Smurf wrote:I was just thinking on paper that maybe this will end up being looked at like the BC Rail deal and I believe other dealings that the Auditor General has had to take to court to get any information. It's not like litigation hasn't happened before and has real possibilities of going further if someone keeps on top of it. I believe a number of the same names are involved so the two could end up tied together.
Until we get beyond what you believe, as opposed to what you know, it's not a matter for litigation.
I was just commenting on your own statement:
"I'm not surprised a distiller's organization or a brewer would prefer to work with a monopoly. Why should they favor the consumer? They are in business to make a profit and if they can collude with government to keep prices high, why wouldn't they."
You really do have trouble with either logic or reading comprehension, don't you. How do make the vast leap from an acknowledgement that since business operates to make a profit rather than for the public good, those profits should go to the public. Have you truly forgotten that "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest."
and
How can it be good for that money to suddenly leave the province as profit for an international company when it's previously circulated around our province or economy in one way or another. Including income taxes, pensions, mortgage payments, food and all the other things a family spends their money on.
and
Something must be attracting Exel/DHL and I am sure it is profits. Why does it not make sense to keep those profits which are currently ours here, for the taxpayers of BC.
If your understanding of capitalism is so bereft, I am afraid you are beyond my powers of persuasion. See final comment.
You gave every indication you support the sale
Sorry, I did nothing of the sort. I clearly stated that I wanted to see the numbers Exel gave the government, and never indicated support for a private monopoly, regardless of how you read it.
Your right I ran with it.
And you're still running.
I do believe from your writing you already believe it is a good deal just because it puts it in private hands.
What I said, rather than what you wished I had said, was that liquor distribution is not a natural monopoly that might justify public ownership/operation, and therefore it belongs in the private sector. Not at all what you claim I said. Please read more carefully in future.
If you read your posts I believe more than once you insinuated just because it is your idea or mine does not make it right or wrong.
Very true. But I am right.
I believe there are times when publicly owned business does work and this one is.
Too bad you haven't made that case, beyond an emotional appeal to keeping the profits in BC while ignoring the unintended consequences that ensue. I, on the other hand, have made a case for liquor distribution not being a government operation. Mine is based on sound economics rather than beggar-thy-neighbour economics that leaves everyone poorer.