The Bar Towel

cfrancis wrote:Has there been a study done on the amount of jobs opening up the system would create against how many would be lost by the shutting of the Beer Store and the reduction of the LCBO?

Perhaps the old 2005 Beverage Alcohol Review covered jobs, I'd have to look it up.

But in Alberta jobs increased from 1,300 to 4,000+ after privatization.

Source: http://www.aglc.gov.ab.ca/liquor/albert ... zation.asp

Cass wrote:

cfrancis wrote:Has there been a study done on the amount of jobs opening up the system would create against how many would be lost by the shutting of the Beer Store and the reduction of the LCBO?

Perhaps the old 2005 Beverage Alcohol Review covered jobs, I'd have to look it up.

But in Alberta jobs increased from 1,300 to 4,000+ after privatization.

Source: http://www.aglc.gov.ab.ca/liquor/albert ... zation.asp

I can already hear the "But those are minimum wage jobs", blanking out the fact that the LCBO only hires casuals nowadays.

Cass wrote:

cfrancis wrote:Has there been a study done on the amount of jobs opening up the system would create against how many would be lost by the shutting of the Beer Store and the reduction of the LCBO?

Perhaps the old 2005 Beverage Alcohol Review covered jobs, I'd have to look it up.

But in Alberta jobs increased from 1,300 to 4,000+ after privatization.

Source: http://www.aglc.gov.ab.ca/liquor/albert ... zation.asp

The jobs mostly got worse too, if memory serves.

The whole jobs argument really isn't anything specific to alcohol though, is it? It seems to me like a pretty basic socialism vs free markets thing. I mean the government could make a monopoly and set up a bunch of cushy administrative/union jobs selling mattresses too if they wanted, right? The argument for the LCBO existing is one based on public health and safety.

Craig wrote:
The jobs mostly got worse too, if memory serves.

The whole jobs argument really isn't anything specific to alcohol though, is it? It seems to me like a pretty basic socialism vs free markets thing. I mean the government could make a monopoly and set up a bunch of cushy administrative/union jobs selling mattresses too if they wanted, right? The argument for the LCBO existing is one based on public health and safety.

No doubt it starts with public health but the jobs issue is what I want to know. The argument can be made that even though the LCBO is very top heavy, those are a lot of good jobs that could be in jeopardy. If you are a free market guy then you like it because they are paid with taxpayer money but tell that to someone who knows an LCBO employee.

Thanks Cass for the info on Alberta, I'm going to read that tonight.