CO-04 (Special Election)
See Full Big Line
(R) Greg Lopez
(R) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Biden*
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%↓
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
90%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
90%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
(R) Ron Hanks
40%
30%
20%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(R) Deborah Flora
(R) J. Sonnenberg
30%↑
15%↑
10%↓
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Dave Williams
(R) Jeff Crank
50%↓
50%↑
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
90%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) Brittany Pettersen
85%↑
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
(R) Janak Joshi
60%↑
35%↓
30%↑
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
May 06, 2016 09:13 AM UTC
137 Comments
Allowing grocery stores to have multiple licenses to sell full strength beer and wine but not allowing independent liquor stores to do the same is the definition of an unfair advantage.
Shame on Mayor Webb for this. Shame on Kroger, shame on Safeway, shame on Wal Mart. Keep Colorado Local.
Okay tobias, here's the deal: The liquor cartel can have as many licenses as it wants to sell beer, wine and booze. In turn groceries get to sell full-strengh beer and wine but not distilled liquor. Sounds fair to me. And the only shame here belo gs to the greedheads in the liquor cartel whose lobbyists protect their oligopoly at the expense of Colorado consumers.
Except the "liquor cartel" (lol) can't actually have more than one license. If they could, this would be a fair fight and something worth looking at. But the law isn't written that way.
Brewers I know think this is bad for their business. They distribute themselves, because the overhead of hiring a distributor to get them into the bigger stores and groceries is too big a burden. And since groceries only deal with large distributors, this is a bad deal for them
Yeah, I'm going to side with the independent businessmen and women who make new and unique products that I enjoy over the Kroger and Wal Mart execs. Bad law, vote no.
You arve actually siding with the gree head liquor cartel to force me and every other citizen to pau over priced products for inferior selection. Thanks a lot. For me, I opt for freedom even if it does cost your buddies their obscene profits.
ps–I know the proposal does't let the booze shops have multiple licenses, that's a proposal for a legislative compromise. But you know who fights that — the same "mom and pop" stores that hate competition now, You don't really think they want to compete with Applejack and Argonaut, do you? I always laugh and the name "mom and pop" liquor stores. My mom and pop were both children of alcoholics. You would catch them in a liquor joint, let alone owning one.
My libertarian side says: abolish all laws regulating booze sales. All.
No
The way I see it, if grocery stores can sell real beer and wine, they'll go with the big brands: which AB Inbev and Molson-Coors now own lock,stock, and barrel. That should free up space in liquor stores for the good stuff-local brewers and distillers. I have little fear that liquor store shelves will go empty.
Not empty, but they too rely on the big brand cheap beers for sales volume.
I assume, skinny, the groceries will go for what they think is the highest profit. That should ensure a fair share of their shelf space goes to the crafts. Distillers will still be off limits to them. That's fair, since it's beer and wine that go with meals. It's good to remember that the biggest sellers relight beer and groceries can sell that now, since they are all watered down to under 3.2.
above should say "the biggest sellers are light beer." Still no editor, sigh.
I was in Hawaii a couple of weeks ago. My mom sent me shopping, including for beer. Went to Safeway and I was surprised by how much of it was micro brews. About 40%. I figured just by market share it would be mostly big brands.
Anyways most every local microbrew. And lots from the mainland including Fat Tire.
That's interesting, david, and good ammo against the liquor cartel's whining. As noted above, I figured the big supermarkets would go with the big brands leaving plenty of room on liquor store shelves for the craft brands-both beer and wine. It also might free up liquor store space for craft spirits where the mass market wine used to be.
I do think liquor stores should also be allowed to have more than one location. Obviously super market chains do. That would be the one tweak I believe would make this fair for everyone.
I can't speak for everywhere, but in Santa Cruz, CA, Laconia, NH, and New Ulm MN, when I've bought beer in a grocery store there was a pretty good selection of local craft beers. All these towns also have liquor stores, some are mom-and-pop, others are the megastores. YMMV.
Wow, Fat Tire! You can hardly find that anywhere! /s
My Littleton Safeway is the one built to house a large liquor store style section. Most stores will only be able to add a limited selection in an aisle and that will be OK for convenience but won’t put any well stocked liquor stores out of business.
My Safeway has always had a great selection of microbrews, far beyond just Fat Tire which isn't very micro aymore but they've just expanded and reorganized so there's an international brews section, a whole section devoted to Colorado micro-brews and another for American micro-brews from outside Colorado. Still have space for Coors, etc. but you can tell they are finding the interesting stuff to be what their customers in Littleton are looking for. You can put together your own six packs with individual bottles to taste test for a price break.
I have no complaints and know from my growing up years in Chicago and 'burbs that liquor stores and booze and beer and wine in supermakets can and do coexist just fine. If liquor stores are allowed to have more than one location that would address the fairness issue.
Most supermakets, unike mine which was built for it, will not have extensive on site liquor stores so big liquor stores with a great selection and small specialty liquor stores should both still do well. Small liquor stores with boring Coors/Bud stock will have to change to apeal to niche buyers or fade away. No great loss. They provide only a few low paying jobs anyway.
This is all true, and I'd feel a lot more warmly toward this initiative if the mechanism was already in place to let small liquor store owners have more than one license to sell. But considering the current state of our state House and Senate, and considering how long it actually takes to get a substantive change like that through, I don't think it's a slam dunk that it would get done, even within five years. And that's long enough for plenty of these businesses to lose more and more market share in their local area.
I'd rather vote yes on this when it's written properly: to allow more than just huge grocery chains the ability to have more than one store.
Good point. But considering how fast we went from supermarkets blocking off their liquor space on Sunday to Sunday liquor sales, also opposed by the liquor store advocates, being allowed, I don't think it will take that long to pass such and adjustment.
Of course if the "mom and pop" liquor stores fight allowing the more than one license option and manage to block it, that's their call and their problem. Considering their lack of success in getting the public on their side so far to block the beginning of the move into supermarkets and Sunday sales, I don't think they'll be able to keep Colorado from joining most of the rest of the country for long. And big box liquor stores and small niche targeted liquor stores will do just fine. Even crappy small liquor stores with nothng very interesting located in walkable small town and urban neighborhood business districts will still do OK due to lack of nearby better options. Craft brews will still be widely available. That’s the only kind we buy…. at the Safeway just south down Broadway. They’ve got a terrific selection.
A trip to a city like Chicago will confirm that you can have liquor in supermarkets and still maintain a thriving craft brew market and a complete range of liquor store options. This is much ado about a non-problem. Just like the fight against Sunday liquor sales was.
You may be right about that. However, all but one brewery in the state is against this legislation, and they're loudly against it. The small breweries who distribute on their own need the smaller stores to stay viable.
Me, I like choice. I like being able to have an experimental brew over here, another over there. I like it when they try a few things and find themselves with a new favorite. If small breweries have to focus all their output into getting beer into grocery stores, which means going full capacity on one beer instead of several, bye bye choice, bye bye selection, bye bye opportunities for something new.
I'm not bullshitting when I say breweries are operating on shoestring budgets.
Nor am I bullshitting when I say that consumers should be able to buy what and where they choose, without being forced to patronize a politically favored group. If you want government subsidies for small brewers, let's see the plan. Don't hide such government favoritism by discriminating against consumerswhom prefer convenience and reasonable prices. Buggy whip makers also went out of business — it's called capitalism, a place where success and failure both happen in response to free markets. And it works, as the victims the old Soviet GOSPLAN can testify.
Pretty sure you can get pretty much any obscure thing you want to try in a city like Chicago that always had booze in the gocery stores. There will still be a market demanding that kind of thing and there will be liquor stores that specialize in catering to that market.
Chicago doesn't have nearly the strong craft brewing scene that has developed in Denver, at least in part because of the liquor store laws.
The craft brewers that were there? Their only choice was to sell out to the macros because they could not compete for shelf space in grocery stores because they made a smaller product.
All I'm saying is this: make the playing field even for groceries and liquor stores, and then let the market do what it does. This gives an inherent advantage to out of state grocery chains while limiting a small liquor store's ability to gain another license and expand their business.
That's not capitalism.
Sad state of craft brewery scene in Chicago a little over-stated?
http://www.choosechicago.com/things-to-do/nightlife/craftbeer/
http://www.guysdrinkingbeer.com/chicago-craft-beer-map
http://www.timeout.com/chicago/bars/chicagos-craft-beer-scene
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_breweries_in_Illinois
Chicago metro has twice the number of people as all of Colorado.
Fine, Tater. It also doesn't have the whole Rocky Mountain water thing and cache going for it. But never mind.
My point is demand will keep the craft brew scene strong and having laws similar to most of the rest of the country will be barely a blip on the screen. This is much ado about nothing much.
As such, I've got to say I'm not really passionately invested in this issue. If your side succeeds in continuing to block it there are plenty of other issues I care way more about. In fact, I can't believe we're spending this much time on this. Peace.
C'mon, BC…We invented math because of beer..it's a big deal…
People want to be able to buy full strength beer and wine in grocery stores. Neither Webb or the grocery stores should feel any shame over this.
I'm not convinced that any change is required …
And, I've managed fairly well by being leery whenever the powerfuls-that-be are trying to sell me that they're acting benevolently to help some little guys …
Nope!
Now, about that bridge …
Ahh, but it is the liquor cartel trying desperately to convince me that I will be hurt if I have an alternative to their inconvenient and overpriced venues. And that, Dio, is a bridge too far!
I'm not feeling hurt, even a little hurt, now. So, like I said …
PS, " … liquor cartel … "??
Really, V?? … again with the overselling.
You toss out more straw and BS these days than a Kansas organic wheat farmer …
Dio, this is a private clunb that uses the force of law to force me to buy from them. If you don't realize that is a cartel, you are frNkly ignorant about what a cartel is. The liquor cartel is a cartel. It is also a classic greedhead spcial interest using the power of law to rip off cnsumers. Do you really think they spend all that money on lobbyists because they just want good government?
Now you're just trying to lull me with sweet talk, eh? …
Nah, I think we have lobbyists, 'cuz our system of campaign finance is what made America great! God knows the, what – two?, grocery chains are all about good government and would never seek to exert their influence in any way as base as spending money …
I guess, given the choice of control of the beer market by a so-called "cartel" of interested businesses, or a grass-rooty KrogerWaltonopoly, I'm gonna' choose the many smaller folks over the astroturfers
Now, if you're really interested in changing this, or any, system, or maybe even one person's mind, I think I recall from decades ago in formal debate, that you probably ought to show a harm (of the current system) being corrected, or an improvement (to be gained from the change) — and big bonus points if you can back up either of those two with, you know, facts and actual data and have a little bit more than just blustery windpuffery and theater …
… where you can still get a point for costuming, I suppose.
(I will concede this, however, the proposed change will no doubt lead to damatically increased sales of those made-in-China craft brews . . .
. . . 一飲而盡
(bottoms up) )
Just this weekend we had a festival in Palisade that featured 20 local and regional craft brewers. Those brewers are almost universally against this initiative.
Why? Because the point of the initiative is to force small brewers to sign up with distribution companies if they want shelf space. That is the bottom line.
That is clearly NOT the point. It may or may not be an unintended consequence. Time will tell.
Dio, this is a private club that uses the force of law to force me to buy from them. If you don't realize that is a cartel, you don't know what a cartel is. The liquor cartel is a cartel. It is also a classic greedhead spcial interest using the power of law to rip off cnsumers. Do you really think they spend all that money on lobbyists because they just want good government?
You'd better believe it's a cartel; with a lot of influence. How many years did they hold off Sunday sales whining that "we'd never get a day off." How many liquor stores have folded since Sunday sales were approved? And you're right, V. Grocers already sell the beer most people drink with meals. Wine in supermarkets.though, would be welcome. Again, they'd stock common, mass-produced brands: lots of Gallo and Sutter Home. You'd still go to a liquor store for the good stuff.
Actually in my neighborhood it's the opposite. The liquor stores near me are all pretty small and they're the ones with mostly just the mass produced brands. The Safeway, closer to me than any of the mega liquor stores, has a much better selection of wines, beers and everything else than any nearby liquor store. I love it. I don't see how my Safeway is any more of a threat to smaller liquor stores in my neighborhood, which mainly suck, than the big box liquor stores are and they too, have a better selection and lots more local micro brew and foreign, domestic wine, etc. than any nearby small liquor store.
The people who work at Safeway also make living wages with benefits. Few who work at small liquor stores do. This isn't an evil rightie versus good progressive issue.
Exactlly, skinny. The real gain here is the conveinence of picking up a modest vin ordinare to go with dinner. I'll still go to argonaut for Dom Perignon. And I actually do plan to buy a bottle of that super expensive stuff for our 50th anniversary, now just a bit more than two years away.
Congrats! Karen and I will mark thirty in July.
Outstanding! You have had thirty years of love and companship and the stars haven't fallen from the firmament. Now if people can just accept that trans folks have to respond to the call of nature like everybody else, maybe our country could finally start worrying about real problems, like climate change, poverty and health care. Lord, how much of our national dialogue has beeb wasted on lgbt bashing over the last 30 years?
35 years in June, legalized same sex marriage not withstanding.
Never looked for Dom Perignon at Safeway. We received a bottle as a gift once and yes… it was delicious. But they do have all the Veuve Clicquot options, a very nice champagne for a price far short of the nearly $200 for Dom.
It turns out that COSTCO is the leading retailer of Dom Perigean, and will sell you a bottle for just $120. Still a bit pricey for this country boy.
For me too. Veuve Clicquot at about 50 bucks with my Safeway discount (more for the most expensive kind but I like the orange label) is my idea of a special occasion. But Dom is delicious, though it's gone out of fashion with the hip foody winey crowd in favor of more modern iterations.
One Veterans Day a Cherry Hills client of ours regifted a bottle to my husband, a Vietnam vet. He's not big on wine of any kind but even he was wowed. At the time, maybe eight years ago, you could find it for $175. So $150 is great.
And not many people get to celebrate a 50th. As an unreconstructed victim of my upbringing in the apartment across from my old world Jewish immgrant grandparents' I am now taking all the proper precautions, knocking wood, spitting, etc. to ensure the happy day arrives without any interference. Best not to mention it again!
So if this is so awesome for craft brewers, how come not one craft brewer has endorsed the let -grocery-stores-sell-hard-likker initiative?
Not one. Perhaps this graphic might help to clarify.
Nah, the way I hear the folks telling it here, we'll never have any meaningful local craft beer breweries in Colorado until Walmart can break the Colorado liquor cartel's stranglehold on industrial-strength PBR, and be able to sell that too, along with all their fine fresh locally sourced produce …
… oh, wait?!?
Possibly because there is no initiative to let grocery stores sell hard liquor. That term refers to distilled spirits. If you ever bother to read the proposal, you will find it only authorizes sale of beer and wine.
I was joking about the "hard likker", hence the misspelling. But it's true that Colorado craft brewers don't favor YourChoiceColorado's bill.
Right now, local craft breweries only need to persuade their local liquor stores to carry their products. Local liquor stores, local beer is a win-win. The fewer miles needed to transport products to consumers, the less pollution and climate-warming carbon produced.
On the other hand, if a big chain grocery store can decide which, if any, local brewers they will allow on their shelves, that gate is narrowed. Most grocery stores and especially big-box places like Target and Walmart do not allow local managers to "buy local". These decisions are made at the corporate level.
When locally produced beverages are also sold in Colorado, the money also stays in the Colorado economy. This is why KeepColoradoLocal's coalition of microbrewers, liquor stores, vintners, and other small businesses are against changing the present law.
They are against changing the law because they love the fact that they can rip me off. Please don't pretend that the liquor cartel cares for anything but its own profits. And we actually heard on this very blog a safeway buyer explain why they would love to stock craft beer. Given the exorbitant maekups on those brews, naturlly they would get in the game if they could. Way to side with the greedhead special interest against me and other consumers. Good to know that bernie nomics puts profit over people.
As a postscript, does it give you pause that your eagerness to rip off consumers in behalf of the liquor cartel makes me much less likely to believe your dubious claim that ColoradoCare doesn't rip off seniors? If you want to rip me off every time I buy a bottle of wine, you certainly would have no compunctionns rippi g me off on health care to benefit another politically favored group.
For sure, I'm definitely sitting around dreaming up ways to overcharge you for your booze. Not.
That's a fairly bizarre claim, V.
Short fuses all around.
Yup. It's easy to tell when V has run out of logical arguments – he goes right for the ad hominem attacks.
Which is also when it’s time to bug out, and leave him to it.
It's the only possible result if the cartel wins, MJ. You don't really think those lobbyists are working for the public good, do you? If so, I have a promising pipeline project to sell you
Lobbyists for the liquor stores – not in it for the public good.
Lobbyists for the grocery stores – TOTALLY in it for the public good.
You're have interesting thoughts.
"they love the fact that they can rip me off."
Or it's small, family-owned and operated brewers, operating on a shoestring budget, just trying to keep the doors open.
You're right. It's probably all about you. /rolleyes
You have to remember, Tobias. My good friend Voyageur is a republican trying to pass as a "mainstream Democrat". Adjust accordingly.
He has been embued with authority to pronounce the requirements to be a real Democrat…so be careful lest you be cast out…
To quote a former president, "there you go again."
What…are you V.s' daddy or something?
Just trying to help you out during these trying political times for Sanders supporters. Oh, and the apostrophe for "V.s' " is in the wrong place. Should be after the period.
I got that authority from the guy who labels anybody to the right of Trotsky a corporate sellout.
That authority comes from having been branded a "conservative corporatist" by some guy in Grand Junction whom you may know
I'll vote for this in a heartbeat. The present law is rent seeking.
I love my local liquor store. But I agree.
As one who seldom imbibes at home, except for the couple times per year that I entertain friends, I really can't get worked up over all the sobbing, wailing, weeping, and gnashing of teeth going on from the liquor store lobby and its sympathizers. I've got a couple six packs and three bottles of wine sitting in the refrigerator, bought last year, that should be sufficient for my next patio party in mid-June. If I need more, would be nice to just pick it up at the grocery store, with the other party stuff. I think this is a perfect opportunity to let the free market work. Maybe a couple tweaks as mentioned by Blue Cat, but let the market work.
The more of these I see, the more I hate being bullied by an aggressive lobbying effort put on by national chains that will be the sole beneficiaries of this measure financially.
Well, don't drown in the crocodile tears shed by the liquor cartel members who are the only one's benefitting financially from the present law against competition. Even ifI don;t save money personally, I'll save on gas and time by being able to put a bottle of cabernet into my shopping cart instead of making a separate trip to argonaut. I doubt very much in my case that Soopers can beat Argonaut's price, about $3 a liter, on my favorite boxed wine, Vella ($15 for a 5 liter box.) But even though Argonaut is only 6 blocks away, it takes me at least 45 minutest to fight Capitol Hill traffic to get there, wait in line, pay, load the car and drive home. Forty five minutes a week amounts to about 40 hours a year — the equivalent of a whole work week of time lost because the liquor cartel knows it will lose at least some sales if groceries are allowed to sell wine for dinner. Free markets usually serve the consumer interest. Government-blessed cartels only pretend to worry about consumers. I still prefer to live in a free country.
http://www.bing.com/mapspreview?&ty=17&q=liquor%20stores%20near%201155%20e%209th%20avenue%2c%20denver&ppois=39.7396469116211_-104.978286743164_Argonaut%20Wine%20%26%20Liquor_YN138x236330818~39.7465476989746_-104.993965148926_Champa%20Street%20Liquors_YN873x134059086~39.7303733825684_-104.974235534668_Capital%20Hill%20Liquors_YN138x402481994~39.7480773925781_-104.977531433105_Washington%20Liqour%20Store_YN138x402506631~39.7023468017578_-104.959548950195_Bonnie%20Brae%20Wine%20%26%20Liquor%20Mart_YN138x2695798~&v=2&sV=1&FORM=MAPAGG
You're Welcome!
Hope this helps, . . .
. . . at least until you’re able to reside in a free country!
Another thot’: The next time you’re you’re at Argonaut ( …’cuz we both know you’re still going to go there despite the tremendous hardship …) , why not buy TWO boxes of that marvelous vintage — assuming it’s in your weekly allowance budget — cut that horrendous commute by, what?, 20 hours per year . . .
. . . of course, that will require some level of willpower — not to drink both boxes in the first week — but, I’ll bet someone who has endured hardship as gracefully as you will have little problem; I believe in you, V!
Pity the poor little guy. The Wal Mart. The Kroger. The Safeway. Won't someone think of their interests? Their lobbyists are obviously in this for the greater good, not because they're getting gobs of money!
The group canvassing for Your Choice Colorado is Black Diamond Outreach, by the way. The same outfit canvasses for pro-fracking initiatives, as well as other big money outreach operations. It takes HUGE money to even get them to start working for you, not to mention getting their paid canvass staff. To argue the conglomerated grocery stores plus huge money canvassers are doing it because it feels good to help you out is laughably ignorant.
Only an idiot would argue that either side is interested in the public good. But if you ever read an economics text, Tobias, you might find this young guy Adam Smith who talks about the invisible hand of competition serving the public good. In one case, a greed head special interest is forcing the public to buy only from their cartel without even pretending to give a crap about consumers. The other side is trying to increase its profits by offering consumers better prices, greater convenience or both. The next time I have to battle cross town traffic to buy a bottle of dinner wine from your cartel buddies, Tobias, I'll remember your economic illiteracy and my thoughts won't be complimentary.
LOL.
" . . . battle cross town traffic to buy a bottle of dinner wine . . . "
You can't buy wine in outer Waziristan? That goat-herd rush hour can be a total bitch, huh?
But then, "only an idiot ( '… by offering consumers better prices, greater convenience or both … ') would argue that either side in interested in the public good."
LOL
Neither side is interested in the public good. One side serves the public good in pursuit of its own interest. Sorry you never took econ 101. Or if you did, I'm sorry you flunked it
I'm sure it was no more difficult for me than 4th-grade Geography was for you . . .
Cross town traffic? There are liquor stores EVERYWHERE. May I suggest you live in a slightly more civilized part of the world?
Such hardship! Driving an extra block — or across a parking lot!!! — to find that box of Franzia for your guests to choke down while you berate their knowledge of the world!
Those "greed head special interests" are small businesses; owned and operated by people who, in many cases, put their entire life savings into building a brewery and tasting room… hiring skeleton staffs to get it off the ground… slowly building enough capital and reputation to expand their fledgling operation begin canning… then to distribute, independently of the big distributors, to small liquor stores that might take their inventory.
But you side with the corporations and the multi-million dollar distributors, who turn these small brewers down because they don't have high enough volume to have the honor of being distributed to big box stores, or take their already-thin margins and cut them slimmer in order to meet a grocery chain's requirements for price per-case.
So the brewers switch to cheaper ingredients to make the cut, lowering the quality of their product, which causes their reputation to slip, causes them to be less experimental in what they decide to brew.
But hey, at least you didn't have to drive across the parking lot!
I side with the people who offer me the best value and service. The horror, the horror. And the liquor stores in walking distance my house (two) have horrible prices and crappy selection. But that's all right, why should they try to compete for my business when you are working to force me to buy there? Who knew Mother Theresa ran a liquor store? Next we force supermarkets to close entirely and bring back the markets of yore?
Small brewers offer a much higher value, since they make their products with better ingredients, and offer selection outside of the swill you choose to swallow.
Your assertion that small brewers don't think they have to work for business — while pitting them against Budweiser, Coors, etc. — is moronic.
Do you get benefits at Black Diamond Outreach for being a sockpuppet?
If you ever stop being a stalinist imbecile, Tobias, I'll answer the question. Until then, rent a brain if you can;t afford to buy one.
Being pro-small business = "stalinist imbecile."
Being pro-Wal Mart and pro-Budweiser takeover of every distributor in Colorado = ?
So. BDO. Is it just an hourly, or do they pay you per post? Or do they pay you in actual sock puppets?
Actually, being a total ignoramus on economic issues who embraces state determination of economic outcomes is what makes you an imbecile. The Stalinist part of it is just a gift. And if I'm the sock puppet, how come I’m dancing rings around your claims that you favor choice but only IF I choose to buy from your politically correct cartel suppliers. Doesn't "favoring choice" mean you should, ohh, favor choice? Work on that, and learn not to insult your betters until you at least understand the terms of the debate.
"dancing rings" may be in the eye of the beholder. Or in this case in the self-proclaimed dancer, likely sitting on a posterior. PROST!
There are four smallish liquor stores within 1.5 miles of my home in Lakewood. None of them carry much of a craft beer selection. While I'm not a strong imbiber, I have been in each during the past 12 months.
Frankly, the craft beer thingee seems like a red herring to me. I go down to Larimer where the proud independent mom and pop businesses sell thunderbird to the winos from behind bars and I don't frankly see the flowering of new age creativity that Tobias does. It's a matter of simple justice — consenting adults should be able to trade freely unless there is a damn good reason to stop them. Some statist fool's notion that I must buy from an overpriced and under serviced booze store rather than King Soopers — which incidentally provides thousands of good paying union jobs in this state — is not a good reason.
Those who believe that we as individuals must subsume our freedom in service to the state because Marx said so, damnit, are free to disagree. And they will, endlessly. But they won't find a good reason to prefer feudalism over freedom.
This one last set of questions, please indulge me: What makes you so very certain that King Soopers will carry the particular selection items you want, at or near the price-point you want? And this follow up: If KS doesn't, and you're still "forced" to endure that weekly perilous trek to Argonaut, what makes you think they'll be able to continue to offer your preferred box-o-red at the same price they always have, if they've lost a portion of their crap-beer revenue stream to KS?
I realize we're talking about this as a zero-sum game, and perhaps letting the Waltonopoly sell full strength will lead to an overall market surge — a new golden age of constant round-the-clock jovial inebriation — in consumption here in Colorado, where everyone wins and no one loses. But, if it's closer to a near zero-sum situation, you don't see nothing but sunny, happy bottoms up??? Really????
You finally asked a good question, Dio, and one that I'm happy to answer. If Soopers doesn't have the product I want at the price I like, I won't buy there! Nobody can force me to buy there — the way you want to force me to buy from Stop for Slop, the liquor store across from Soopers. Competition makes things better for consumers. Cartels and government picking of winners and losers hurts consumers. You just passed econ 101 and there is hope for you yet!
Partial credit only — since you completely ran from trying to answer the follow ups. I'll grant you a "gentlemen's C-" mostly in deference to your advanced, um, "life experience" relative to me (and your being such a sweet talker).
You do realize that, ummm, nobody's forcing you to shop at Stop for Slop now? (Rhetorical) So, that, nothing would be different except for your feeling of empowerment by being able to choose NOT to buy from KS, and except that Argonaut would have to somehow make up some lost revenue stream. I think I understand now what kind of convincing and cogent stance you're taking here.
PS. There's more that actually hurts consumers than government and so-called cartels.
yes, but cartels and other forms of price fixing clearly hurt consumers. The rest of your question, if you really don't know, is that free competition is a darwinian process. Yep, it has winners and losers. That's why we progress, by finding more efficient ways to do things. I'm willing to bet you drive foreign car. I could argue for a ban on such imports to protect auto workers. But everyone else is poorer. Argonaut will survive, it is your beloved stop for slop that will fail. But if it did fail through open competition, the result would be a net gain in society's productivity, Netflix killed blockbuster. It happens. That's what the "creative destruction" of capitalism is all about, though its a lot easier to write about from a tenured faculty post than to live through a business failure yourself.
I'm sure the families who own the craft breweries really care that the "craft beer thingee" is a red herring to some schmuck sockpuppet on the internet.
There is one (1) craft brewer who has come out in support of Your Choice Colorado's initiative. He's also on their payroll.
Every single other brewer in the state is taking time to talk to their customers about how bad this law would be for their business, how destructive it would be to the craft brewing industry, which is a source of pride for many Coloradans.
Without the ability for multiple licenses for liquor store owners, this is a bad law. Vote no.
Check with your overlords in the liquor cartel. Most are dead set against multiple licenses. They are the same small shops who fought Sunday sales for decades for the same reason — they fear competition from Argonaut, Applejack, et all more than they fear even the groceries. Multiple licensing is only something they bring up to con the naive.
There is no greedhead liquor store cartel. If this law passes, and what is bogus about former Mayor Webb's claim, is that the greed head large brewers (AB Inbev, etc.) are buying up the distributors in the state so that they can control who gets into the grocery stores. No small brewery like the Bootstraps and Strange Brewing, etc. will ever get into grocery stores because they can't self-distribute to Safeway or King Soopers and they don’t brew enough beer to supply a distributor or large grocery chain. The small brewers would have to go through a distributor, which all but eliminates their profit. Also, Budweiser, as the owner of the distributors, won't be carrying their competition unless said competition is paying a hefty fee. So you want to talk about greed heads, look at the "food chain" of the supply of craft beer under this law. The big companies own the distribution channels and this will not only kill the local liquor stores, but will decimate the small craft brewers who depend on self-distribution to thrive. And one more thing, this proposed law is unfair to the liquor stores because it doesn't lift the ban on them selling "produce" and other things grocery stores carry like limes, and chips and sodas and burgers, etc.
lifting the ban on chips, etc., would be a fair trade for stopping the cartel's monopoly on full strength beer and wine. But it should stand as is until we have free choice as consumers. Here's the secret, Slarti — I can't afford your $10 a pack beer. If the booze merchants want to work on a fair trade at the lege, tell them to call off their lobbyists and deal. Until then, there has to be some penalty for being a greed head special interest who uses the power of the state to suppress competition.
The Walmart Analogy
A change in the present liquor store law would be equivalent to encouraging more Walmarts. You as a consumer can buy cheaper goods at Walmart, and it's open longer hours than your corner small business grocer / hardware/ clothing store. It facilitates that "one stop shopping" you're so fond of.
Walmart also chokes out any small businesses in the area, paying starvation wages so that the taxpayer needs to subsidize basic living necessities for the help. Over and over, we see small business grocers, hardware stores, and clothing stores wither and die when Walmart sets up in an area.
So the "convenience" to you as a consumer comes at the price of less diversity, and less long term economic sustainability among the businesses in your neighborhood.
Now maybe keeping various local brewers, vintners, and liquor stores alive in your area isn't worth that extra $1 a six pack you pay vs. the big-box store prices. But, for me, and most others who value a diverse small business base, it is worth it.
Hey, you can shop anywhere you want as far as I'm concerned. I'm just demanding the same freedom in return, I shun Wal-mart because it is anti-union. But Safeway and Soopers employ thousands of union workers who get decent wages and working conditions. Why do you want to discriminate against them by using the law to bolster non-union liquor cartel members? Is Freedom of choice a slogan you only employ for the abortion debate?
Slartibartfast: as long as there are restaurants with liquor licenses, small craft brewers will be able to market their product. And why are you so sure that all liquor stores will go out of business if groceries can sell wine and full strength beer? Sounds like you may be a lobbyist for the liquor store oligopoly.
Small brewers see this as a bad deal for them.
But Voyager sees them as greedy.
And he's really smart…
Gosh, I'm just torn.
Torn you is, Noodlesoup. Take a course in debate and economics before you try to call me a sock puppet again — and I'll try not to box your ears quite so soundly the next time.
Brewers are crafty
and Tobias is drunk
He thinks he's a lion
But debates like a punk.
Burma Shave
I'll be waiting for that ear boxing. Hasn't happened yet.
One (1) brewer is for this law. Every other brewer in the state is actively working against it.
So long, sockpuppet.
And so it's only brewers who have a vote? Consumers don't get to decide? Eat my shorts. illiterate troll!
Consumers DO get to decide.
So do brewers. So do people who support brewers (hint: there are a lot of them).
Call me names all you want. You want this to be all about the poor corporations, and I'm telling you it goes a bit deeper than that. You don't like hearing that though.
Talk about a troll.
You are the one who started name calling, troll boy. After you learned I didnt agree with you, it was"sock puppet, sock puppet" which was a pretty stupid thing to call one of the oldest posters on pols. If we get a vote, I thhink you will find most of us are in favor of buying a bottle of dinner wine where we buy the rest of our food. So cry your heart out.
"So cry your heart out" from the guy whining about me not paying respects to "one of the oldest posters on pols." Lol.
I'll try to remember to genuflect at the altar next time, the same way you genuflect when entering the WalMart to pick up that box of Franzia pink stuff you'll puke up later.
We'll see what the voters decide. If they care at all about craft brewing staying craft, they'll vote no. That's the word from almost every brewer in the state.
Considering when I walk into my local brewery, they know my name, and when I walk into a Soopers, they don't, that makes a huge difference to a lot of people.
Keep Colorado Craft. Vote No.
Hey, you actually managed to make an argument –a weak one, but an argument — without resorting to insults. For you, that's progress and I'll stop calling you troll as long as you can keep it clean. Actually, a lot of my union brothers and sisters at Soopers know my name. But if you spend enough time in a brewery that they know your name, that's impressive. Good luck with that rehab thing though.
Keep it clean, he says, yet can't refrain from being just a bit of an asshole all the same. Classic Grumpus.
Man, when the boys at the Brewery know you by name, I doubt it's because you spend so much time there handing out temperance posters!
Have a shitty day, French Fry!
Have another squirt of "wine in a box" Grumpus.
"Keep it clean," he says, even as he calls me an alcoholic. Good show.
So you're just incapable of "keeping it clean" yourself? Good stuff, Voyeur.
I don't make jokes about the disease of alcoholism. You shouldn't either. But you do, because you're a piece of shit.
Can't wait for your next "hey, keep it clean guy!" chart-topper.
I'll say this one time, stupid one, just in case you are so ignorant you don't actually know why you broke the rules. It's ok to call someone you disagree with an asshole. Not very effective, but okay. But a sock puppet isn't a real poster, it's a phony one created for the purpose of spreading the views of a third party. Only an imbecile like you would accuse somebody who has been here at least ten years longer than you have of being a sock puppet. That's the dirty part. Call me an asshole all you want. A troll, on the other hand, is a real poster, just an exceptionally stupid and obnoxious one. Get the difference, troll-=boy? Good. And apparently I hit close to home about your full-time residency at the brewery, or you wouldn't have gone all PC on me.
Hey, both my grandfathers were drunks who preyed on my mom and dad as only a drunk can. They lived with the after math of that drunken abuse all their lives.
Call the drunks victims if you like. I call drunks drunks, and if you don't like it, you can put it in your bottle of ten buck beer and swig it down.
tater
we're out of reply boxes but if you will share the name of this wondrous pub, you will make lot of lurkers happy campers!
You're a lonely, pathetic troll, getting his rocks off insulting other people on the internet. Which might be the saddest thing I've ever had to write about someone. But that's you to a T, isn't it voyager?
I've seen your type before, and dispensed with them. I'll see them again long after I've forgotten you, the speck of nothingness I crushed under my shoe.
As I suspected: you're a piece of shit. Nothing else needs to be said.
Buh bye, clown shoe.
"You're a lonely, pathetic troll…….I’ve seen your type before." What type are you?The last time I heard comments like this came from the mouth of a fundamentalist Christian.
I buy beer at my local brewery, where they know my name although I stop in one maybe two days a week for a pint, sometimes (but rarely) three for $2.50 per. Local beer, local hops, locally owned (employee owned actually).
You’re both kind of being assholish. That's OK. I'm just a sock puppet.
And CHB just wants to be relevant, representing a “conservative” that hasn’t actually existed in the political world since the 1950s.
Did I miss anyone?
Funky chicken:
Boy are you dumb. The only thing you crushed was your preparation H! Being a world class tight ass will do that.
Taterheap
I assume that is a brew pub. $2.50 a pint isn't bad for on premise consumption. The ten bucks refers to a six pack at a liquor store, though I recognize some exotics may be higher. And by definition, you're not a sock puppet — did you learn nothing from my destruction of Tobias Punke?
As to CHB, God I wish we had a lot more real conservatives like him. The thing about "movement conservatives" is that they leave off the first part of their title "Bowel Movement Conservatives."
I think I am a trolling sock puppet. $2.50 a pint for these beers is a great deal. Their 6ers in cans (16 oz) are about $9.00, also a screaming deal. Local beer, local hops, local money in the local economy. Can't beat it.
I can vouch that Voyageur is no sockpuppet. I've met the man, and they don't make puppet socks that size. 16E, wasn't it, V?
😉
I think that other Polsters at our recent get-together may have been expecting that V and I would get in an epic bar fight, but we (Davie, Canines, notaskinnycook, Mrs. cook, Jason Salzman, Voyageur, and I ) actually had quite a congenial meetup. It's amazing how civil we all can be when we meet face to face.
But you are right that no craft brewers support changing the law as it now stands, TFunk.
Actually, he says just one does. But, when did we decide that only craft brewers have a right to vote on a bill to expand consumer choices?
Actually, MJ and I agree on more things than we disagree on, but whats the fun of that. She just skipped over that part of the Bible saying she should submit to men's leadership and she's been hard to deal with ever since.
??Men were leading stuff??
Wait, what…?? There was a Bible??
As is often the case, politically, the genie can not be put back in the bottle if it doesn't work.
I think the liquor stores have more employees than would be added in grocery stores.
2 liquor stores in my county. Each carry 25-30 craft beers. 1 grocery that can't manage a produce Dept. The grocery, with self scanning, is trying to eliminate jobs.
Well, 44 states manage to get by with beer and wine in grocery stores. I don't know of any that went back to our prohibition era anachronism.
as for me, the fact that I can't afford craft beer means it doesn't make much difference if I don't buy it from Safeway or don't buy it from Stop for Slop, the friendly overpriced understocked cartel outlet near you. But as an American, I resent cartels and especially greed head businessmen who insist they are only trying to help me when they pick my pocket. They aren't. They're trying to protect themselves from competition.
Here's a test: If you run into the owner of a liquor store on the street and he greets you by name, consider voting to keep him in business no matter how inefficient he is. This test only works in small towns, up to, perhaps, GrandJunction's size if I can credit Duke's eloquent statements on this issue.
In the front range, vote for better competition and consumer choice. The union worker who serves you at Soopers or Safety is a far better neighbor and friend than the liquor store owner, who doesn't know you from Adam.
No thank you. I prefer craft beers and don't fill my stomach with garbage Budweiser. Because Craft Beers have flavor. Which is why Budweiser and Coors are buying craft brewers, so they can try to corner that market as well.
It seems you're just not very smart, Voyager. Bummer.
Oh,you issooo smart, little troll boy. The world is in awe — of your stupidity. And your doggerel does't even rhyme. Mine did:
Brewers are crafty
and Tobias is drunk
He thinks he's a lion
But debates like a punk.
Burma Shave
Tee hee, boxed your ears again, little concern troll and minion of the liquor cartel.
'Tis easier to get a good drunk on from chardonnay-in-a-box, the grumpus thought:
“I do not drink your fancy beer. I shall declare a human right. To shop at Big Box to my heart's delight.
Those Mom and Pop's with decades invested, shall not impede my daily festive
decadent demise to drink
not quite as clever as I think
imbibe imbibe and bide my time. Til I must pass out, good night.”
epic fail, french fry!
"I hide behind these noble things, "free markets," "choice," "consumer's dreams" to shop convenient it seems, at the world's richest family's shop, at Kroger Inc, not the Mom and Pop.
"But it is clear to all that thunk, in the end I'm just a…
grump?
That good and faithful champion of the public good, Sen Pat Steadman, has been working on a compromise that would phase in beer a.nd wine sales over 20 years. Yes, that's a very long time but it gives liquor store owners time to amortize their investments. It would also allow groceries to buy licenses from existing holders. That isn't a bad way to amortize the cartel's assets. But the lege adjourns tomorrow and Pat's chances of passing the bill are not good. But it was an honest try by a decent guy, whose presence will be missed. Term limits harm the public good.
Well, damn, it took you five days, but you finally got something right on this diary! Enjoy your afternoon box, you've (finally) earned a quaff!
Actually, you finally got one right. I can't believe you honestly didn't know that competition, while good for consumers overall, has both winners and losers for sellers.
Oh, please. I can't believe that you've chosen to be so willfully ignorant about the likely (intended) consequences of this proposal, and the eventual effect that it will have on the concentration of choices to fewer outlets, less competition overall, and all the good news that will mean for the winners — so long as their last name is Walton — any all of the bad news that will mean for oh, pretty much everyone else (e.g., consumers), the losers.
"Free markets" don't exist anywhere, except as that simplistic theoretical model in your Econ 101 text. The "freer markets" involve more sellers. The real world opposite of a freer market, is the KrogerWaltonopoly you espouse.
In other real world news: a thorough understanding of gravity may involve more than just apples falling off trees …
… but, you're still right about term limits.
If you actually believe that highly competitive supermarkets, which traditionally have about a one percent gross margin on sales, charge more than mom and pop stores, go down to your local bodega and buy a roll of toilet paper, or a box of aspirin or a pound of beef. Absolutely, competition will drive many small, inefficient, retailers out of business. That's the point. Tried to buy a Hupmobile lately?
Anyway, let's just agree to be disagreeable on this one, amigo. I think we understand each other perfectly. But don't give up on free markets — from what I read they are already driving marijuana prices down.
I can agree to disagree, V.
BTW, I'll probably stop by Argonaut in the next couple of days — I'll be happy to pick up a box and save you that perilous 6-block ordeal. Let me know!
Actually, my last trip there was two boxes of vella, two bottles schmirnoff, one bottle vermouth, one 12 pack beer. Obviously, I stock up. What you lose with that strategy is spontaneity. Why I want wine in supermarkets is that simple. It would be nice to shop and stop by the wine aisle for a bottle of something different, not something I bought in a 10 liter stock up.
Even your beloved craft beer would be nice to buy on impulse but unless I've missed it in the the past, there are no 3.2 craft beers. Even to go across the street to the liquor store at 9th and Corona wastes 20 to 30 minutes. You have to put your groceries in the car, walk across the street, hunt an unfamiliar inventory, wait to be served, and then pay too much before walking back to the car.
There is nothing spontaneous about that. Yes, you can plan ahead and buy a few bottles ahead of time, but spontaneous things add a lot to life, even for those of us who have to manage our budget. I have no doubt Soopers would carry craft beer — whatever I bought there would be in excess of the zero I buy now.
Is the price of my free choice that some marginal liquor stores will go out of business? Absolutely. But the government didn't step in to save our family owned sporting goods store when Reagan's double digit prime rates drove the parent franchisee into bankruptcy. Capitalism is a tough game, for the capitalists. But free markets still give the lowest prices and greatest convenience to consumers. And the grocery world is highly competitive with Kroger, Safeway, albertson. etc dueling with Satan-Mart, err, Union-Buster Mart (I never said they were all decent people.)
Anyway, I've love it if you'd stop in if you’re in the neighborhood and want to share a quaff or two. I'm just a block from Barricuda's.
Pax Vobiscum
Pols– thanks for fixing the edit function. It's great to be able to fix dumbass mistakes like saying "your" when I meant "you're."