substitute for rational argument. Whatever turns you on.
And I dismiss most of what you write because you take emotional stakes in issues and then work backwards to semi-rational arguments while screeching stridently and insulting anyone who disagrees with you. Tell me again how Costco's 1183 money is so damnable and merits a boycott, while the liquor wholesalers' anti-1183 money doesn't merit a mention or a boycott? Any chance it has to do with your preferred outcome on 1183?
You're a hack. Sorry, but it's true. One day you may grow into a reasonable writer capable of measured analysis, and you'll look back on stuff like this and cringe. Or maybe you'll stay a hack, forever tilting at windmills, completely convinced that your emotional positions are a substitute for rational argument. Whatever turns you on.
71
George Carlin had it right: the public sucks, fuck hope! When you have selfish ignorant population who vote like sheep based on 30 TV ads, then we end up as corporate slaves. They must laugh their asses off, slaves that volunteer to put on the shackles themselves. Because they believed those shackles were really free bracelets.
72
Goldy, your comment in #64 just proves my point that you choose to address peripheral arguments, and ignore substantive criticisms. Like any comment thread, there is a lot of shit and noise here, but there are also quite a lot of solid comments, which you are completely ignoring. You are like a guy who only likes to fight people weaker than you are. After working over a wimp, you roar and flex.
73
Just do what I do people, stop reading Goldy's posts. Life is too short to waste on his nonsense.
74
Personally, I think it was darn altruistic for Costco to spend all of that money so I can finally buy a bottle of liquor in my local QFC or Safeway (just like you can in most of the civilized world).
Thanks!
Thanks!
75
@38 Fuck you -- your argument was totally illogical, so you have to attack the commenters who pointed that out.
If your point is that the initiative process was screwed up then why boycott Costco? It didn't create the process, and it's not the first company to pour money into an initiative.
Will you be boycotting all the liquor distributors who funded the anti-1183 movement, too? Or are they OK because they are on the losing side?
If your point is that the initiative process was screwed up then why boycott Costco? It didn't create the process, and it's not the first company to pour money into an initiative.
Will you be boycotting all the liquor distributors who funded the anti-1183 movement, too? Or are they OK because they are on the losing side?
77
@63,
What they want more than anything is access to what they want when they want it.Which is why I voted NO. What *I* want, not what some peckerhead grocery clerk thinks I want. If this passes, the availability of non-standard brands of liquor will go WAY DOWN.
79
As long as my 5 year old can run down to Safeway and get me a fifth of scotch when I run out that's all I ask.
80
I don't see the horror of this at all. Where is the evil in this? So a company spends millions to "get your ear". You let them get your ear. Maybe YOU are the problem. Stop falling for their line of crap. Let them know you don't care what they say. You will do your own research. Stop blaming the high powered over paid high priced messenger and start blaming the idiot citizens that fall for the silly histrionics thrown at us all.
81
@77: Which is why there are so many more varieties of tequila, rum, and brandy available in Washington than California, where pecker-head clerks pick inventory.
Oh, wait. Tell me again why I'm always bringing back unusual brands that aren't available in WA when I travel to California?
Oh, wait. Tell me again why I'm always bringing back unusual brands that aren't available in WA when I travel to California?
83
@77, totally ignoring that this opens up a new market for liquor-only retail stores. Like the state runs, only bigger, with more convenient hours, and not beholden to a pecker-head bureaucrat to decide what brands to carry.
84
I welcome Costco's involvement in this initiative. I'm tired of the piss-poor selection at state-run liquor stores, not to mention the inconvenient hours and locations. As far as I can tell, the state of Washington is getting a fair shake in this deal.
87
No, The results of the election can't POSSIBLY be a result of the public's authentic understanding and expressed interest in the initiative. Could they?
If something passes, that Goldy deems to be subversion of The Desired Nanny State, then to only POSSIBLE conclusion is that those wily business owners and shareholders, and their interests, have perverted the course of Liberalism's Natural Good.
Only by commercially-bought deceit could the bleating masses be so misguided.
Only more intrusive government will save us from us.
Alarm! To the tax code! We must find more resources for the defense of us, from us!
No, The results of the election can't POSSIBLY be a result of the public's authentic understanding and expressed interest in the initiative. Could they?
If something passes, that Goldy deems to be subversion of The Desired Nanny State, then to only POSSIBLE conclusion is that those wily business owners and shareholders, and their interests, have perverted the course of Liberalism's Natural Good.
Only by commercially-bought deceit could the bleating masses be so misguided.
Only more intrusive government will save us from us.
Alarm! To the tax code! We must find more resources for the defense of us, from us!
88
Yes it's got nothing to do with this being problematic from a free market standpoint. Corporate interests after all these years of trying may have pierced the window with this, but at least I'm glad that it's one that gets the state out of the booze buying business, an enterprise they had no place being in the first place.
89
Exactly @83. This is what I have been saying to people who think that access to quality liquor will be hindered. I just don't buy it. What about PCC? Metropolitan Market or Whole Foods? We live in one of the best areas in the nation for high quality super markets for christ's sake! Even the beer/wine selection at QFC is one of the most diverse that I have ever come across in a super market. Anyone who says differently is just spoiled and used to Seattle standards. And just to picture it: 10,000 sq feet is about the size or a little bit more of a baseball diamond. Big, but not inordinately enormous.
91
Sorry, Goldy. I didn't vote "yes" on 1183 because of Costco (big liquor distributors put a lot of money in on the other side as well), but because IT'S FUCKING STUPID TO REQUIRE LIQUOR TO BE SOLD IN STATE-RUN STORES.
Period. Nobody bought my vote. Nobody influenced it. Having travelled and lived in many other states without state-run stores (that's MOST STATES) and seen it work out just fine, I vote for the same SANITY here.
Period. Nobody bought my vote. Nobody influenced it. Having travelled and lived in many other states without state-run stores (that's MOST STATES) and seen it work out just fine, I vote for the same SANITY here.
95
@ 89, if I still lived there, I would have voted NO because of the 10,000 square foot requirement. If you spend some time in a state that doesn't control sales in this fashion, it's because really good, high quality selection shops take up much less space. (Check out a quality wine shop sometime - thank god you guys can have that, at least - and imagine if such a place could also specialize in premium spirits, especially those from the now-rising small-batch distillery trend.)
Also, where in Seattle's dense neighborhoods are these 10,000 square foot stores supposed to open? This gives the QFC and Safeway in your area permission to stock the hard stuff - and, granted, the stores you mention are likely to stock good stuff, IF they're that big. (The Metropolitan Market on top of Queen Anne probably isn't 10,000 sq ft; neither is the PCC near Green Lake.) I suppose you can build some more mixed-use developments and leave the retail area as one single space, like the one with the QFC on Mercer and 5th, but I thought everyone was getting tired of those things.
For Washington's sake, I hope that someone addresses that rule and fixes it. I think Fnarf's prediction has a greater chance of being on target if it's not.
Also, where in Seattle's dense neighborhoods are these 10,000 square foot stores supposed to open? This gives the QFC and Safeway in your area permission to stock the hard stuff - and, granted, the stores you mention are likely to stock good stuff, IF they're that big. (The Metropolitan Market on top of Queen Anne probably isn't 10,000 sq ft; neither is the PCC near Green Lake.) I suppose you can build some more mixed-use developments and leave the retail area as one single space, like the one with the QFC on Mercer and 5th, but I thought everyone was getting tired of those things.
For Washington's sake, I hope that someone addresses that rule and fixes it. I think Fnarf's prediction has a greater chance of being on target if it's not.
96
@92: Is there any other look from Goldy? If Mudede is incoherence incarnate, Goldy is petulance personified.
97
@95- I'm from NY, so I am familiar with mom and pop shops. I also shop in local wine shops, support local distillers, drink only the best spirits and drink almost exclusively local or national micro-brews. Of course I do, I live in Seattle. There is a market for this stuff. We have good taste here, and so does Denver, which I lived in for a year, and San Francisco, which I have also lived in for a a time. All this is meant to say that the people who want craft spirits are going to have someone selling it to them. The 10,000 sq ft requirement while not ideal, allows for pretty much all of our lovely supermarkets who have a penchant for selling high quality goods the opportunity to have high quality spirits. And I have no reason to doubt that they will, since they have been selling me high quality brews and wine for the 5 years that I have spent in Seattle. Get the freaking government out of it, create more revenue for the state, and let us see what the market decides to sell to the endlessly snobby (picky?) Seattle market.
98
It's quite simple -- Goldy hates voters when they vote against his politics, loves them when they vote his way. Costco didn't buy the election anymore than Index Newspapers, LLC pays for Goldy to conduct his opera of simianesque obscenities in a specific key and to an exact beat. Free will is a pain in the butt, Goldy, but it's what makes this society the best among the alternatives.
99
The average Trader joe's is 10k sq. ft. Take a look at their corporate website about store sizes. You could fit most trader joes into the met. market on queen anne.
100
Honestly, the problem is not with Washington's iniative process. Blame it on Citizens United. Corporations are people, my friend! Expecting Costco not to spend lots of money on this initiative is just ridiculous. It's like expecting my dog not to lift his leg on the tree...it's just what he *does*. Costco is not a bad corporate citizen. In my shitty hometown in Central Washington, they are one of the few employers who pay living wages plus benefits to their employees. They sure as hell don't have to, especially considering that lots of those jobs are telephone jobs that could easily be shipped to India (you know, like Microsoft does?). Corporations aren't inherently evil just because they're corporations. Now, the WSLCB.... they're inherently evil.
Oh and Fnarf.... just wait until you enter the beautiful land of Total Wine. You'll take it all back. Google it.
Oh and Fnarf.... just wait until you enter the beautiful land of Total Wine. You'll take it all back. Google it.
102
@95, the 10,000 sq ft rule was explicitly put there to stop the opposition commercials from running ads saying "OMGZ HARD LIQUOR AT THE GAS STATION WHERE EL-HABIB WILL SELL TO TEENAGERS BECAUSE HE IS A TERRORIST". They ran those ads anyway. I would fully expect the legislature to create a "boutique" store exemption to this rule in the future for specific licensees.
103
@90 - nice to see the Stranger is at least admitting their new editorial policy places trolling ahead of anything resembling professional journalism.
If you're comfortable being the left-wing's answer to redstate, great. But don't go crying/whining when you suddenly find people aren't returning your calls.
If you're comfortable being the left-wing's answer to redstate, great. But don't go crying/whining when you suddenly find people aren't returning your calls.
104
@100 Actually the rule in Citizens United has been the case in Washington for a long long time. That decisions did not effect our local elections.
108
I look forward to making and drinking my first margarita since I moved into this silly state-government-nanny-controlling-alcoholic-establishment place.... and I'll enjoy it. And it'll be with ingredients from Costco. And I'll be sure to make up for Goldy's lack of shopping there, I'm sure.
110
@81, because you can have small, specialist liquor stores in CA. Last time I was in CA I visited a BevMo (the only new kind of business that might crop up here given 10k square footage requirement) last time I was in CA. Bunch of crap it had. Aisles of margarita mixes. No local producers featured anywhere.
@89, what universe are you living in where the beer selection at QFC is "good?"
@89, what universe are you living in where the beer selection at QFC is "good?"
111
Goldy is teasing you girls.
The real reason he doesn't shop at Costco anymore is that he was banned after he exposed himself to those little girls there last year....
The real reason he doesn't shop at Costco anymore is that he was banned after he exposed himself to those little girls there last year....
112
@110 You must have the strangest definition of what "crap" is. Go look at Bevmo's web site and you tell me you can't find something you would want.
113
Hmmm, Goldy is getting to be the new ECB, and it's still about alcohol.
Seriously, Goldy, what IS your problem? Why not blame the courts for allowing paid signature gathers? That's the real issue. Did you mind the SEIU getting 1163 on the ballot? Or is your anger just directed at measures you don't like?
Your consistency is just like Tim Eyman's, who screams about the "will of the people" over 1125, but conveniently forgets such measures at automatic teacher pay increases, class size, minimum wage, etc.
Seriously, Goldy, what IS your problem? Why not blame the courts for allowing paid signature gathers? That's the real issue. Did you mind the SEIU getting 1163 on the ballot? Or is your anger just directed at measures you don't like?
Your consistency is just like Tim Eyman's, who screams about the "will of the people" over 1125, but conveniently forgets such measures at automatic teacher pay increases, class size, minimum wage, etc.
114
@110
screw you, I sell awesome fucking beer to the QFC at North Broadway. a lot of the beer/wine buyers who actually stock the shelves at these places are incredibly knowledgeable people who are doing these jobs because they're enthusiastic about the product. I know the same can't be said about Safeway...nearly every one I've set foot in has the same selection of both import and domestic beer, but from QFC to Metropolitan, Whole Foods to Town & Country (Ballard Market, Central Market in Shoreline, etc) there are people who do some really ambitious alcohol programs. to assume that bigger stores wouldn't be able to cultivate that with liquor as well is naive and/or dishonest.
also, I assure you that the people who are already running boutique bottle shops in the region have already started looking into any loopholes they can use to get into this as well. at least if they have any sense of business savvy and self-preservation that is.
screw you, I sell awesome fucking beer to the QFC at North Broadway. a lot of the beer/wine buyers who actually stock the shelves at these places are incredibly knowledgeable people who are doing these jobs because they're enthusiastic about the product. I know the same can't be said about Safeway...nearly every one I've set foot in has the same selection of both import and domestic beer, but from QFC to Metropolitan, Whole Foods to Town & Country (Ballard Market, Central Market in Shoreline, etc) there are people who do some really ambitious alcohol programs. to assume that bigger stores wouldn't be able to cultivate that with liquor as well is naive and/or dishonest.
also, I assure you that the people who are already running boutique bottle shops in the region have already started looking into any loopholes they can use to get into this as well. at least if they have any sense of business savvy and self-preservation that is.
115
@113: Talk to the folks at SEIU and ask them where I stand on the initiative process. They love it, and they know I would repeal it immediately if made benevolent dictator for a day.
That said, this is the hand I'm dealt, so I'll support and oppose initiatives one by one. But I'm entirely consistent in believing that it's a stupid way to write legislation... just as stupid as godfuckingmoronic system of electing judges.
That said, this is the hand I'm dealt, so I'll support and oppose initiatives one by one. But I'm entirely consistent in believing that it's a stupid way to write legislation... just as stupid as godfuckingmoronic system of electing judges.
116
@107, no, you buried your point in your bitching about just Costco. Had you, maybe, included Kemper and the Toll Initiative, and the SEIU grab at the state general fund, and not focused on never going to Costco again, you might have a point about calling this journalism.
The way you have franed this, it's complaining about one of your pets losing at the ballot box.
The way you have franed this, it's complaining about one of your pets losing at the ballot box.
117
@66: ones => one's
is a => is as
Hope this helps; have a nice day. If you're going to get on a high horse about someone being on a high horse about a typo, uh...yeah. Good luck with that.
Goldy: I agree. After 7 years in Seattle, I now live in a place with no initiative/referendum process. Our politics are a whole lot saner. There are many reasons we have representative democracy, and short-circuiting it is never going to lead to a better society.
is a => is as
Hope this helps; have a nice day. If you're going to get on a high horse about someone being on a high horse about a typo, uh...yeah. Good luck with that.
Goldy: I agree. After 7 years in Seattle, I now live in a place with no initiative/referendum process. Our politics are a whole lot saner. There are many reasons we have representative democracy, and short-circuiting it is never going to lead to a better society.
118
@115,
I'm in total agreement with you on the moronic nature of the initiative process - at least since the Supremes said that it was OK to pay signature gatherers. Also in agreement on the moronicness of electing judges.
"Hand dealt"-wise though, you're still arguing the merits of a change in law, irrespective of the mechanism. Your arguments against 1125 remain inconsistent, illogical, and (though moot at this point), wrong-headed.
Still and all, you *do* slam the initiative process citing outcomes you don't like - while failing to sling similar arrows against initiative driven changes in law that you *do* like. Costco is "big money", yep. So is SEIU.
I voted "yes" both times on the SEIU "no-brainer" measures, by the way - not because of who backs and who opposes, but because it's common-sense law.
I'm in total agreement with you on the moronic nature of the initiative process - at least since the Supremes said that it was OK to pay signature gatherers. Also in agreement on the moronicness of electing judges.
"Hand dealt"-wise though, you're still arguing the merits of a change in law, irrespective of the mechanism. Your arguments against 1125 remain inconsistent, illogical, and (though moot at this point), wrong-headed.
Still and all, you *do* slam the initiative process citing outcomes you don't like - while failing to sling similar arrows against initiative driven changes in law that you *do* like. Costco is "big money", yep. So is SEIU.
I voted "yes" both times on the SEIU "no-brainer" measures, by the way - not because of who backs and who opposes, but because it's common-sense law.
119
Costco spent more on this initiative than has ever been spent in the state's history on an initiative. For what? Costco as good corporate citizen just trying to let Washingtonians buy booze for less? What great corporate citizens! I suspect we'll see many more initiatives paid for simply to increase corporate profits. Sad.
121
You hate booze. I hate democracy. The initiative process is inherently broken. This proves nothing.
122
@117, if you would care to read two posts later you will see I made a correction to my typos. Ass.
123
This reminds me: I need to renew the Costco membership.
As a union member, government employee, and person who goes to a liquor store once every decade (I'm a wino, not a boozer) I am happy to see this pass. Just as utilities were rightfully told to get out of the appliance sales and service business because it was unfair competition with the private sector, the state should get out of the retail liquor business.
Plus, it is hopefully the beginning of the end of the ridiculous "enforcement" arm, and their arcane rules about things like porn in bars and booze in strip clubs. All of that should be dealt with on the local level, through zoning and law enforcement.
As a union member, government employee, and person who goes to a liquor store once every decade (I'm a wino, not a boozer) I am happy to see this pass. Just as utilities were rightfully told to get out of the appliance sales and service business because it was unfair competition with the private sector, the state should get out of the retail liquor business.
Plus, it is hopefully the beginning of the end of the ridiculous "enforcement" arm, and their arcane rules about things like porn in bars and booze in strip clubs. All of that should be dealt with on the local level, through zoning and law enforcement.
124
I voted against this initiave for one reason alone ( No I dont believe either side about underage drinking OR more money going to blah blah) I voted against it because our liquor store is a beautiful wonderful fun place to go!I We just got a brand new store and the people who are working it ( NOW UNEMPLOYED!!!!) are so nice and knowledgable and I love to go in there a few times a month and try something new. You think your local grocer is going to carry BakonVodka? Or those packs that make wonderful Christmas gifts.. or those cute little airplane size bottles?? Just because the local grocer can sell alcohol doesnt mean they will! You may suddenly find yourself 50 miles from your fav brand of whatever. Or that obscure exotic liquor you recently discovered and now love..( Absinthe comes to mind). You think mom and pop are gonna carry it? Think again. I love(ed) Costco but its 100 miles round trip from me and heck if I am going that distance to buy whatever they decide to carry. My (increased) membership is due.. not gonna do it.
125
@ 124, you registered now, just to post THAT? Your liquor store employed friend ALREADY got their pink slips? I smell a shill.
126
@124: I'm sure amazing high-end liquor stores will step in to fill the void... probably still at lower price points and without the cold war era decor.
127
Am I the only one who will have LESS access to booze once this goes through? There are no 10,000 sq ft stores near me (in the U-District). Hopefully the liquor store on 45th gets purchased by an independent contractor..
128
@124 - um, just on absinthe alone, here's what BevMo has at ONE of their outlets:
http://www.bevmo.com/Shop/ProductList.as…
Everything from a $10 bottle (yuk!) to a $78 bottle. Lots of choices.
Anyone who thinks BevMo and Liquor Barn and the like have not been watching this initiative VERY VERY closely is deluded. Anyone who thinks they don't already have retail locations in mind is very likely wrong. Bring on my BevMo.
But my real question is, can we now make personal purchases of liquor over the internet?
http://www.bevmo.com/Shop/ProductList.as…
Everything from a $10 bottle (yuk!) to a $78 bottle. Lots of choices.
Anyone who thinks BevMo and Liquor Barn and the like have not been watching this initiative VERY VERY closely is deluded. Anyone who thinks they don't already have retail locations in mind is very likely wrong. Bring on my BevMo.
But my real question is, can we now make personal purchases of liquor over the internet?
129
@127,
Aren't the Safeway on NE 45th or the QFC at U-Village 10k gsf? Because the liquor store (which is now on 25th) sure isn't.
Aren't the Safeway on NE 45th or the QFC at U-Village 10k gsf? Because the liquor store (which is now on 25th) sure isn't.
130
@124: If there's a market for that bounty the state liquor stores offered (?) then why wouldn't entrepreneurs open stores to meet that demand? I think they will, just as they have in so many other states. And they'll need employees as well.
And if there ISN'T such a market, then what was the state doing spending tax money all these years? And sorry, but it isn't the state's job to provide jobs for sales clerks.
And if there ISN'T such a market, then what was the state doing spending tax money all these years? And sorry, but it isn't the state's job to provide jobs for sales clerks.
131
Just glanced at the actual Initiative (pdf warning: slow download). Lots of issues:
1) Looks like liquor stores licenses (for current state stores) will be auctioned off and the winner can't be denied based on size, location of a replacement store (so much for that 10k restriction).
2) Money to buy out all those existing contracts will come out of the revenue that was supposed to go to enforcement. So much for extra monies in the near future.
3)The Liquor Control Board will be overwhelmed trying to implement this in the time frame given.
4) Almost anybody can be a distributer?? Someone tell me I missed something, aren't they limiting the number of distributors?
1) Looks like liquor stores licenses (for current state stores) will be auctioned off and the winner can't be denied based on size, location of a replacement store (so much for that 10k restriction).
2) Money to buy out all those existing contracts will come out of the revenue that was supposed to go to enforcement. So much for extra monies in the near future.
3)The Liquor Control Board will be overwhelmed trying to implement this in the time frame given.
4) Almost anybody can be a distributer?? Someone tell me I missed something, aren't they limiting the number of distributors?
132
My god some of you people are so predictably dense. All one has to do is utter "corporate profit", and everyone farts loose stool all over themselves. Sometimes, you know, it's OK for corporations to make money selling us the goods and services we want. Especially if they can do it better than anyone else (or the state) can. Costco is gonna make money on the deal... yep, they sure are. So're Safeway, and Kroger (QFC), and Liquor Barn and BevMo will be here in short order too. This is GOOD! There will be competition to drive prices down. There will be less government involvement in policing our vices, and hopefully they'll start working on building policies that matter. Oh, and parents might actually have to take some fucking responsibility for their shitty little brat kids... and if they don't, then their shitty little brat kids will drink too much and die. Win-win.
133
Goldy is like one of those crabby, bitchy curmudgeons you see in coffee shops, except half their age. He rants and if not for being an otherwise functioning member of society you'd swear he was some street nutcase.
I'm sure Goldy won't have to worry about Costco once this measure takes effect and he wants to buy a bottle of liquor, since most of the city's supermarkets will also stock liquor, plus we may see a few specialty private liquor stores.
As for bitching about someone buying the initiative process... hey, where the fuck have you been, Goldy? Tim Eyman's backers have been buying the process for over a decade. If you don't like people spending money to manipulate the process, I'd recommend lobbying to have the initiative process terminated... because as long as it exists it's always going to happen. Elections at all levels are won by the money of rich people.
I'm sure Goldy won't have to worry about Costco once this measure takes effect and he wants to buy a bottle of liquor, since most of the city's supermarkets will also stock liquor, plus we may see a few specialty private liquor stores.
As for bitching about someone buying the initiative process... hey, where the fuck have you been, Goldy? Tim Eyman's backers have been buying the process for over a decade. If you don't like people spending money to manipulate the process, I'd recommend lobbying to have the initiative process terminated... because as long as it exists it's always going to happen. Elections at all levels are won by the money of rich people.
135
@127, The Ave has a Safeway at 50th. Whatever is at 4321 University Way (which has been Tower Records, Tiger Tiger and a used bookstore) is 10,000 sq ft and right on the Ave and stumbling distance to dorms. The old drug store (now vacant?) next to Pagliacci on the 4500 block is close to 10k, I believe. Any number of Ave storefronts, all of which have huge turnover, could be re-combined for a 10,000 sq ft location. The Ave used to have JC Penneys, Sears, and Nordstrom, but when dept store retail left, those spaces were divided. Just recombine them. Multi-story counts, not just the ground.
A big issue for a U District store is whether the landlord (the UW owns most surrounding property) wants liquor as a lessee.
A big issue for a U District store is whether the landlord (the UW owns most surrounding property) wants liquor as a lessee.
136
Read my last paragraph again, Goldy, and connect the dots. If Tim Eyman and Costco are problems, it's because the process enables it.
137
@38:
So you don't like the initiative process, and your solution is to boycott Costco? Yeah, that'll do the trick. And you have the balls to call everyone else stupid?
So you don't like the initiative process, and your solution is to boycott Costco? Yeah, that'll do the trick. And you have the balls to call everyone else stupid?
138
I have a very unpopular opinion on money spent in elections that most people disagree with.
I’m tired of voters always talking about how money buys elections. Everyone thinks that they are immune to the big money campaign tactics but that the millions of other “stupid” voters don’t have the same intelligence as they do. I have more faith in the other voters than most, I guess. Yes, I know that most winning campaigns over the last few decades have been the campaign that spends more money. I think we get the causal relationship behind money-spent and elections-won wrong. I think corporations and politicians do, as well… which is why Costco is willing to spend $20 million on this campaign. I think they believe that this will buy them the election. I honestly think they could have won without spending this much though because I think they wrote an initiative that aligned with the people better than the opposition.
I didn’t vote for 1183 because I don’t like a lot of the deregulation that comes with it. I have no problem with being able to buy liquor in a grocery store or a 7-11. I just don’t like the pricing deregulation that accompanies this initiative. However, I do hate the fact that this somehow aligns me with the opposition and their dishonest scare tactics.
I honestly don’t think that bars, restaurants, or grocery stores will sell to the consumers for less than the consumer is currently paying… the price point has been set. I don’t see any benefit to the consumer. If we do end up paying less money, I don’t believe that the state will somehow get more revenue either. We pay less, the state makes more, and there’s a bunch of money for the corporations… something just doesn’t add up there.
I don’t fault the initiative process. I actually think it would easier for corporations to buy elected officials than it would be to write an initiative that the people will vote for. I wish that initiatives were written by the people, for the people – not by corporations, for corporations – but I don’t blame the initiative process.
More...
I’m tired of voters always talking about how money buys elections. Everyone thinks that they are immune to the big money campaign tactics but that the millions of other “stupid” voters don’t have the same intelligence as they do. I have more faith in the other voters than most, I guess. Yes, I know that most winning campaigns over the last few decades have been the campaign that spends more money. I think we get the causal relationship behind money-spent and elections-won wrong. I think corporations and politicians do, as well… which is why Costco is willing to spend $20 million on this campaign. I think they believe that this will buy them the election. I honestly think they could have won without spending this much though because I think they wrote an initiative that aligned with the people better than the opposition.
I didn’t vote for 1183 because I don’t like a lot of the deregulation that comes with it. I have no problem with being able to buy liquor in a grocery store or a 7-11. I just don’t like the pricing deregulation that accompanies this initiative. However, I do hate the fact that this somehow aligns me with the opposition and their dishonest scare tactics.
I honestly don’t think that bars, restaurants, or grocery stores will sell to the consumers for less than the consumer is currently paying… the price point has been set. I don’t see any benefit to the consumer. If we do end up paying less money, I don’t believe that the state will somehow get more revenue either. We pay less, the state makes more, and there’s a bunch of money for the corporations… something just doesn’t add up there.
I don’t fault the initiative process. I actually think it would easier for corporations to buy elected officials than it would be to write an initiative that the people will vote for. I wish that initiatives were written by the people, for the people – not by corporations, for corporations – but I don’t blame the initiative process.
139
I have a very unpopular opinion on money spent in elections that most people disagree with.
I’m tired of voters always talking about how money buys elections. Everyone thinks that they are immune to the big money campaign tactics but that the millions of other “stupid” voters don’t have the same intelligence as they do. I have more faith in the other voters than most, I guess. Yes, I know that most winning campaigns over the last few decades have been the campaign that spends more money. I think we get the causal relationship behind money-spent and elections-won wrong. I think corporations and politicians do, as well… which is why Costco is willing to spend $20 million on this campaign. I think they believe that this will buy them the election. I honestly think they could have won without spending this much though because I think they wrote an initiative that aligned with the people better than the opposition.
I didn’t vote for 1183 because I don’t like a lot of the deregulation that comes with it. I have no problem with being able to buy liquor in a grocery store or a 7-11. I just don’t like the pricing deregulation that accompanies this initiative. However, I do hate the fact that this somehow aligns me with the opposition and their dishonest scare tactics.
I honestly don’t think that bars, restaurants, or grocery stores will sell to the consumers for less than the consumer is currently paying… the price point has been set. I don’t see any benefit to the consumer. If we do end up paying less money, I don’t believe that the state will somehow get more revenue either. We pay less, the state makes more, and there’s a bunch of money for the corporations… something just doesn’t add up there.
I don’t fault the initiative process. I actually think it would be easier for corporations to buy elected officials than it would be to write an initiative that the people will vote for. I wish that initiatives were written by the people, for the people – not by corporations, for corporations – but I don’t blame the initiative process.
More...
I’m tired of voters always talking about how money buys elections. Everyone thinks that they are immune to the big money campaign tactics but that the millions of other “stupid” voters don’t have the same intelligence as they do. I have more faith in the other voters than most, I guess. Yes, I know that most winning campaigns over the last few decades have been the campaign that spends more money. I think we get the causal relationship behind money-spent and elections-won wrong. I think corporations and politicians do, as well… which is why Costco is willing to spend $20 million on this campaign. I think they believe that this will buy them the election. I honestly think they could have won without spending this much though because I think they wrote an initiative that aligned with the people better than the opposition.
I didn’t vote for 1183 because I don’t like a lot of the deregulation that comes with it. I have no problem with being able to buy liquor in a grocery store or a 7-11. I just don’t like the pricing deregulation that accompanies this initiative. However, I do hate the fact that this somehow aligns me with the opposition and their dishonest scare tactics.
I honestly don’t think that bars, restaurants, or grocery stores will sell to the consumers for less than the consumer is currently paying… the price point has been set. I don’t see any benefit to the consumer. If we do end up paying less money, I don’t believe that the state will somehow get more revenue either. We pay less, the state makes more, and there’s a bunch of money for the corporations… something just doesn’t add up there.
I don’t fault the initiative process. I actually think it would be easier for corporations to buy elected officials than it would be to write an initiative that the people will vote for. I wish that initiatives were written by the people, for the people – not by corporations, for corporations – but I don’t blame the initiative process.
140
@137: When did I ever say anything about calling for a "boycott." I'm never shopping there again, because I can't in good conscience spend my money at a company that, for its own selfish reasons, has set such a dangerous precedent for our state. But you're all free to spend your money as you see fit.
141
@135 that's the other funny thing. People are acting like 10,000 sq ft commercial real estate is so hard to find--that's laughable. It's 100x100 feet. Retail like that, especially as you say for multi story, is trivial. Hell, the upper area alone at the old Borders at Westlake, for scale, is probably what--20,000 to 30,000 square feet?
142
@135, yeah, I just looked at this commercial MLS site:
http://www.commercialmls.com
For lease-only properties in Seattle with at least 10,000 square feet. These sites, if they're anything like residential MLS, will only show at best 1/4 to 1/3 of the real listings. Maybe less. And I still found 43 hits. Example: 12,000 square feet, a block off Westlake: ta da. One of many. The current real estate market couldn't come at a better time for I-1183.
http://www.commercialmls.com
For lease-only properties in Seattle with at least 10,000 square feet. These sites, if they're anything like residential MLS, will only show at best 1/4 to 1/3 of the real listings. Maybe less. And I still found 43 hits. Example: 12,000 square feet, a block off Westlake: ta da. One of many. The current real estate market couldn't come at a better time for I-1183.
143
Fuck Costco. I like flats of cheap pineapple and diced tomatoes, but I'm damned if I'm going to buy them from a bunch of fucking fascists.
144
@143: "a bunch of fucking fascists"
Really? Jesus fucking christ.
I'm not exactly happy with the initiative, and their influence, but it was inevitable. People weren't tricked into voting, and the 10000 sq foot rule was accepted by the voters. What's your problem?
Really? Jesus fucking christ.
I'm not exactly happy with the initiative, and their influence, but it was inevitable. People weren't tricked into voting, and the 10000 sq foot rule was accepted by the voters. What's your problem?
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
The Sunday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (144) RSS