|
Post by dgriffin on Jan 30, 2009 19:52:09 GMT -5
Liquor Store Owners Unite Against Proposed Wine TaxVERONA, N.Y. (WKTV) - Liquor store owners state wide came together Thursday to fight Governor Patterson's proposal to allow the sale of wine in any store that sells beer. Multimedia Currently, New York State law states that wine and liquor can only be sold in liquor stores. Although, as an effort to create revenue and fight the $15 billion state budget deficit, the Governor wants to make wine available in grocery stores, drug stores, and any store that sells beer. The revenue would be created through licensing fees and franchise fees. This proposal makes liquor store owners fear they will lose business and possibly be forced to close their doors. The owner of The Liquor Loft, in Washington Mills, said last month that wine sales are nearly 90% of his business. The basis of Patterson's hope for more tax revenue would be, in addition to licensing fees, the expectation of more overall sales of alcohol through the offering of wine in grocery stores. So, wait a minute. Wouldn't a reasonable soul presume that all of New York State's regulations, liquor boards and various laws are aimed at reducing or at least controlling alcohol consumption? So now Patterson wants to instead motivate more consumption by making it more freely available in many, many more stores?
Oh ... OK, that's fine. It's a nice example of government tripping over it's own self-righteousness.
At any rate, we've been down a similar road in the 1970's, when the Mom and Pop Liquor Store law was passed, which specified a maximum discount on booze, keeping the small stores in business and effectively killing the "liquor warehouse" retailers. So I suppose Mom and Pop should be happy with a 30 year reprieve from the forces of the free market.
|
|
|
Post by wcup102 on Jan 30, 2009 21:42:42 GMT -5
And did you see Roann Destito's interview when she said "we need to find other ways of taxing people ......"
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on Jan 31, 2009 0:19:25 GMT -5
Hahaha! Yes, that was also part of the above story. She used the phrase "progressive tax" which means tax the rich. Guess what? We are the rich, if we have a bank account. You know, I've just recently seen her photo. It's amazing how much she resembles Bella Louisa Cornhillio, the food editor at the recently purchased OD, now called the VD (Voz del Demente) by the new Argentinean owners (in my upcoming comic strip.)
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on Jan 31, 2009 0:41:26 GMT -5
As a matter of fact, many of the new personnel at the VD look mysteriously familiar. Here's that loveable, befuddled character, Pistler J. Wankerfield, City Desk.
|
|
|
Post by bobbbiez on Jan 31, 2009 11:44:16 GMT -5
As far as I'm concerned they can tax all who sell the liquor products which in turn will make the consumer pay more to drink and I won't give a damn. You want to know why I feel that way? Because......................as they continued to raise the taxes on cigarettes the non smoker (most of whom drink) applauded the actions not realizing when the government got done with the cigarettes they would start on another product the consumer enjoyed. I don't care how one feels about smoking because I feel the same way about drinking and I'm not going to argue the pros and cons of either. Neither are illegal so what's the point? In stead of applauding the governments actions on taxing something you don't enjoy all should watch very carefully what the government is doing and band together to fight against any taxing on items we all enjoy.
|
|
|
Post by Clipper on Jan 31, 2009 13:14:38 GMT -5
Everyone needs to be able to buy a bottle of wine with the weekly groceries? NOT. Although if it puts a couple of liquor stores out of business, it will be no great loss to society in general. If we want to fairly tax something and make it come out of everyone's pocket across the board, why don't we put a buck or so worth of taxes on toilet paper? I mean hell, we are taxed on the water we drink, and on the sewage that we flush. Why not be really over the top and tax the paper we use to wipe our behinds?? We are taxed on our electricity, our soda, snacks, gasoline, heating oil, as well as on our property holdings and our basic income. We are running out of places to tax. Gee, do ya think they will run out of tax sources eventually and be forced to cut spending instead of raising taxes?
|
|
|
Post by clarencebunsen on Jan 31, 2009 18:57:59 GMT -5
Sshhh Clipper Roann may be reading your board. Remember "We need to find other ways to tax people."
Meanwhile, Tom Daschle who wrote tax legislation didn't know that personal use of a company car was taxable. Give me a break.
|
|
|
Post by frankcor on Feb 1, 2009 13:00:55 GMT -5
Roanne said "We need to find other ways to tax people."
I say "We need to find other people."
|
|
|
Post by Clipper on Feb 1, 2009 13:17:28 GMT -5
Amen to that Frank!
|
|
|
Post by concerned on Feb 6, 2009 11:42:38 GMT -5
I never knew that liquor stores were not allowed by law to sell any kind of grocery items. Thats why you can buy the tequila to make a drink but can't buy the salt that is used to rim the glass for that drink in the same liquor store. I guess liguor stores should then be allowed to sell groceries. I like a nice bottle of wine and it would be very convenient for me to buy it at a grocery store. The wine store in North Utica Shopping Mall has some very nice wines at good prices, even though I only buy two or three bottles a year.
|
|