Theme

Welcome · log in · join	food

Home

Reviews

Speed Test

	All Forums		Hot Topics		Gallery

Search similar:

Forums → O Canada! → Canadian →

Canadian Chat → FUD from the Beer Store

uniqs
3904

« What Are They? • Uncle died. and I got exactly what I deserved. »
prev · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · next

DKS Damn Kidney Stones join:2001-03-22 Owen Sound, ON	DKS to Ian1 2014-Apr-17 2:45 pm to Ian1 Re: FUD from the Beer Store said by Ian1: said by DKS: This isn't about the beer producers. It is about changing the conditions of the regulated sale of a regulated product. That's what the Beer Store would have you believe. However, I think the foreign-owned monopoly corporate owners of it may have less altruistic motives than you seem to imagine. Their motives are irrelevant. They will make money no matter how beer is sold.
	actions · 2014-Apr-17 2:45 pm ·
DKS	DKS to elwoodblues 2014-Apr-17 2:46 pm to elwoodblues said by elwoodblues: And that's going to change how? When I lived in Etobicoke, (and didn't have a car) we would walk to the beer store (Kipling and Dixon DKS) , but as we got older and got cars we drove. Now across the street from my apartment was a Strip plaza with a "Smoke and Gift" store. Now you gonna tell me that people are going to get more drunk and drive to get ther booze because it's closer to most people's home then the beer store? For me it makes very little difference, the beer and liquor store are the bottom of my street, so it's very convenient. That's urban myopia if I ever saw it. There is a lot more distance to be covered outside 416.
	actions · 2014-Apr-17 2:46 pm ·
elwoodblues Elwood Blues Premium Member join:2006-08-30 Somewhere in	elwoodblues to DKS Premium Member 2014-Apr-17 2:46 pm to DKS said by DKS: said by Ian1: said by DKS: This isn't about the beer producers. It is about changing the conditions of the regulated sale of a regulated product. That's what the Beer Store would have you believe. However, I think the foreign-owned monopoly corporate owners of it may have less altruistic motives than you seem to imagine. Their motives are irrelevant. They will make money no matter how beer is sold. Not even close to what they make now.
	actions · 2014-Apr-17 2:46 pm ·
DKS Damn Kidney Stones join:2001-03-22 Owen Sound, ON	DKS to ruddypict 2014-Apr-17 2:48 pm to ruddypict said by ruddypict: In the end we want the same thing, less driving impairment. I just want those choices to be decided by facts rather than personal anecdotal evidence. I gave you stats, based on accidents, not impaired rates. Those are solid results. Your point?
	actions · 2014-Apr-17 2:48 pm ·
DKS	DKS to AsherN 2014-Apr-17 2:49 pm to AsherN said by AsherN: We need a free market. We have a well regulated market. It works.
	actions · 2014-Apr-17 2:49 pm ·
ruddypict join:2010-03-24 4 recommendations	ruddypict to DKS Member 2014-Apr-17 2:59 pm to DKS said by DKS: said by ruddypict: In the end we want the same thing, less driving impairment. I just want those choices to be decided by facts rather than personal anecdotal evidence. I gave you stats, based on accidents, not impaired rates. Those are solid results. Your point? You mean like your stats from »changetheconversation.ca ··· tics.php which show that Ontario (table 7) has more alcohol related deaths and alcohol related crashes than Quebec (table 8; again, a province with a lower drinking age, higher BAC limit & beer/wine sold at depanneurs). Thanks for proving my point.
	actions · 2014-Apr-17 2:59 pm ·
HiVolt Premium Member join:2000-12-28 Toronto, ON	HiVolt to DKS Premium Member 2014-Apr-17 3:08 pm to DKS said by DKS: said by AsherN: We need a free market. We have a well regulated market. It works. Yeah, like the telecom or oil industry. Please, stop beeing a fuddy duddy.
	actions · 2014-Apr-17 3:08 pm ·
corster Premium Member join:2002-02-23 Oshawa, ON 1 recommendation	corster to DKS Premium Member 2014-Apr-17 3:16 pm to DKS said by DKS: said by ruddypict: In the end we want the same thing, less driving impairment. I just want those choices to be decided by facts rather than personal anecdotal evidence. I gave you stats, based on accidents, not impaired rates. Those are solid results. Your point? Raw numbers are useless for comparison - of course Ontario has more total accidents, we're the most populous province, with the most drivers. By your logic, we should be adopting the Quebec model for selling beer and wine in depanneurs because they had less alcohol-related fatalities than Ontario. The statistics that ruddypict linked to are per capita, which is how you actually compare accident rates between provinces. But I'm sure you already knew that.
	actions · 2014-Apr-17 3:16 pm ·
Ian1 Premium Member join:2002-06-18 ON	Ian1 to DKS Premium Member 2014-Apr-17 4:41 pm to DKS said by DKS: It works. If by "works" you mean maintains a retail monopoly for a mostly foreign owned cartel at the expense of choice and convenience for consumers, then sure. Works awesome.
	actions · 2014-Apr-17 4:41 pm ·
DKS Damn Kidney Stones join:2001-03-22 Owen Sound, ON	DKS to ruddypict 2014-Apr-17 4:57 pm to ruddypict said by ruddypict: said by DKS: said by ruddypict: In the end we want the same thing, less driving impairment. I just want those choices to be decided by facts rather than personal anecdotal evidence. I gave you stats, based on accidents, not impaired rates. Those are solid results. Your point? You mean like your stats from »changetheconversation.ca ··· tics.php which show that Ontario (table 7) has more alcohol related deaths and alcohol related crashes than Quebec (table 8; again, a province with a lower drinking age, higher BAC limit & beer/wine sold at depanneurs). Thanks for proving my point. Not at all. Ontario has a higher population and so we would expect a higher number of crashes involving alcohol. And it does.
	actions · 2014-Apr-17 4:57 pm ·
DKS	DKS to HiVolt 2014-Apr-17 4:58 pm to HiVolt said by HiVolt: said by DKS: said by AsherN: We need a free market. We have a well regulated market. It works. Yeah, like the telecom or oil industry. Please, stop beeing a fuddy duddy. There are many regulated marketplaces. Electricity, milk, eggs, chicken, grains and so on. Prescription drugs are regulated. There is nothing inherently wrong with a regulated market.
	actions · 2014-Apr-17 4:58 pm ·
DKS	DKS to Ian1 2014-Apr-17 4:59 pm to Ian1 said by Ian1: said by DKS: It works. If by "works" you mean maintains a retail monopoly for a mostly foreign owned cartel at the expense of choice and convenience for consumers, then sure. Works awesome. And foreign ownership has nothing to do with the place and manner alcohol is sold. Absolutely nothing.
	actions · 2014-Apr-17 4:59 pm ·

Ian1 Premium Member join:2002-06-18 ON	Ian1 Premium Member 2014-Apr-17 5:01 pm said by DKS: And foreign ownership has nothing to do with the place and manner alcohol is sold. Absolutely nothing. Other than that the retail monopoly enforced by the Government benefits the shareholders of foreign corporations? Ummm.... ok.
	actions · 2014-Apr-17 5:01 pm ·
DKS Damn Kidney Stones join:2001-03-22 Owen Sound, ON	DKS to elwoodblues 2014-Apr-17 5:10 pm to elwoodblues While the full study is complex, the summary of the research says, quote: Research demonstrates that average, or per capita, consumption of alcohol is significantly associated with alcohol-related fatality rates. Alcohol distribution and retailing practices that act to increase average alcohol consumption will act to increase alcohol related fatality rates, while practices that act to reduce average alcohol consumption will act to reduce alcohol related fatality rates. »www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/con ··· amh.html And conclusively, research says, quote: Increased alcohol outlets will act to increase alcohol consumption, and associated alcohol related problems such as underage consumption, drinking and driving, and alcohol-related aggression, morbidity and mortality. This is supported both in Canada and internationally.
	actions · 2014-Apr-17 5:10 pm ·
DKS	DKS to Ian1 2014-Apr-17 5:13 pm to Ian1 said by Ian1: said by DKS: And foreign ownership has nothing to do with the place and manner alcohol is sold. Absolutely nothing. Other than that the retail monopoly enforced by the Government benefits the shareholders of foreign corporations? Ummm.... ok. You forget the other beneficiaries; those who are employed and pay taxes, suppliers and the owners themselves, who also pay taxes. There are also costs to the health care and judicial system, however.
	actions · 2014-Apr-17 5:13 pm ·
ruddypict join:2010-03-24	ruddypict to DKS Member 2014-Apr-17 5:21 pm to DKS said by DKS: Not at all. Ontario has a higher population and so we would expect a higher number of crashes involving alcohol. And it does. Which is my statistics were per capita (thanks for noticing Corster!). And they're also more recent than what you posted. Again: »www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85 ··· g.htm#a2 I'd like to point out again that at the time range for the above link (2011) every province excluding Quebec: - Has controlled beer through select outlets - Has a BAC limit of 0.05 (Quebec has 0.08) - Has a higher drinking age of 19 (Quebec has 18) Having a "beer store" obviously didn't help 8 provinces and all the territories. I think its safe to say that the only people who have a vested interest in selling beer through a controlled outlet are a) People who profit from it and b) militant teetotalers.
	actions · 2014-Apr-17 5:21 pm ·
NCRGuy join:2008-03-03 Ottawa, ON 3 recommendations	NCRGuy to DKS Member 2014-Apr-17 5:23 pm to DKS said by DKS: said by Ian1: said by DKS: It works. If by "works" you mean maintains a retail monopoly for a mostly foreign owned cartel at the expense of choice and convenience for consumers, then sure. Works awesome. And foreign ownership has nothing to do with the place and manner alcohol is sold. Absolutely nothing. I imagine those working for Canadian breweries and craft breweries that have not yet been absorbed by the monoliths would disagree with you.
	actions · 2014-Apr-17 5:23 pm ·
NCRGuy 1 recommendation	NCRGuy to DKS Member 2014-Apr-17 5:23 pm to DKS said by DKS: While the full study is complex, the summary of the research says, quote: Research demonstrates that average, or per capita, consumption of alcohol is significantly associated with alcohol-related fatality rates. Alcohol distribution and retailing practices that act to increase average alcohol consumption will act to increase alcohol related fatality rates, while practices that act to reduce average alcohol consumption will act to reduce alcohol related fatality rates. »www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/con ··· amh.html And conclusively, research says, quote: Increased alcohol outlets will act to increase alcohol consumption, and associated alcohol related problems such as underage consumption, drinking and driving, and alcohol-related aggression, morbidity and mortality. This is supported both in Canada and internationally. Was that study peer-reviewed? Do you have any research done by those who aren't trying to take is back to the prohibition era?
	actions · 2014-Apr-17 5:23 pm ·
DKS Damn Kidney Stones join:2001-03-22 Owen Sound, ON	DKS 2014-Apr-17 5:50 pm said by NCRGuy: Was that study peer-reviewed? Do you have any research done by those who aren't trying to take is back to the prohibition era? It is a metastudy of peer reviewed literature. The source is CAMH. There is a lot of data out there in the field of public health medical research which supports the conclusion. Public health isn't trying to take us back to prohibition, but to promote healthy attitudes. And increased availability of alcohol isn't one of those healthy attitudes.
	actions · 2014-Apr-17 5:50 pm ·
NCRGuy join:2008-03-03 Ottawa, ON	NCRGuy Member 2014-Apr-17 6:00 pm said by DKS: said by NCRGuy: Was that study peer-reviewed? Do you have any research done by those who aren't trying to take is back to the prohibition era? It is a metastudy of peer reviewed literature. The source is CAMH. There is a lot of data out there in the field of public health medical research which supports the conclusion. Public health isn't trying to take us back to prohibition, but to promote healthy attitudes. And increased availability of alcohol isn't one of those healthy attitudes. Increased consumption is the problem. I still don't buy the better availability=more people drinking more. It means me not having to waste as much of my time to get beer. Although frankly, it wouldn't save me any time as I would still go to Quebec to buy beer since the extra gas is more than made up for in cost savings. And there really is nothing special about Beer Store employees' ability to prevent sale of beer to underage or intoxicated people.
	actions · 2014-Apr-17 6:00 pm ·
urbanriot Premium Member join:2004-10-18 Canada	urbanriot to Gone Premium Member 2014-Apr-17 6:32 pm to Gone said by Gone: said by DKS: And the same kind of enforcement will have to be done if beer goes into corner stores. Right now it's not an issue, as the LCBO and Beer Store have a mandate to identify and refuse service to underage clients. Doesn't seem to be a problem in the US, as I can't count the number of times I've seen bald-headed middle aged men storm out of Tops because the cashier won't sell them beer without seeing their ID first. Conversely I can also count the amount of times I've seen kids successfully hitting up 21 - 30 something year olds for booze outside stores in US, especially Springville. I've also seen cops chase kids out of these areas The argument is silly regardless, since 16 - 18 year olds have zero issue scoring booze whenever they want it. The fact that 17 year olds are in university with 19 year olds increases the accessibility factor to the nth degree. Where it's sold is irrelevant.... teens can get booze.
	actions · 2014-Apr-17 6:32 pm ·
dirtyjeffer0 Posers don't use avatars. Premium Member join:2002-02-21 London, ON	dirtyjeffer0 to NCRGuy Premium Member 2014-Apr-18 9:22 am to NCRGuy said by NCRGuy: Increased consumption is the problem. I still don't buy the better availability=more people drinking more. agreed...and in some examples given in here, if someone had a couple of beers, then realized they ran out, they could walk to their corner store to grab another 6 pack...if they had to go to the beer store, which may be some distance away (depending on where you live), they would likely be more inclined to drive. regarding the increased availability argument, does having more gas stations increase the consumption of gas used???...of course not, it simply means the product is more available to consumers and gives them more choices as to where to purchase it from. as well, the recent decision for the LCBO to start opening a "store within a store" and is taking bids from retailers is further proof that this is about nothing other than $$$$$...if the increased availability of the product is the concern, why would they then be opening up stores inside grocery stores and making it more available??
	actions · 2014-Apr-18 9:22 am ·
DKS Damn Kidney Stones join:2001-03-22 Owen Sound, ON	DKS to NCRGuy 2014-Apr-18 12:48 pm to NCRGuy said by NCRGuy: Increased consumption is the problem. I still don't buy the better availability=more people drinking more. It's proved in the research. Talk to any public health official. Well documented internationally, too.
	actions · 2014-Apr-18 12:48 pm ·
DKS	DKS to dirtyjeffer0 2014-Apr-18 12:49 pm to dirtyjeffer0 said by dirtyjeffer0: as well, the recent decision for the LCBO to start opening a "store within a store" and is taking bids from retailers is further proof that this is about nothing other than $$$$$...if the increased availability of the product is the concern, why would they then be opening up stores inside grocery stores and making it more available?? Many grocery stores already have wine stores in them. They sell bad wine, generally.
	actions · 2014-Apr-18 12:49 pm ·
NCRGuy join:2008-03-03 Ottawa, ON	NCRGuy to DKS Member 2014-Apr-18 12:53 pm to DKS said by DKS: said by NCRGuy: Increased consumption is the problem. I still don't buy the better availability=more people drinking more. It's proved in the research. Talk to any public health official. Well documented internationally, too. What's proved? Correlation or causation? They aren't the same.
	actions · 2014-Apr-18 12:53 pm ·
Last Parade join:2002-10-07 Port Colborne, ON	Last Parade to elwoodblues Member 2014-Apr-18 5:30 pm to elwoodblues said by elwoodblues: I see the Temperance movement is alive and well on DLSR
	actions · 2014-Apr-18 5:30 pm ·
elwoodblues Elwood Blues Premium Member join:2006-08-30 Somewhere in	elwoodblues to DKS Premium Member 2014-Apr-18 5:35 pm to DKS Sure, then stock up, we do when hit the cottage, we easily take 10 case or more of beer with us, since the only choices are a boat ride to Youngs Point or drive in to Lakefield, and when hammered nobody is going to do either.
	actions · 2014-Apr-18 5:35 pm ·
dirtyjeffer0 Posers don't use avatars. Premium Member join:2002-02-21 London, ON	dirtyjeffer0 to DKS Premium Member 2014-Apr-18 10:46 pm to DKS said by DKS: Many grocery stores already have wine stores in them. They sell bad wine, generally. i know, many of the Loblaws/RCSS locations have an integrated wine store (they often offer free samples when you walk by too)...i am curious if they are a bastion of serving underage patrons and the scourge to society you seem to imply...since they have been around for quite some time, logic would dictate they run their business above board, just like most business owners who would like to sell a profitable product would.
	actions · 2014-Apr-18 10:46 pm ·
Sanity @teksavvy.com	Sanity to DKS Anon 2014-Apr-19 10:55 am to DKS said by DKS: Many grocery stores already have wine stores in them. They sell bad wine, generally. Is the issue that of minors purchasing alcohol, or only them purchasing "quality" alcohol. If you want to prevent teens from drinking or doing drugs, prohibition has proven ineffective. It's unfortunate that some feel fit to add expenses and limit rights of responsible families as a punishment for what is generally a rural issue. I suggest that rural municipalities struggling with alcohol issues address them within their jurisdictions using local laws. There is no need for provincial, or federal laws prohibiting any form of alcohol. There are many municipalities in Ontario whom are able to sell and consume alcohol without losing control of their respective populations.
	actions · 2014-Apr-19 10:55 am ·
DKS Damn Kidney Stones join:2001-03-22 Owen Sound, ON	DKS 2014-Apr-19 11:14 am said by Sanity : said by DKS: Many grocery stores already have wine stores in them. They sell bad wine, generally. Is the issue that of minors purchasing alcohol, or only them purchasing "quality" alcohol. If you want to prevent teens from drinking or doing drugs, prohibition has proven ineffective. It's unfortunate that some feel fit to add expenses and limit rights of responsible families as a punishment for what is generally a rural issue. If course prohibition is ineffective. I am not advocating prohibition. I am advocating appropriate public health measures for control of the sale of alcohol. I suggest that rural municipalities struggling with alcohol issues address them within their jisdictions using local laws. There is no need for provincial, or federal laws prohibiting any form of alcohol. There are many municipalities in Ontario whom are able to sell and consume alcohol without losing control of their respective populations. It is not rural municipalities which have problems with alcohol. It is the whole province and the whole country. That is why we have provincial sales controls, using a number of strategies. Alcohol abuse is a serious public health issue.
	actions · 2014-Apr-19 11:14 am ·

Forums → O Canada! → Canadian → Canadian Chat	« What Are They? • Uncle died. and I got exactly what I deserved. »
prev · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · next

Canadian Chat → FUD from the Beer Store

Re: FUD from the Beer Store