HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Sep 21, 2007, 3:08 PM
Only The Lonely..'s Avatar
Only The Lonely.. Only The Lonely.. is offline
Portage & Main 50 below
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 4,871
Eliminate MLCC? I'll drink to that!

Eliminate MLCC? I'll drink to that!


Fri Sep 21 2007 | Bruce Clark | Winnipeg Free Press commentary


WHEN will Manitobans be allowed to purchase spirits, wine and beer from Sobeys, Safeway, or any other free-market retailer at reasonable prices instead of being extorted by the Manitoba Liquor Control Commission cartel?
In Palm Springs, Calif., my adopted home, I can purchase a 1,750 ml bottle (a "sixty-six" or "handle" in drinker's parlance) of Canadian Club rye whiskey at Costco for $16.23 including sales tax. On making my annual summer pilgrimage to Winnipeg, it almost kills me to shell out $53.10 including GST and PST to purchase that same bottle at an MLCC outlet.

So, why does a product manufactured in Canada sell for an additional $37 in its native land? It's all taxes that eventually contribute to health care, education and other social services, right? Wrong. And that's the costly rub.

The MLCC purchases that 1,750 ml bottle of rye from the distributor for a whopping $9.52. Don't shake your head, it's not a typo. There's a $0.49 freight charge giving the MLCC a total cost of $10.01 for a bottle of whiskey they'll eventually peddle to you for over 53 bucks, paper bag included.

There is a federal excise tax of $8.18 and another $1.13 in surcharges but what makes that bottle so expensive is the criminally high markup (which is actually a hidden provincial tax) that would make even the sleaziest of loan sharks blush.

The MLCC markup on that $10 bottle is -- you may want to pour yourself a stiff one before continuing -- $27.66. And just to kick you while you're down, you pay GST and PST on the hidden tax and the federal excise tax. In other words, you're paying federal and provincial taxes on hidden federal and provincial taxes. And you thought the bootlegger went the way of the passenger pigeon.
In its last published annual report (fiscal year ending March 31, 2006), the MLCC reported gross profits of $249 million. Pretty easy to accomplish when you're a government-protected monopoly. MLCC president and CEO Don Lussier boasted that the commission returned $196.2 million to the provincial government.

What happened to the $249 million? Oh, right, it cost consumers (and here's the part that drives me to drink) over $50 million to have the added annoyance of having to make an extra trip to a government-run institution whenever they want to enjoy a glass of wine or a whisky sour with their dinner.

The MLCC spent $30.8 million in salaries and benefits for its 800 full- and part-time employees. Not to mention over $10 million to lease and maintain office space and the 46 (soon to be 47) MLCC retail outlets. All tolled, the MLCC snatched an extra $50.2 million from consumers for no other reason than to fund itself.

The MLCC is an antiquated make-work project that exists for one reason: to perpetuate the existence of the MLCC. Drinkers in Manitoba are forced to purchase alcoholic beverages at immorally high prices that contain exorbitant, unethical markups that are due in large part to propping up the MLCC.

Manitobans (and the rest of Canadians for that matter) shouldn't be forced to pay a premium on any goods or services in order to run bloated bureaucracies, to lease and maintain redundant retail space and compensate superfluous staff.

There is absolutely no reason why consumers shouldn't be free to purchase their spirits at the same time and the same place they're buying their T-bones. A Safeway cashier can scan a bottle of wine and bag a crock of rum with the same professional aplomb as any MLCC clerk.

The hidden taxes that make up that $196 million are certainly a benefit to Manitobans and they could easily be collected by retailers in the form of a provincial excise. The tens of millions of dollars in annual savings realized by shutting down the bloated MLCC would be passed on to the consumer.

Eliminating the anachronistic MLCC, a monopoly that's been allowed to exist for far too long, will create competition and undoubtedly lead to lower prices. That's something all Manitobans can drink to.


Bruce Clark, a writer and standup comedian now lives in Palm Springs, Calif., and spends his summers in his hometown of Winnipeg.
__________________
WINNIPEG: Home of Canada's first skyscraper!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Sep 21, 2007, 3:21 PM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is offline
I am a typical
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 41,172
When will the profits on alcohol go to Americans instead of Manitobans? I can't wait!

LCBO makes billions from alcohol sales. That's billions that don't have to come from tax payers. In addition to that, the LCBO actually holds sway in the industry. There was an article in Time about it recently. Safeway's alcohol department would never be able to do something like that.


And do you honestly believe Safeway is going to charge less for alcohol? They have the highest mark ups of all the chain grocers! Safeway puts much more money to wages and pocketed profits than MLCC ever will, and it's almost entirely non-Manitoban, let along non-Canadian. Safeway Canada may be HQed in Canada but their profits still go south.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Sep 21, 2007, 3:51 PM
drew's Avatar
drew drew is offline
the first stamp is free
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hippyville, Winnipeg
Posts: 7,981
Look no further than Alberta. They have "private" alcohol sales - and save for single malt scotch (IIRC there is a difference in applied taxes for that particular item in Alberta), the prices for everything are pretty much identical to the good 'ol bloated LC.

I'm with Vid on this one, we can go private, but don't expect a drastic drop in prices.

I really don't mind the LC. I live within a 2 minute walk of one, it's open late just about every day, and the people that work there are always extremely helpful and friendly - probably a direct result of their bloated government wages, but I digress...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Sep 21, 2007, 4:20 PM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is offline
I am a typical
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 41,172
Not only that, but the LC is exclusively a liquor store, which means that they are much more knowledgeable about the product than an employee at Safeway would be.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Sep 21, 2007, 4:42 PM
Only The Lonely..'s Avatar
Only The Lonely.. Only The Lonely.. is offline
Portage & Main 50 below
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 4,871
Quote:
Originally Posted by vid View Post
Not only that, but the LC is exclusively a liquor store, which means that they are much more knowledgeable about the product than an employee at Safeway would be.
Yaaa, because there's no way an 18 year old clerk could learn to read the back of a bottle of Merlot to tell you what it is.

Anyways, let's assume that there is no change in price. What would be so bad about having new convienent locations and a greater variety of brands?
__________________
WINNIPEG: Home of Canada's first skyscraper!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Sep 21, 2007, 4:44 PM
drew's Avatar
drew drew is offline
the first stamp is free
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hippyville, Winnipeg
Posts: 7,981
^ nothing. But the crux of that editorial was that private = lower prices. I just pointed out that this is proven false in Alberta.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Sep 21, 2007, 4:47 PM
Only The Lonely..'s Avatar
Only The Lonely.. Only The Lonely.. is offline
Portage & Main 50 below
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 4,871
I posted the article because I was amazed at the mark-ups on some of the items. I always knew booze was pretty heavily taxed but wow.
__________________
WINNIPEG: Home of Canada's first skyscraper!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Sep 21, 2007, 4:51 PM
drew's Avatar
drew drew is offline
the first stamp is free
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hippyville, Winnipeg
Posts: 7,981
true that. I gots to get my hands on some black market booze.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Sep 21, 2007, 4:51 PM
Only The Lonely..'s Avatar
Only The Lonely.. Only The Lonely.. is offline
Portage & Main 50 below
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 4,871
An interesting 2002 article from the Frontier Centre for Public Policy..


B.C. Moves To Reform Liquor

In Brief:


B.C. has concluded that liquor retailing is not a "core activity" of government.
Most European and U.S. governments, plus Alberta and Quebec leave this function to the normal marketplace.
Alberta's experience has been mostly positive: more revenues, more customer choice, better service.
Manitoba's government liquor retailer is embroiled in a lawsuit with private wine stores.
To remove the obvious conflict of interest involved in owning retail liquor stores that compete with private outlets, and regulating both, Manitoba should exit liquor retailing.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


On July 24, British Columbia announced it will open up the retail liquor business and invite more private vendors to sell spirits to the public. The new policy has merits on its own, but even more important is its underlying principle.

Rick Thorpe, B.C.'s Minister of Competition, Science and Enterprise, is in the middle of what they're calling a Core Services Review. It means looking at all the government's operations to "identify the core roles of government in the economy." In the case of liquor, the cabinet has correctly concluded that booze retailing is not a core government service.

This approach - separating the activity of operating or delivering a service from government's most important role, regulating it - helps achieve a basic of good policy design. It clarifies the job of elected officials who, at the end of the day, oversee the machinery of government. It allows them to consider all delivery options -- public, private or volunteer -- on a level playing field, free from the bias involved in being one of the players. All government activity should be subject to that test.

While Thorpe's Ministry has concluded otherwise, there are still many who see liquor retailing as a core role of government. Plenty of evidence suggests otherwise. Most of Europe and the United States, for example, leave this function to the normal marketplace. Québec and B.C.'s next-door neighbour also have a more modern attitude about liquor retailing. Any corner store can sell domestic beers and wines in La Belle Province.

In 1993, Alberta sold its provincial liquor stores and licensed private vendors to operate the service. Customer service promptly skyrocketed. Within two years, the number of outlets tripled and the number of products quadrupled, with operating hours expanded. The story in Manitoba was one of comparatively tepid reform. The Filmon government allowed a tiny opening to private wine retailers in 1994 that quickly revealed a hidden market, one that monopoly had suppressed. In Winnipeg, six private stores sell as much wine as the 22 Liquor Commission outlets, simply because they try harder.

Although the Alberta government had intended to make its exit out of liquor retailing revenue-neutral - it lowered taxes per bottle as the market expanded - the final tally proved a fiscal windfall. Income from direct liquor taxes stayed at about $450 million. But license fees and income taxes from the new retailers, revenue sources that did not exist when the Province owned the outlets, provided a new and thicker icing for the cake. The potential for increased income from liquor entrepreneurs must be alluring to the B.C. government, strapped for budget room by a succession of big-spending predecessors and the tariff-induced collapse of its biggest cash cow, softwood lumber.

Aside from a small increase in armed robberies, attributable to more stores open during longer hours, the only negative in the Alberta liquor reform turned out to be lower wages for liquor clerks. Average remuneration dipped from $13 an hour to $8, a level that, unsurprisingly, mirrored the wages available to other retail workers. On the positive side, however, many Alberta employees invested their severance packages to create thriving private outlets. Protecting these economic "rents" from objective market determinations of wage levels will nonetheless inspire an all-out effort in B.C. by government liquor retail employees to retain the public framework that saddles consumers with higher costs and less service.

The B.C. reforms still fall short. First, no single government liquor store will be sold until they conduct a "community by community analysis" to assess the impact. Besides opening the door to much political mischief, this soft policy implies that an open market may not serve the public's needs better, a fear confounded by the experience in Alberta, where service expanded across the board when all publicly owned stores were closed. The chance that some government stores will stay open revives the same conflict of interest that bedevils broad swaths of Canadian public policy. The Province will directly compete with the people it is regulating.

The same problem is mirrored in an upcoming court case here in Manitoba. Several private wine stores are suing the Manitoba Liquor Commission for alleged unfair trade practices. Among the allegations a claim that the Commission, as the regulator, forces private wine retailers to reveal who their customers are. This information could be passed to government stores who could then attempt to sell them directly with discounts and other goodies, for example, comparatively over generous airmile bonuses. Such a basic conflict of interest could be avoided by having the government exit the retail sales business completely.

As far as they go, the planned reforms to the liquor trade in B.C. deserve high praise. The single most difficult task for politicians is letting go of their perceived power and influence. Forced by the province's long brewing fiscal crisis to get government back to the basics, Gordon Campbell's government is demonstrating an unusual level of courage by starting to shed its retail liquor operation, especially since they're doing it for the right reason.
__________________
WINNIPEG: Home of Canada's first skyscraper!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Sep 21, 2007, 4:53 PM
Only The Lonely..'s Avatar
Only The Lonely.. Only The Lonely.. is offline
Portage & Main 50 below
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 4,871
Again from the Frontier Centre circa 2000

Alberta's Liquor Policy Bonanza
The numbers are in on Alberta's privatization of liquor retailing.


In Brief:


Nova Scotia is moving towards privatizing liquor distribution.
Alberta has benefited substantially from a policy of narrowing the core business of government to exclude liquor sales.
It increased tax revenues and expanded the tax base by 840 new tax-paying businesses. Consumers enjoy five time the product selection and lower prices.

In Manitoba, the government liquor monopoly is aggressively discouraging the few private wine stores from thriving at a significant opportunity cost to the broader community.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


In its provincial budget last April, the government of Nova Scotia promised that it would "get out of the retail and wholesale liquor business, provided such a move makes good sense for taxpayers." The evidence from Alberta, which privatized liquor retailing in 1993, indicates that the move makes a lot of sense.

Once the private sector took over, the industry took off. Albertans now enjoy more choice, more convenience and more investment in the liquor business. Revenues to the provincial treasury have remained the same, despite lower taxes per bottle. Predictions of dire social outcomes from freeing up booze have proven hollow.

John Hamm's government is heading in the same direction for the right reason, that selling liquor is not a "core government function". That phrase may not seem profound, but ignoring it is perilous. Government can best perform its vital duties, ensuring social order and prosperity, by getting out of the way. It doesn't run businesses very well, and shouldn't try.

Why did most provinces monopolize the liquor industry? The policy was a hangover from the beginning of the century, when temperance movements were all the rage. The harmful social effects of alcohol could only be mitigated, most people believed, by tight social controls over its sale and distribution. They were mistaken. Today we understand the catastrophic health effects of smoking, but nobody advocates selling cigarettes in government stores. We simply tax them heavily to discourage their use.

In Alberta, the government decided to maintain its liquor tax revenue at a flat level. Although per capita consumption has remained about the same, a tripling of outlets has allowed the government to capture the same amount of revenue while lowering the tax per bottle. To keep revenues constant, it has had to reduce taxes four time.


Before Privatization After Privatization
Number of retail outlets 304 840
Communitites served 151 219
Full-time jobs 950 4,000
Product list (provincial) 3,325 16,701
Product per average store 865 1,140
Tax revenue $435 million $443 million
Average price per litre $4.92 $4.69



Sources: Alberta Gaming and Liquor Commission, Statistics Canada, Westridge Marketing Services

Did more choice and diversity in the industry mean a lot more drinking? Not at all. Average liquor consumption per capita over the seven years rose only 1.7%. More importantly, since 1991 the incidence of drunk driving in Alberta has declined by 50%, due to heavier penalties for infractions. This is government at its best, allowing much more social freedom while containing the negative consequences.

Statistics on crime involving booze outlets are ambiguous. Overall, the rate of criminal offences at liquor stores in Calgary declined by 32%, but over-the-counter robberies went up. Analysts believe that the crime pattern just shifted because liquor stores can now stay open until 2:00 a.m. Break and entry declined because criminals approached were more likely to find staff in attendance.

Consistent with the pattern of privatization in other industries, the private liquor business created a financial windfall for Alberta. The government initially took in $82 million from selling assets, more than three times the actual cost of privatizing, which included $17 million in severance packages for employees. But $100 million in private capital investment followed. The businesses that sell liquor pay business, property and income taxes, having lost the free ride of escaping normal taxation due to government ownership. Alberta also realized a big boost in license fees from private liquor stores.

A significant difference between Alberta's effort and Nova Scotia's plans is that the latter intends to privatize the wholesale and distribution end as well. The pervasive benefits of free markets will be realized across the board.

Six years ago, the Filmon government made a minuscule effort to liberate the liquor business by licensing a handful of private wine stores and allowing two grocery stores in Winnipeg to sell wine. But the outcome has been muddied by blatant discrimination between the two types of facility and by ham-handed monopoly behaviour towards both.

For instance, the LCC has decreed that the wine stores get a 30% discount, after its 100% markup, but the grocery stores are only allowed 13%. The logic? Wine will bring more people into the food stores and they will buy more food. It does not make financial sense for grocery stores to bother with wine at this price.

Neither style of retailer is allowed to offer high-volume customers discounts or any of the promotions common in the hospitality industry. The Commission lost so much in sales to restaurants despite the restrictions that it offered them a generous Air Miles promotion the private retailers can't match. This diddle landed the LCC in court.

The private retailers can decide wine prices only if the LCC doesn't stock the brand, otherwise controls apply. Even if they bring in their own bottles from wineries, they have to rubberstamp the LCC's prices. The LCC minimizes the threat of competition with a sliding scale of discounts, 30% on the first million dollars in wine purchases, 15% for the next million and then down to 71/2%. In short, you are penalized if you succeed.

As soon as even a modicum of choice was allowed, the LCC responded with a sledgehammer. Before private wine stores, its advertising budget approached zero; now it's over $10 million a year. The private stores are not even allowed to tout the health benefits of drinking wine. The LCC also threw millions of tax dollars into renovations and hiring wine experts, spending that the private stores can't match as long as they're forced to stay small. In at least three cases, licensees have tried to supply private restaurants in which they have an interest but were threatened with the loss of their licenses just for asking permission.

Any wholesaler who tried these tactics in the normal marketplace would land in jail. That's the trouble with government monopolies. Basic rules of fair play go out the window when the referee ceases to be neutral.

These modernizing breezes from Alberta and Nova Scotia are unlikely to blow into Manitoba, at least under this government. Here's why. In Alberta average wages paid to liquor store workers declined from $13.00 an hour to $7.97, the labour price found in the competitive retail sector. Four times the employment, five times the product selection, lower liquor prices, 840 new tax-paying businesses, longer service hours -- in other words, a consumer and taxpayer bonanza matter little compared to preserving a handful of protected jobs.

Inertia rules. As it wastes energy harassing a few shopkeepers, a government misses the big picture yet again. We all continue to pay for another medieval public policy relic, drinking very expensive wine, at the cost of every economic advantage that privatization can confer.
__________________
WINNIPEG: Home of Canada's first skyscraper!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Sep 21, 2007, 8:48 PM
harls's Avatar
harls harls is online now
Mooderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Aylmer, Québec
Posts: 19,609
Quote:
Originally Posted by drew View Post
true that. I gots to get my hands on some black market booze.
I know a guy in Winnipeg that buys empty whiskey barrels and makes nasty swish. something like 60% alcohol. He gave me a glass and I could barely finish it. Disgusting, yet pleasing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Sep 21, 2007, 11:05 PM
1ajs's Avatar
1ajs 1ajs is offline
ʇɥƃıuʞ -*ʞpʇ*-
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: lynn lake
Posts: 25,831
while were at it get rid of the sunday shoping laws and get rid of the notion a weekend is a saturday and sunday its what ever days you take off during the week.....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Sep 21, 2007, 11:15 PM
newflyer's Avatar
newflyer newflyer is offline
Capitalist
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Calgary
Posts: 5,086
Government has no business in the liquor business... period.

This is just a enforced monopoly... which is just one of many expamples how Manitoba is still slow to embrace private enterprise.


The fact is if liquor sales were privatized there would be more convenience, more employment and more private business pushing for a more efficient government. Of cource the NDP has no interest in any of these things.

Not only does Manitoba limit private enterprise in this field, but it really penalizes private enterprise across the board with such taxes as the Payroll Tax and Capital Tax... as well as continuing high levels of business taxes. Government should fight to encourge more investment.. not for less.

By minimizing the amount of private investment, the government is really only discourgaing economic growth through private funds. Yes Manitoba is currently doing well thanks mainly to massive government projects, but really lacks the longterm private capital investment which would feed the economy in the future. There is also suspiciously low levels of new jobs feeding the economy during this time of growth, which is also a sign that there may not be adaquite level of private investment in the economy.

Its time to Manitoba to advance towards a modern economy .. and leave the 50's mantality behind.
__________________
Check out my city at
http://www.allwinnipeg.com **More than Ever**
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2007, 5:02 PM
Only The Lonely..'s Avatar
Only The Lonely.. Only The Lonely.. is offline
Portage & Main 50 below
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 4,871
And now just to peeve Newflyer a message from the local government...

From the Winnipeg Free Press commentary:

Buying liquor should be about more than price


Sat Sep 22 2007

Don Lussier



FROM time to time editorials and personal opinion pieces have appeared in these pages questioning the relevance and the value of the MLCC. More often than not, opinions are based solely on pricing.
The opinion piece by Bruce Clark (Eliminate MLCC? I'll drink to that! Free Press, Sept. 21) illustrates a naivety perpetuated by the uninformed with regard to liquor retailing in this province. The truth is that after 84 years, the MLCC continues to offer Manitobans exceptional value for their money.

While it is true that Manitoba's prices are higher than those found in the U.S., Manitobans enjoy many health and social benefits as a result of those prices. These benefits are either not available to our U.S. neighbours or available at costs not affordable to most Americans.

Here are the facts: Manitoba's beverage alcohol prices are mid-range in comparison with other Canadian liquor jurisdictions, and we enjoy the lowest beer prices in the country. As to our operational efficiencies, the MLCC remains one of the most efficient liquor jurisdictions in the country. In fiscal 2006, the MLCC's general and administrative expenses as a percentage of sales was 10.3 per cent -- the lowest in Canada.

Every Friday, the MLCC makes a deposit into the provincial treasury. This money in turn is used to help fund Manitoba's health care, education, social services and community support system. In 2006, the MLCC returned a record $196.2 million to the provincial government. To put it in a more tangible way, this amount could fund the annual operating expenses of four community hospitals.

Reduced alcohol prices may appeal to Manitoba's wholesale shopping reputation, but, the bigger question is: If prices were reduced, where would the shortfall in revenue come from? For instance the amount of revenue raised by the MLCC is approximately the equivalent to 10 per cent of total personal income tax collected. Without the MLCC, the money has to come from somewhere or someone.
One only has to look to Alberta to see what has happened to liquor prices since privatization approximately 14 years ago. Prior to privatization, Alberta's liquor prices were the lowest in Canada. Cross-Canada liquor price comparisons now show that Alberta's prices have moved to among the highest in the country.

One of the areas often over-looked in a comparison between private and public liquor retailing models is social responsibility. As a public retailer, the MLCC ensures that social responsibility is built into all its practices. Programs and controls are in place in both retail and licensed establishments to prevent minors from purchasing alcohol and to prevent over-service of alcohol.

A leader in social responsibility programming, the MLCC has received national and international recognition for our With Child-Without Alcohol program that addresses Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder, and for Be Undrunk; a public information campaign to discourage binge drinking among young adults.

The MLCC has also been working to reduce the harms associated with over-consumption of alcohol in Thompson and northern reserves due, in part, to bootlegging. A restriction was placed on the number of bottles purchased at the Thompson Liquor Mart and the MLCC is helping to establish a downtown watch patrol similar to the one in downtown Winnipeg.

The question is: Would a private liquor retailer act in a similar manner?

As for customer service, we are routinely praised for our exceptional employees. Customer surveys consistently rate Liquor Marts No. 1 in many attributes in comparison to other major food and drug retailers.

We score very high in friendly, knowledgeable service, and availability of products. In fact, the level of service satisfaction with Liquor Mart customers is around 98 per cent -- a percentage that would be the envy of any retailer. Recently, Winnipeg's Liquor Marts won a Consumers' Choice Award for quality, value, service and appearance -- hardly the mark of a bloated bureaucracy.

Here are more facts: The MLCC is a half-billion dollar company responsible for 46 retail outlets and approximately 800 employees. Not only have we managed to return record profits to the provincial government while maintaining our efficiency, we have done so with an eye to being a preferred employer, having been named one of the Top 100 Employers in the country and one of the Top 10 Employers in Manitoba in 2007. Our customers tell us we're doing a good job of balancing service, selection and social responsibility. If price is your only motivator when it comes to buying a bottle of alcohol, then perhaps Palm Springs, Calif., is the place for you.


Don Lussier is president and CEO of the Manitoba Liquor Control Commission.
__________________
WINNIPEG: Home of Canada's first skyscraper!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2007, 5:43 PM
newflyer's Avatar
newflyer newflyer is offline
Capitalist
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Calgary
Posts: 5,086


Its not about price, as much as maximizing the economic return.. and encouraging private investment within our economy.

Government controlled opperations don't offer that. Yes I am sure having a monopoly on alcohol is a profitable business for the government.. it doesn't take a genius to figure that one out... but thats not the issue.

Using the socialist logic the government should also control all gasoline sales.. yes shutdown all those private gas stations and make it all 100% government run. I am sure a monopoly in fuel sales would be very profitable too... while the economy would shrink... even for a slow bueracratic mess like government. Now of course ... this would also translate in half as many stations, as with any monopoly you don't need to worry about serving customers well. You wouldn't see competitive activity in the marketplace.. nor any private investment in this field. Yes the economy would pay the price, but thats something socialists would rather not mention. While we are at it lets nationalize Auto Supply stores .. I mean hey one government inforced monopoly works as well as another right. Shutdown all Canadian Tire stores.. each and every step would see the economy get smaller and smaller.. hell if Manitoba tried hard it could eventually be as efficient as Cuba where everone is so very happy to live in third world conditions in the name of a failed ideology.

No matter how socialist try to colour it, private business enterprise brings many more benefits to society than government controlled monopoly, which tries to suggest there is even a slight level of efficiency. Government is not efficient .. monopoly or not. Profitable yes.. but Al Capon knew that if you controlled alcohol sales you could become very rich too.
__________________
Check out my city at
http://www.allwinnipeg.com **More than Ever**
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2007, 5:53 PM
drew's Avatar
drew drew is offline
the first stamp is free
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hippyville, Winnipeg
Posts: 7,981
Quote:
Originally Posted by harls View Post
I know a guy in Winnipeg that buys empty whiskey barrels and makes nasty swish. something like 60% alcohol. He gave me a glass and I could barely finish it. Disgusting, yet pleasing.
Weird - I played spongee with a couple guys here that have done the same. They buy the oak barrels from the Crown Royal distillery in Gimli for next to nothing. There is usually a litre or two of pure unadulterated whiskey left in each, which they collect.

They make swish with the empty barrels, and last I heard they were going to cut each barrel in half and sell them as planters...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2007, 6:03 PM
Marc B.'s Avatar
Marc B. Marc B. is offline
Robot Hand is the Future
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Wolseley
Posts: 325
How do the private specialty wine stores, like the one in the Forks, work here? Are they related to the MLCC? Are they limited to a specific variety of wines? Are the prices set? How many are there? Do any of the other provinces, apart from Alberta, offer private liquor sales?

Just curious.
__________________
your pal, Tom Mango
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2007, 6:29 PM
newflyer's Avatar
newflyer newflyer is offline
Capitalist
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Calgary
Posts: 5,086
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc B. View Post
How do the private specialty wine stores, like the one in the Forks, work here? Are they related to the MLCC? Are they limited to a specific variety of wines? Are the prices set? How many are there? Do any of the other provinces, apart from Alberta, offer private liquor sales?

Just curious.
Specialty wine stores .. and beer outlets are giving special permission if they meet the required conditions.
__________________
Check out my city at
http://www.allwinnipeg.com **More than Ever**
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Sep 23, 2007, 8:31 PM
rgalston's Avatar
rgalston rgalston is offline
Density and complexity
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Parish of St. John
Posts: 2,644
Thirty-five dollars. That's how much two bottles of Crown Royal whiskey at Pembina N.D. right now. I also enjoyed purchasing $2.00 bottles of sauvingon at Trader Joe's grocery store in Minneapolis this weekend. Buying beer and coolers at 24-hour Rainbow Foods Uptown was nice, too.

Even if prices didn't change here, that's not the point of privatization. Don Lussier seems to think bloating government bodies selling consumer goods are better than the private market.

Amazingly, Mr. Lussier's drivel was printed inches from the Free Press' "Freedom of trade" proclamation on the editorial page. Luxton, Dafoe, etc. are certainly spinning in their graves.

I for one am going to make a greater effort to purchase liquor in the U.S., and wine at Fenton's at the Forks, or DeLuca's on Portage avenue.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Sep 24, 2007, 2:37 AM
Lee_Haber8 Lee_Haber8 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 757
I completely agree with disposing of the MLCC. Being in the alcohol business only distracts the province from issues it should be focusing on like the economy, health care and education. From my own experience in Quebec, it is great being able to go to a grocery store and buy beer. Not only is the price cheaper, but there is a far wider variety. The government should be regulating businesses, not running them!
__________________
www.winnipegrapidtransit.ca
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:46 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.