Slog Music

Music, Nightlife,
and Drunks

Wednesday, January 2, 2013

The Wednesday Morning News

Posted by on Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 8:36 AM

Because making 98 percent of the Bush tax cuts permanent was such a betrayal of Republican principles. They whined. They wailed. They gnashed their teeth. Then House Republicans finally put the "fiscal cliff" bill up for a vote, where it passed comfortably. Drama queens.

Yay for Wall Street! Markets are up sharply in the wake of the "fiscal cliff" deal. Bipartisanship capitalism prevails!

Check your paycheck. One thing the "fiscal cliff" deal did not include was an extension of the payroll tax "holiday." That means an additional two percent will be withheld from your paycheck, starting immediately. On the bright side, 850,000 Washington State itemizers like me will continue to save an average $500 each on our federal taxes, thanks to a two-year extension of the state sales tax exemption.

Fuck you, Sandy victims! After finally approving a "fiscal cliff" deal last night, the Republican leadership adjourned the House without considering a Sandy relief package. Assholes.

Time to bring in Joe Biden. The NHL and the players association continue to negotiate an end to the lockout ahead of tonight's deadline for the players to disband their union and file an anti-trust suit.

Those hourly fees add up. Car rental giant Avis Budget has agreed to acquire rent-by-the-hour pioneer Zipcar for $491 million.

I told you so. Liquor prices are up about $2.50 per liter in Washington State since I-1183 took effect: “I don’t know how you would expect prices to go down when you’re adding this new middle man,” said Leonard Daniel, owner of Mountlake Terrace Liquor and Wine. Suckers.

But imagine how much sexier it would be if we put it in a tunnel! The Washington State Department of Transportation estimates that it would cost only $23 million to widen I-5's northbound Seneca Street bottleneck.

There were a bunch of college football games yesterday. Google it yourself.

If only we were all naked and armed with samurai swords, tragedies like this would never happen. Police subdued and arrested a naked man wielding a large samurai sword New Year's Day, after a three-hour standoff. And of course, since this incident happened in San Jose, not Seattle, the police managed to subdue him without shooting him.

Jonah is funny. I know it's true, because it says so in the Seattle Times. So funny, in fact, that now I'm not so scared of the SPD anymore. Hooray for Twitter!


Comments (64) RSS

Newest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
prompt 64
I hate that stupid bottleneck with such a passion. That'd help northbound I-5 traffic so much.
Posted by prompt on January 4, 2013 at 11:30 AM · Report this
p.s., #61, I'm not going to name the website, but one that I've used and which has always happily shipped to Seattle is selling Oban for less than half the Seattle price. Who needs the "local" rebottled Canadian dreck, anyway?
Posted by Mister G on January 3, 2013 at 1:06 PM · Report this
#61, I'm in Portland pretty often anyway. Their Soviet system's prices aren't a little lower, they're a lot lower. About one-third on the stuff I buy the most often. I'm going to California for other reasons pretty soon, and am going to stock up big time down there.

As for the local distilleries here, I see a lot of them opening, but that doesn't mean anything. Probably most of them are like wineries, some rich guy's hobby.
Posted by Mister G on January 3, 2013 at 1:00 PM · Report this
@60 local distilleries are doing great. So good in fact a lot of them are expanding right now, and new ones are popping up left and right. Bars are taking advantage of the self-distribution and are getting that cheaper booze. I'm pretty sure you're obsessed with facts. So there's one you can use.
Secondly, if you're dumb enough to call shit in the states 'soviet' or calling our current system 'socialist' (still looser than most states) I guess you're dumb enough to drive from Seattle to Portland for cheaper booze. I don't know about you, but I certainly don't want to waste a quarter of my day to buy slightly cheaper booze. Add the gas money and whatever savings you got us a wash. You can bitch about bikes all you want but when it comes to the alcohol industry, study up or shut up. You're embrassinig yourself.
Posted by CbytheSea on January 3, 2013 at 12:46 PM · Report this
#59, but those new ones will need the patronage of people like me, i.e. drinkers with money to spend. How they cut liquor taxes here is beside the point. Either they'll do it, or the industry (especially the local one) will suffer. Hell, even Oregon's Soviet stores are cheaper now, and they always had a much better selection than Washington's socialist system.

As for Fremont's mischief, all it takes is one of these to keep plenty of people sticking to the tried and true.
Posted by Mister G on January 3, 2013 at 11:05 AM · Report this
Alright Mister 3 strikes and you're out!
@56 nice duck there, it looks like you really haven't put any thought into the various stages that alcohol are taxed in this state and on a federal level. I'll give you this little factual tidbit for future arguements. Wisconsin has very strict distribution laws, they even have some dry spots, their tavern laws are adorable but that's a shitty example of liquor utopia. You're looking for Missouri. The loosest liquor laws in the US. It's not Texas! That land of freedom is awful when it comes to the commercial side of booze.
@57 why would it be dumb to pro-rate something. If I only need a car for an hour, why would I want to pay for a whole day. By pro-rating something you get your maximum value.
@58 can't speak for Fremont distilling. Never had their product. Samish Bay won best small batch Whisky a year ago at the CDC, it's quite tasty, Voyager Gin is by far the best gin I've had. The list goes on, there are soon to be another 50 new ones opening in 2013. But yeah, I'd base an entire industry on one company, that seems like a really smart and thoughtful thing to do.
In not understanding how a 3 tier system works, I'm sure that whole self distribution and allowing direct retail for in state distillers went totally over your head. Basically, locally produced booze gets to skip the middleman with their 30 percent markup or skip the retailer's 20-35 percent.
But as Kesh said, your turning into the poor man's Will in Seattle.
Posted by CbytheSea on January 3, 2013 at 10:42 AM · Report this
#50, if you own a brewery, maybe you might run into whatever shyster runs Fremont Distillery. Tell him he's not fooling his customers with that bulk Canadian rotgut that he rebottles in the square bottles. Well, wait: He might fool them once, but not twice.

"Local" alcohol? Not so much.
Posted by Mister G on January 3, 2013 at 12:51 AM · Report this
#51, I'm going to have to let you in on a little secret. Flexcar, Zipcar, and Car2Go are no different than any other rental cars, except that they charge by the hour and do without the customer service . You know, like having the car cleaned between uses?

They were financed by venture capitalists, whose plan was always to find some big corporation to buy them. The joke, as always, is on the "progressive" hipsters who actually buy into the various marketing bullshit stories. You know, sucker born every minute?
Posted by Mister G on January 3, 2013 at 12:47 AM · Report this
Back to my question, where would you reduce liquor tax?

I'd reduce it Washington State, so I wouldn't have to drive all the way to California.
Posted by Mister G on January 3, 2013 at 12:32 AM · Report this
Ipso Facto 55
[Apropos of nothing in this thread...]

Can someone please explain why the reported temperatures on all the big weather sites are so off right now?

I just walked a couple miles across North Seattle, and lemme tell you it's a sparkling, frosty winter wonderland out there. Yet, AccuWeather, and Weather Undground all claim that 98103 is above freezing.

Hell, there was frost on the ground before 8pm, and Weather Underground told me it was 41 degrees! What the fuck?
Posted by Ipso Facto on January 2, 2013 at 11:20 PM · Report this
Free Lunch 54
@19 - I had to go to three stores to find Beefeater. Beefeater! The third best selling gin worldwide!

@Phoebe - Jim Beam rye is better suited for Manhattans. Of the ryes previously available at state stores, Jim Beam makes the best. Old Overholt is nasty, and Wild Turkey rye is far too sweet, as were all of the "high-end" ryes they sold that basically just upped the sugar level to make them smoother.

But for a sweeter drink like an Old Fashioned, I'd opt for Wild Turkey rye.

I was hoping this law would some how bring in a bunch of the smaller Canadian ryes, but alas, I've seen none so far.
Posted by Free Lunch on January 2, 2013 at 8:16 PM · Report this
Anyone who has to comment more than three times (without apologies for server-hiccup duplicate posts) on a thread has more free time than sense or access to psychoactive medications.
Posted by you know who you are on January 2, 2013 at 6:08 PM · Report this
keshmeshi 52
Jesus, Mister G is just a stupider, more hostile Will in Seattle.
Posted by keshmeshi on January 2, 2013 at 4:29 PM · Report this
First carshare people got screwed when Zipcar bought Flexcar and membership doubled along with other crappy Zipcar rules. Now with Avis buying them it's going to turn Zipcar into a steaming pile of dog excrement.
Posted by Weekilter on January 2, 2013 at 4:16 PM · Report this
@49 I did. As an owner of a brewery (used to work in the retail and distibution side of thing), I go to hill climbs every year to talk to members of the state senate and house. They always want to raise our excise tax, they need more money and most people have no problem raising tax on 'sin'. So, of course being an engaged business owner, I show them how much tax I'm currently paying, how many employees I hire, the supply chain of brewing beer, etc.
Washington has so many annoying little taxes because they need to fund the state in one way or another. I know people have rejected income tax in the past, but it is the reason why we have expensive liquor, taxes hidden in the dumbest and most mundane of transactions. It's that trade off.
Back to my question, where would you reduce liquor tax?
Posted by CbytheSea on January 2, 2013 at 3:59 PM · Report this
#48, you wrote that WI's liquor taxes are lower because their income taxes are higher. Our income taxes are zero, but our sales taxes are approaching 10%, at least in a restaurant. Their sales tax rate is 5.5%.
Posted by Mister G on January 2, 2013 at 2:48 PM · Report this
@47 on retail or excise?
Posted by CbytheSea on January 2, 2013 at 2:29 PM · Report this
WI's sales tax is much lower than ours. In any case, I'd like to see Eyman put an initiative on the ballot to cut WA's liquor taxes. I'd definitely vote for it, just like I voted for I-1185.
Posted by Mister G on January 2, 2013 at 2:21 PM · Report this
@40 wiscosin has a super strict 3 tier system. Stricter than Washington believe it or not. They do allow for volume discounting though and their taxes are lower, mostly due to their income tax.
Posted by CbytheSea on January 2, 2013 at 2:14 PM · Report this
Oh, but wait! Target, whose wages are no higher than Wal-Mart and which completely lacks customer service, is hip, and so is Freddy's, the regionally owned schlockmeister. And we should feel good about a $5 bunch of carrots at the farmer's markets, even though one of the big reasons they cost so much is the energy intensivity from dirt to kitchen.

Seattle's "progressives" are funny. Stupid for sure, but funny.
Posted by Mister G on January 2, 2013 at 2:09 PM · Report this
#42, the "progressive" "urbanists" are doing everything they can to hassle those who own cars and tilt the field toward rentals. It's sooooooooo hip not to own anything.
Posted by Mister G on January 2, 2013 at 2:04 PM · Report this
In short, you're celebrating the success of terrible selection in car-oriented big box suburbs. That's yet one more area of commerce given over to the principles of Wal-Mart. That's a decline in civilization. In most of America now it is virtually impossible to buy a book, a record, a movie, or a food item (including booze) beyond a tiny selection of lowest-common-denominator items.

You don't get out much, do you? The liquor selection in WA State has improved somewhat since privatization, but it would be much better if we would just cut the taxes and sweep away the distribution system mandated by the law.

As for Wal-Mart, the next shoe to drop is that they'll come into the cities. The hipsters of Seattle don't realize it, but their "progressive" city council last year cleared the decks for it to happen right here when they raised the threshhold for big box retailers to enter Seattle without state environmental review. So if you think this is just a suburban deal, you'd better think again.

As for books, music, and movies, it's all going online.
Posted by Mister G on January 2, 2013 at 2:01 PM · Report this
@37 maximum would be nifty. It'd help crave up those big boxes that have had issues renting out huge amounts of footage since the recession.
@41 no one is forcing you to rent a car Mister G, your manufactured victimhood is safe. Glad to see your expanding your lexicon of words in quotes.
Posted by CbytheSea on January 2, 2013 at 2:01 PM · Report this
Car2Go will be acquired by a rental car company too. I have to laugh when I read stuff from the hipster "urbanists" about how "cool" these things are. They don't want people to own their own cars. They want to force everyone to rent from this or that megabucks corporation.
Posted by Mister G on January 2, 2013 at 1:41 PM · Report this
Now we need an initiative to cut state liquor taxes and bring in a distribution system like, say, Wisconsin's, where liquor prices are half what ours are.
Posted by Mister G on January 2, 2013 at 1:38 PM · Report this
And still not a word about how filibuster reform is seemingly floundering in the Senate:

Filibuster reform is in serious trouble…

It passed with little attention amid the fiscal cliff fighting, but on the Friday before New Year’s Day, Dem and GOP Senators released a package of reforms to the filibuster that has been watered down in order to gain bipartisan support.

But the proposal — spearheaded by Senators Carl Levin, Chuck Schumer, John McCain, and others — is so weak that one of the leading filibuster reformers in the Senate, Jeff Merkley, tells me he will vote against it if it comes to the floor, and will urge other liberal colleagues to do the same.

* * * *

It's time to disarm the filibuster -…

The Republican minority has wielded the procedural rule like a weapon to prevent Congress from functioning.

* * * *

Tell you what: if no political journalists from the Stranger are going to weigh in on this and urge readers to call Senators Murray (202-224-2621) and Cantwell (202-224-3441) demanding that they vote to definitively end filibuster abuse -- now, when it counts -- then they should agree to place the blame for future Senate obstruction squarely where it belongs: not with the Republican filibusterers, but with the Democrats who knowingly enabled them them to filibuster.
Posted by PCM on January 2, 2013 at 12:57 PM · Report this
Phoebe in Wallingford 38
@33: I agree with you about the demise of retail diversity; or rather the overload of ubiquitous junk and at the same time prefer to have liquor sales privatized. The two are not mutually exclusive.
Posted by Phoebe in Wallingford on January 2, 2013 at 12:45 PM · Report this
Fnarf 37
@35, which is why Mexican cities are usually much more interesting places to walk around than American ones.

Re Bottleworks: precisely. Slogger "N in Seattle" long ago proposed that the rule should have specified a 10,000 foot MAXIMUM, and I agree.
Posted by Fnarf on January 2, 2013 at 12:44 PM · Report this
Fnarf 36
@31, I was under the impression Zipcar was about half-dead already. Most of the Zipcar spots that were in my neck of the woods are gone. The thing I'm starting to see now is Car2Go -- blue and white Smartcars that can park in any city 2-hour space, not just assigned lots.
Posted by Fnarf on January 2, 2013 at 12:05 PM · Report this
@33 in retail diversity, Mexico has the US beat by a long shot. The other factor with the 10k sf rule is its hard to find a space that big in the city and if you do, it'll be stupidly expensive. I hope that rule goes away soon. I want a boutique booze shop, something small and dark like Bottleworks.
Posted by CbytheSea on January 2, 2013 at 12:04 PM · Report this
Jaymz 34
PS to Foghorn @9 - as a fellow Islander I vaguely recall the shirtless swordsman but must have missed the werewolves and CHUDs. This explains the disgusting droppings I've seen since they seem to be consuming and excreting each other!
Posted by Jaymz on January 2, 2013 at 12:02 PM · Report this
Fnarf 33
@30, that's because you live in an area dominated by huge box stores. In the city, most drug stores are too small. The Bartell's near me is too small.

And I don't think you can count groceries and drug stores that carry ten or twenty brands total to a full-service liquor store. Even the fancy supermarkets here in town have laughable liquor departments.

In short, you're celebrating the success of terrible selection in car-oriented big box suburbs. That's yet one more area of commerce given over to the principles of Wal-Mart. That's a decline in civilization. In most of America now it is virtually impossible to buy a book, a record, a movie, or a food item (including booze) beyond a tiny selection of lowest-common-denominator items.

Remember those stories about Soviet-era Russians coming to the US and being flabbergasted by the retail variety on offer at even the most mundane store? That process has reversed completely. The US is now one of the most impoverished countries in the world in terms of retail. We're turning into a giant dollar store. And of course your online purchases don't send tax to the state, so the state is falling apart. Yay, you can buy half-gallons of store brand for $12 at the drugstore.

Unless you're rich, of course; then you can have anything you want.
Posted by Fnarf on January 2, 2013 at 11:54 AM · Report this
Phoebe in Wallingford 32
@28: Yes, I was dismayed at the lack of selection... until recently. Go to the QFC liquor store in University Village.
Posted by Phoebe in Wallingford on January 2, 2013 at 11:54 AM · Report this
Jaymz 31
Pardon the distraction of another item posted:

A small voice in the wilderness cries out in dismay when Zipcar is eaten by Avis Budget - this can't be good.

Please resume booze related dismay.
Posted by Jaymz on January 2, 2013 at 11:53 AM · Report this
fletc3her 30
@23 The 10,000 sqft restriction is small enough that every drug and grocery store in my area now stocks liquor. We went from two outlets to more than a dozen.
Posted by fletc3her on January 2, 2013 at 11:30 AM · Report this
@23 you're right about the revenue trap. Distribution is in a weird state right now. A lot of beer folks are going into liquor distribution so hopefully that'll open things up a bit.
In hindsight, it bums me out that when we, the people of Washington, owned the liquor distribution when couldn't get any booze producers to do a special Whisky for the Washington market.
@19 check out Wine World in Wallingford. Great selection. Prices are high though, so I'd recommend buying the rare stuff only.
Posted by CbytheSea on January 2, 2013 at 11:25 AM · Report this
sperifera 28
@5 - Phoebe, my dear, if you seriously believe that selection is better now than before privatization, you need to put down the crack pipe and pick up the shot glass.
Posted by sperifera on January 2, 2013 at 11:24 AM · Report this
keshmeshi 27


If lowering prices increases consumption enough to also increase *profits*...
Posted by keshmeshi on January 2, 2013 at 11:11 AM · Report this
@11 I work in the industry. There's restrictions but its not a whole lot different than the average. They generally are there to prevent liquor monopolies, as I said, volume discounting is a huge factor. So is allowing free product.
The WSLCB's job is to monitor the sale and production of alcohol. The minor thing is a side gig. Trust me, 99 percent of my interactions is making sure I'm playing fair with everyone and paying my taxes. Kids rarely come up.
I voted for this law (said no on the first two, shitty deal for small local breweries and I do vote in my own self-interest), the pro and con to me seemed to balance eachother out. Yeah, booze is going to cost more but new local distillers can self-distribute and we're starting to see some cool rare booze (though the bars snatch it up).
It's going to take a long time before you see cheap booze in Washington. You might see the odd post-off here and there, that'd be cool. But until you allow volume discounts, these prices will go down a wee bit.

@14 hopefully people realize the difference between a good ipa and a great ipa is age. The Pliny limited availability worked wonders in that regard.
Posted by CbytheSea on January 2, 2013 at 11:11 AM · Report this
Did everyone who voted for privatization of liquor sales do so with the wish that the 2 ounce bottles would be harder to find? Because they are.
Posted by I don't cook with 40 oz bottles on January 2, 2013 at 11:08 AM · Report this
keshmeshi 24

Consumption of liquor is down statewide than before privatization, most likely due to higher prices. If lowering prices increases consumption enough to also increase prices, than prices might come down. But it also depends on the obstinacy of retailers, so we'll see.

Goldy can proclaim all he wants that he told us so, but his main argument against privatization was the evils of The Demon Liquor. But don't expect him to concede that he was wrong about privatization increasing consumption. He never, ever admits fault or error.
Posted by keshmeshi on January 2, 2013 at 11:08 AM · Report this
Fnarf 23
@7, no taxes were added.

I don't know how many times I have to say this before it gets through to people: NO TAXES WERE ADDED.

The liter tax and the heavy liquor sales tax were already there, and have been for fifty years. They were just already included in the shelf price. If you wanted to see the breakdown of liquor price, liquor tax, and liter tax, you had to look in the price book. I have one to show you if you don't believe me.

The reason prices have gone up so much is because the distributors jacked the prices to cover a potential $150 million whammy they might have to pay if tax revenues fall -- which they are almost certain to do.

The deregulation that was not done was on the distributor side. It's not opened up at all, which means there's a near-monopoly on liquor distribution, which means prices will never come down. The other regulation is new: 10,000 foot minimum store size, which means most towns and neighborhoods will never see one. The average Washingtonian has to drive far further to get liquor now -- if they can even figure out where it's being sold.

On the other hand Rite Aid has liters of "Lewis & Clark" brand vodka, rum and Canadian (distilled by Hood River, practically local!) for $6.99 if you have a "wellness card", which is like something out of "Idiocracy".
Posted by Fnarf on January 2, 2013 at 11:04 AM · Report this
Phoebe in Wallingford 22
@19: Give it time. Meanwhile, tell those managers you want Jim Beam Rye and you'll probably see it on their shelves soon.

(Does JBR make a good Old Fashion?)
Posted by Phoebe in Wallingford on January 2, 2013 at 11:01 AM · Report this
Will in Seattle 21
@18 yes, but you get even higher sales if you let them consume it on premises.
Posted by Will in Seattle on January 2, 2013 at 10:56 AM · Report this
" regressive sin taxes are absurd. It's one of the many ways Washington tries to run its government on the backs of the poor "

Well, try sinning less.
Posted by Sugartit on January 2, 2013 at 10:51 AM · Report this
@5 - selection is better?! Are you kidding? Selection now is horrid! Most grocery stores only have a small selection of the same crap. I went to BevMo for the first time, and it still had a worst selection than the state run stores had. I had to go to 3 stores just to find a bottle of Jim Beam Rye.
Posted by ourkind on January 2, 2013 at 10:41 AM · Report this
Sir Vic 18
@17 Was just about to say the same thing, using Walmart as the example. They will certainly cut their liquor prices when possible, as that has been their business model for a long time.

There is probably some consumer science that says that liquor is a luxury item & loss leader - people with extra cash to spend are buying liquor, so the cheaper you make it the greater the chance they'll buy other high margin stuff.
Posted by Sir Vic on January 2, 2013 at 10:19 AM · Report this
@15: Stores are making a reasonable margin right now. When taxes drop, prices will also drop because stores will undercut each other and still make a reasonable margin. It likely won't drop by the full amount of the tax decrease, I think.
Posted by doceb on January 2, 2013 at 10:15 AM · Report this
@12: it did eventually work. They hit him with fire hoses to knock him down, pinned him down with a ladder, then swarmed in.
Posted by doceb on January 2, 2013 at 10:11 AM · Report this
treacle 15
+$2.50 is probably some vast average. Prices are easily $10 more on several bottles now, and it's not just the taxes. And as to "prices will come down once the state gets all its extortion and racketeering payments"... with all due respect, I think you're fooling yourself. Very, very rarely do prices actually come down in a capitalist world. Why would store owners do that? Since people will obligingly purchase alcohol at current prices, stores will only boost their profit margins with any changes in the liquor tax structure.

The minor improvement in convenience is costing us all quite a bit. And it affects the working/drinking classes' pocket books more than the richer folks. Ò_Ó
Posted by treacle on January 2, 2013 at 10:10 AM · Report this
emor 14

My beer & wine buyer friend never even bothered with the Pliny game, even though people asked him for it all the time. Too much trouble to bring in all their other beers just to get a chance of getting a case or two.
Posted by emor on January 2, 2013 at 9:58 AM · Report this
rob! 13
Pliny the Elder Elder no longer in Seattle? NOOOOOO!!
Posted by rob! on January 2, 2013 at 9:58 AM · Report this
Max Solomon 12
Did we kill the Samurai Sword guy at 2nd & Pike back in 1998, 99? I can't remember.

I do remember that they shot him with fire hoses and that didn't work.
Posted by Max Solomon on January 2, 2013 at 9:53 AM · Report this
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn 11

Um, no. Liquor distribution has a long list of restrictions on it, none of which have anything to do with keeping alcohol out of the hands of minors, or preventing alcoholism or DUI.

And yes, the regressive sin taxes are absurd. It's one of the many ways Washington tries to run its government on the backs of the poor instead of making the rich pay their fair share. We're probably stuck with sin taxes until we finally get income taxes.

Micromanaging the liquor market has failed just like the drug war has failed. But progress takes time, it always does. Baby steps.
Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn on January 2, 2013 at 9:52 AM · Report this
Supreme Ruler Of The Universe 10

So after months of railing about Middle Class tax cuts...Obama comes up with a "compromise" that essentially raises them by the same amount by letting another tax, payroll, which seemed hidden from discussion until after the fact, to rise by the same amount ( $1000 to $3000 ).

Some deal.
Posted by Supreme Ruler Of The Universe on January 2, 2013 at 9:50 AM · Report this
Foghorn Leghorn 9
To be fair, Seattle prefers to use pepper balls, firehoses and ladders against the sword-wielding.… Never forget! Meanwhile Bainbridge Island uses its words:… But now we are sadly plagued by werewolves and CHUDS.

@7 is correct. Adios RR, sorry your shenanigans didn't play well, but the truth is that you just don't have the capacity to serve WA. Maybe one day, but 14k bbls right now isn't much for multiple-state distro.
Posted by Foghorn Leghorn on January 2, 2013 at 9:50 AM · Report this
Hmmm, cannabis regulation will really tax the WSLCB ability...
Posted by SanWayneSmith on January 2, 2013 at 9:42 AM · Report this
@1 there are now private liquor stores, liquor can be sold via a distributor and in state distilleries can do direct sales to both wholesale and retail accounts. How will it become more 'deregulated'? Are you talking about that tax that was added to help make up the difference for lost revenue?
If you really want cheap liquor, you need to allow volume discounts. Which, all small industries are going to fight (as they should).
@3 RR left because the state doesn't like the dumb Pliny game, nor did any bars or retailers. I like Vinnie and think RR is a great brewery but that whole quota system was dumb and frustrating. But in the end, they want to sell more beer out of their brewpub (better margin and you can make sure the beer is perfect shape).
Posted by CbytheSea on January 2, 2013 at 9:38 AM · Report this
Akbar Fazil 6
I will gladly pay that only slightly higher price on average for the added convenience, better selection and not having the state in the business.
Posted by Akbar Fazil on January 2, 2013 at 9:29 AM · Report this
Phoebe in Wallingford 5
Liquor prices will come down once the state gets all its extortion and racketeering payments. Already the selection is better than the old state stores, and the convenience of buying non-alcoholic items, like club soda, in the same store is means less errand running.
Posted by Phoebe in Wallingford on January 2, 2013 at 9:28 AM · Report this
if it's only 23 million to widen I-5 at Seneca, why not do that in addition to the tunnel? Is this project somehow forbidden now? Do you think widening at Seneca would match all the traffic throughput the tunnel will provide? How would it be different if the choice had been surface or rebuild? Seems to me you widen at Seneca regardless... how is this related to the tunnel?
Posted by myr on January 2, 2013 at 9:23 AM · Report this
Our liquor laws have cost us another out of state brewery. Goodbye Russian River, we'll miss you.
Posted by Nic in Greenlake on January 2, 2013 at 9:17 AM · Report this
nice, seeing the lede being dems adopt 98% of the Bush tax cuts. then, complaint that gop whines.
wow. again, focusing on the wrong thing. if dems now adopt Bush Tax Cuts, or most of them, as the baseline we're in for more cuts later and this is a huge foundational loss, not a win, not a triumph over the whiners. their whining is faking us out!. the deal raises taxes for the bottom half of all famillies, not very progressive is it, and raises taxes on the tippy top, but not to overall rates of clinton era, saving them from a real restoration of tax rates, and preserves the remainder of the upper classes from tax hikes locking in a gop baseline notion as to what taxes should be.
it's like the gerrymandered distreicts in the house. we look at it and whine, we whine about their whining, then we propose ineffctive reforms that amount to giving in, when we should be blasting the gop for corruption in its soul. they took the economy hostage and all we did was lower the ransom a bit. they corrupted the house and all we do is nothing.

we just let them get away with their shit every time. trying to argue ha ha they are drama queens just obscures the fact -- they won! they locked in most of the bush tax cuts and the program to starve the beast.
Posted by dems join in starving on January 2, 2013 at 9:06 AM · Report this
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn 1
Kind of doubtful we will finish deregulating liquor this year, but thanks for the reminder.
Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn on January 2, 2013 at 9:06 AM · Report this

Add a comment


Want great deals and a chance to win tickets to the best shows in Seattle? Join The Stranger Presents email list!

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy