I was out shopping for an undershirt to wear for my upcoming jury duty (I’m very excited), and outside the store a man was standing asking for signatures for various issues in the upcoming November ballots. Being an issue-conscious voter, I talked to him for a while and did sign a couple of them—including one to increase taxes for multi-millionaires.
Once he realized he had my attention, though, he flipped over one of the clipboards and asked me to sign for another issue: the privatization of hard liquor in Washington State. This would in part permit grocery stores to sell liquor, which they are currently not able to do in accordance with state law.
I hate hard alcohol. I think it should be made illegal, or at least much more strictly controlled. If it were up to me, the drinking age would go up to 25. I told him it was not something I could get behind, and I walked away.
Later, I was at Costco, and noticed something very interesting as I walked in. Costco employees were standing just inside the entrance with the exact same petition in hand. I thought about it, and came up with the following conclusions:
- Since Costco makes an enormous amount of money off of its sale of alcohol, allowing for the privatization of liquor would increase their profits considerably.
- Costo is paying personnel to shamelessly stand inside the store asking people to support the change of a law which would increase their corporate profits considerably.
- At no improvement of product or service, the cost of shopping at Costo is increased, due to Costo paying employees to stand around for the sake of this legal petition, a legal petition with Costco’s corporate interests at heart.
Not only am I strongly against the motion to privatize liquor in this manner, I am also strongly against Costco’s practices here. This is morally reprehensible. I won’t be shopping at Costco any time soon (for this and other reasons).
What are your thoughts?
EDIT:
I found an article on this issue which touches on Costo’s efforts and the initiative itself, Initiative 1100, from thenewstribune.com. Costo wants to be able to buy liquor in bulk (exactly what Costco does), and with this initiative, save enormously because it’s buying in bulk. This saving was previously not possible because liquor was controlled by the Washington State Liquor Control Board. Costs for consumers would plummet, making hard alcohol much more accessible and inexpensive. It would effectively no longer be a controlled substance. Although this may already be the case in most of the country, I happen to like how it works in Washington State.
Needless to say, I oppose Initiative 1100.
