Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Liberal

NDP

Others

[alwaysfishn]

I dont feel bad for the private liquor store owners at all...and I love my suds, they have been making money hand over foot for quite a while now.

What does that mean?

If anyone is making money hand over foot (The expression is "hand over fist") it's the government liquor stores, however they have very high operating/labor costs.

The problem with the NDP proposal is that after the Campell government encouraged a lot of small business people to invest in private liquor stores, the NDP now wants to come along and put them out of business. The amount of money they are making on the booze they sell is very low.... the NDP proposal wants to lower that....

By the way the government makes more money from the booze sold in private stores than they do in the government run stores...

In all likely hood the NDP proposal is there to try and eliminate these businesses so that the NDP can set up more government/union operated stores. Not because they can make more money from the sale of booze, but because they will be able to provide their union buddies with more jobs. I don't see as much of a problem with that, but I see a huge problem with a policy that will force small businesses into bankruptcy.

[Novabonker]

I dont feel bad for the private liquor store owners at all...and I love my suds, they have been making money hand over foot for quite a while now.

What does that mean?

If anyone is making money hand over foot (The expression is "hand over fist") it's the government liquor stores, however they have very high operating/labor costs.

The problem with the NDP proposal is that after the Campell government encouraged a lot of small business people to invest in private liquor stores, the NDP now wants to come along and put them out of business. The amount of money they are making on the booze they sell is very low.... the NDP proposal wants to lower that....

By the way the government makes more money from the booze sold in private stores than they do in the government run stores...

In all likely hood the NDP proposal is there to try and eliminate these businesses so that the NDP can set up more government/union operated stores. Not because they can make more money from the sale of booze, but because they will be able to provide their union buddies with more jobs. I don't see as much of a problem with that, but I see a huge problem with a policy that will force small businesses into bankruptcy.

Gee whiz- All they are proposing is to take back the extra 6% that probably shouldn't have been given at taxpayer's expense in the first place. The stores prospered before the "gift" and I'm sure will continue to prosper if it gets taken back. It smacks of subsidy to me and looks like another attempt to privatize something that adds to our tax base and pays employees a wage they can live on instead of $8 an hour. If it wasn't for the generosity of alms offerings by the customers, I doubt the kids who work in these establishments could survive. It sticks in my craw that I have to subsidize a business by the wholesale decrease in prices or the wages of the employees by my tips. And to take into consideration that the agency stores only get 10% instead of 16% like the private stores just throws fuel on the fire.

[bcguy]

I dont feel bad for the private liquor store owners at all...and I love my suds, they have been making money hand over foot for quite a while now.

What does that mean?

If anyone is making money hand over foot (The expression is "hand over fist") it's the government liquor stores, however they have very high operating/labor costs.

The problem with the NDP proposal is that after the Campell government encouraged a lot of small business people to invest in private liquor stores, the NDP now wants to come along and put them out of business. The amount of money they are making on the booze they sell is very low.... the NDP proposal wants to lower that....

By the way the government makes more money from the booze sold in private stores than they do in the government run stores...

In all likely hood the NDP proposal is there to try and eliminate these businesses so that the NDP can set up more government/union operated stores. Not because they can make more money from the sale of booze, but because they will be able to provide their union buddies with more jobs. I don't see as much of a problem with that, but I see a huge problem with a policy that will force small businesses into bankruptcy.

So the government has high operating costs, yet sells cheaper, with better wages, and still makes alot of money?
And its more like there was so much money in alcohol, the potential owners were fighting over licences.
I highly dought that they had to beg people to apply for licenses to sell alcohol

[Johnny_5]

[quote}Gee whiz- All they are proposing is to take back the extra 6% that probably shouldn't have been given at taxpayer's expense in the first place. The stores prospered before the "gift" and I'm sure will continue to prosper if it gets taken back. It smacks of subsidy to me and looks like another attempt to privatize something that adds to our tax base and pays employees a wage they can live on instead of $8 an hour. If it wasn't for the generosity of alms offerings by the customers, I doubt the kids who work in these establishments could survive. It sticks in my craw that I have to subsidize a business by the wholesale decrease in prices or the wages of the employees by my tips. And to take into consideration that the agency stores only get 10% instead of 16% like the private stores just throws fuel on the fire.
[/quote]

The Private Liquor Stores get a 16% discount on the retail price charged at the Government Liquor store, not the wholesale price.  It's not really a subsidy, government liquors stores buy booze wholesale for a lot less than they sell it for.  Without a discount on the retail price, it would be impossible to compete at all.

[Novabonker]

So the moral of the story is - Buy your liquor at government stores or pay a premium. I fully realize that the mark down is 10 % of retail, but the private stores were faring quite well on 10% so I can't quite grasp why another 6% was needed to be given. (Unless you look at the Elections BC website)

[alwaysfishn]

So the moral of the story is - Buy your liquor at government stores or pay a premium. I fully realize that the mark down is 10 % of retail, but the private stores were faring quite well on 10% so I can't quite grasp why another 6% was needed to be given. (Unless you look at the Elections BC website)

At 10% margin the store needs to sell about 10 - $12 cases of beer an hour just to pay his $8.00/hour employee (wages and benefits). He hasn't yet paid for his heat, light and rent. In addition he has probably invested $100,000 or more into setting his business up. In many cases I'm sure they could be making more if they had of put their money into a 1% bank savings account. Of course they could and usually do charge more for the booze at their stores but that just causes people to drive further to the government stores that charge less......

I'm with you on buying your booze at the government stores. My issue as I said before, for the NDP to put these businesses into bankruptcy because they want their union buddies to get more jobs, well it turns my stomach.

[Novabonker]

So the moral of the story is - Buy your liquor at government stores or pay a premium. I fully realize that the mark down is 10 % of retail, but the private stores were faring quite well on 10% so I can't quite grasp why another 6% was needed to be given. (Unless you look at the Elections BC website)

At 10% margin the store needs to sell about 10 - $12 cases of beer an hour just to pay his $8.00/hour employee (wages and benefits). He hasn't yet paid for his heat, light and rent. In addition he has probably invested $100,000 or more into setting his business up. In many cases I'm sure they could be making more if they had of put their money into a 1% bank savings account. Of course they could and usually do charge more for the booze at their stores but that just causes people to drive further to the government stores that charge less......

I'm with you on buying your booze at the government stores. My issue as I said before, for the NDP to put these businesses into bankruptcy because they want their union buddies to get more jobs, well it turns my stomach.

I've never seen a cold beer and wine sell at par with government stores. Usually it's at a 20-30 % premium. But don't think Campbell's policies are a great boon to independent business. I have a friend that operates a lodge up north. All his power to the lodge and cabins etc. is done by a diesel generator. He estimates that at the present rate, the carbon tax will cost him 10,000 dollars a year for the fuel he requires to run the resort and will escalate as the tax climbs, up to $30,000 a year by the time the tax is fully implemented. Look at how this is going to affect the people heating their homes in Prince George or Fort St. John. I see an increase in wood burning stoves as people will be forced to find ways to deal with the increased costs and that doesn't take into account the pollution levels from the burning wood.Now if you go over a certain electrical usage, you get whacked again. How many folks heat their homes with electricity?That's a damn heavy hit on the bottom line. I own a service business. I get nailed in the pocketbook too as I can't jump on a bus with all of my equipment and tools. It was getting to the point a short while ago that I was considering dumping it all. It's one thing top give a tax break, but to claim it's revenue neutral is a, well, case of being "misspoken". The rest of my tax breaks got clawed back by increasing fees for everything from parking charges in public parks to medical insurance fees, etc.. I disagree with cutting guaranteed revenues to private liquor stores and squeezing other business interests and Joe Public to the breaking point.

[Johnny_5]

So the moral of the story is - Buy your liquor at government stores or pay a premium. I fully realize that the mark down is 10 % of retail, but the private stores were faring quite well on 10% so I can't quite grasp why another 6% was needed to be given. (Unless you look at the Elections BC website)

At 10% margin the store needs to sell about 10 - $12 cases of beer an hour just to pay his $8.00/hour employee (wages and benefits). He hasn't yet paid for his heat, light and rent. In addition he has probably invested $100,000 or more into setting his business up. In many cases I'm sure they could be making more if they had of put their money into a 1% bank savings account. Of course they could and usually do charge more for the booze at their stores but that just causes people to drive further to the government stores that charge less......

I'm with you on buying your booze at the government stores. My issue as I said before, for the NDP to put these businesses into bankruptcy because they want their union buddies to get more jobs, well it turns my stomach.

Obviously it makes sense to buy at the government stores to save money.  However, from a fairness point of view, why can't the private stores buy booze wholesale like the government stores?  Then there would be true competition.  Imagine if you were running a store, and the only way you could get your product was to buy it from your competitor down the street paying full price.  That's basically what we have here.  Remember, the government still makes a profit on the booze they sell to the private stores at a discount.

[marmot]

As long as the gov't liquor stores don't refrigerate their beer, people will continue to buy COLD beer from private business ...sometimes you just can't wait a half hour

[troutbreath]

This thread should be renamed to "where you buy your beer".

[marmot]

This thread should be renamed to "where you buy your beer".

only in canada does beer weigh in at election time, eh?  Not sure whether to be proud of that or not .....    

[alwaysfishn]

Okay the liberals have screwed up over the last few years.....

Here's a reminder of the NDP's screw ups......

* After saying they wouldn’t raise taxes during the 1991 election campaign, the NDP raised taxes by nearly $2 billion in their first two years. As a result, by 1994 B.C. had the highest marginal income tax rates in North America.

* From 1994 onward, B.C.’s economic growth performed below the national average nearly every single year. By 1998, B.C. had the worst economy in the country.

* The NDP brought in EIGHT consecutive deficit budgets and doubled the province’s debt. They introduced five debt-management plans over eight years, and missed every single target. As a result, they received two credit rating downgrades during their time in office.

* The total operating debt – the debt accrued through spending on government operations – doubled to over $12 billion in 2000/01. This resulted in a $3.8 billion "structural deficit" left by the NDP in 2001.

* Between 1992 and 2000 B.C. ranked last in private-sector job creation per capita in the country, and suffered the highest unemployment rate of all the Western provinces nearly every year. The unemployment rate reached 10.2 per cent under the NDP with record high unemployment for women and youth.

* Under the NDP, Real Disposable Income dropped every year between 1991 and 1997, and didn’t even return to 1991 levels until 2001.

* Under the 1990s NDP, thousands of British Columbians fled the province. In their last three years of government (1998 to 2000), B.C. lost nearly 45,000 people to other provinces.

You decide which party is more "dangerous"

[Novabonker]

Okay the liberals have screwed up over the last few years.....

Here's a reminder of the NDP's screw ups......

* After saying they wouldn’t raise taxes during the 1991 election campaign, the NDP raised taxes by nearly $2 billion in their first two years. As a result, by 1994 B.C. had the highest marginal income tax rates in North America.

* From 1994 onward, B.C.’s economic growth performed below the national average nearly every single year. By 1998, B.C. had the worst economy in the country.

* The NDP brought in EIGHT consecutive deficit budgets and doubled the province’s debt. They introduced five debt-management plans over eight years, and missed every single target. As a result, they received two credit rating downgrades during their time in office.

* The total operating debt – the debt accrued through spending on government operations – doubled to over $12 billion in 2000/01. This resulted in a $3.8 billion "structural deficit" left by the NDP in 2001.

* Between 1992 and 2000 B.C. ranked last in private-sector job creation per capita in the country, and suffered the highest unemployment rate of all the Western provinces nearly every year. The unemployment rate reached 10.2 per cent under the NDP with record high unemployment for women and youth.

* Under the NDP, Real Disposable Income dropped every year between 1991 and 1997, and didn’t even return to 1991 levels until 2001.

* Under the 1990s NDP, thousands of British Columbians fled the province. In their last three years of government (1998 to 2000), B.C. lost nearly 45,000 people to other provinces.

You decide which party is more "dangerous"

The total provincial debt  under the Liberals is now 47 billion, economic growth was 3%, 2.8% under the Liberals. Do you really have more disposable income after all the fees and user pay that has been instituted? Go for a drive to Squamish, pay your carbon tax,( I remember Campbel'ls words distinctly that the 3.5 cent tax on fuel was a one time thing)  pay your parking fees if you want to take your kids to a provincial park, but if you get hurt your paid up medical fees will take care of it. You can go through the drive through and grab a burger from an 8 dollar an hour employee that hasn't had a raise in 8 years and marvel at the gluttons on the public teat taking 54,000 dollar raises, beauty pensions and 124 000 severeance even if they quit after 1term with 9000 dollar retraing allowance while you scramble to help put your kids through school with the ballooned tuition fees.. And then you look out over the rivers that will be played with to IPP's while BC Hydro can't do anything to develop new sources and marvel about those rail road tracks that were promised not to be sold Take note of how many logging trucks can be had for a song. Might be time to stock up because the forestry sector can't be get any wors can it?.On your way back, think about how BC Ferries now costs a fortune to use and have no public accountability. You might want to see if any of those new off shore built lemons are vibrating away. Be sure to check out the enormous cost over run convention center and take solace in the fact that despite having the highest child poverty in Canada, we can afford hundreds of millions of dollars for a lid on BC Place and 17 million for a soccer pitch in Delta where the hospital was closed. But that's OK our premier with the mugshot and leadfoot warn the fish farns and return the fines van Dongen will team up with ALR Les to say it's not a moral issue at all.

Sounds VERY dangerous to me.

No ill feelings, but I do love debate.

[alwaysfishn]

will team up with ALR Les to say it's not a moral issue at all.

Sounds VERY dangerous to me.

No ill feelings, but I do love debate.

Yes...  I also have a problem with.... "I didn do no crime.." ALR Les 

[huntwriter]

Carol James did impress me the most. She would stop the sellout of our rivers...help wild salmon (fish farm lice) etc.... seniors schools hospitals ....... ABC

Carol James did impress me the most. She would stop the sellout of our rivers...help wild salmon (fish farm lice) etc.... seniors schools hospitals ....... ABC

Don’t bet on it, Carol James has a very short memory otherwise she would remember that it was her party that started what is erroneously described as sellout. The rivers are leased not sold. Under the NDP government the lease was made out “for Ever” the liberals cut it back to a maximum of 40 years.

It was the NDP that wreaked our health service and education system. It’s not good now either but a lot better then what the NDP left behind.

Carol James is all mouth and wishful thinking.
Elections should not be all about fish and rivers it also should be -mostly- about economy and that is where the NDP sucks big time. Have you read or heard the taxes she wants to force at businesses? And what influence the unions will gain under a NDP government? Not good, not good at all. That she does not like hunting and wants to curb hunting rights and opportunities are weighing in for me too but overall NDP = economic disaster and more taxes for everybody to finance the global warming myth.