Canadian chocolate companies are being charged with "price fixing", meaning they colluded and artificially increased the price of chocolate in Canada. Now there's a class-action lawsuit. I heard that the people who can enter the lawsuit are Canadians who spend $1000 or more in less than two years. It must be for personal consumption and they must provide receipts. I doubt many Canadians could enter the lawsuit.
But the irony is that the charge against these companies is that they "conspired, agreed or arranged to fix prices of chocolate products." Well, that's such a crime! You can easily find chocolate bars for $0.75. So how much were the prices increase? 10¢, 20¢? Oh, the humanity! But the irony is that the GOVERNMENT price fixes ALL THE TIME! Now, they turn around and get upset because some chocolate company is doing the same! How hypocritical!
The government doesn't add 10 or 20% to the price though, they commonly DOUBLE the price! Look at milk. It's controlled by the milk marketing board, and the price is about double. Look at cigarettes, even worse. A carton of cigs costs $29 before taxes. After taxes, it's $94! That's over triple!! Alcohol also has some crazy taxes on it, as I discussed yesterday.
Now the government has the gall to act all indignant that a company dares rip people off. GIVE ME A BREAK.
But the other side of the story is that this sounds awfully suspicious to being with. Most of the time these anti-trust or similar lawsuits are manufactured by competitors in the industry who are unable to compete. Apparently in this case, the suit was brought on by Hershey.
So I'm suspicious to begin with, but even if it's true, the government has no moral authority to condemn this activity.
Monday, September 16, 2013
Sunday, September 15, 2013
Newfoundland Labrador Liquor Corporation Gauging Public
There is no good reason to maintain the government monopoly known as The Newfoundland Labrador Liquor Corporation. It only enriches a tiny minority at the expense of the vast majority. It is an assault on freedom and just another example of government force.
First, the price. NLC charges about 52% excise tax on alcohol. This varies by product, but this is the average. On TOP of this, consumers are charged an additional 13% of "normal" taxes. Meaning, right off the bat, you are paying more than double for your alcohol. This is enough of an argument for why alcohol taxes are bad. It rips off consumers. People have limited money, and when a violent, coercive organization FORCES people to pay more for the products they want, it hurts them. They cannot pay for a vacation or a house renovation, or food as easily, because the price of goods they buy is artificially raised. This lowers their quality of life.
Compare this to the United States. There, the average excise tax on beer is a mere 10%! Americans don't have to break the bank to buy a 12-pack. A case of beer that here costs $25, there would probably cost about $15. The American can go to a movie, then come home and enjoy some beer. The Canadian, on the other hand, can only afford the beer.
Some people claim taxing alcohol is good because it recoups some of the cost incurred by government for having to deal with the negative externalities caused by heavy drinkers. For example, heavy drinkers are involved in accidents or require medical assistant and this costs the government. So in order to recuperate lost money, the government adds a tax. However, according to the CATO Institute, a 1989 study showed this would only justify an excise tax of a few percentage points, not 52%!
Another argument put forth is that higher alcohol prices will discourage binge drinking. There are several problems with this reasoning. First of all, once again the majority is being punished for the sins of the minority, a philosophically unjustifiable position to take. Secondly, studies have shown binge drinking rates in Canada to be the same as the United States, even though Canada has significantly higher average prices. It would seem the price of alcohol does not affect binge drinking rates.
Philosophically I believe each individual is responsible for himself and that I am not guilty of someone's else's sins nor should I pay for them. Ultimately high alcohol taxes hurt people like me. To be honest, I haven't bought an alcoholic product in years, and part of the reason is I cannot afford to spend that much money. I am not a teetotaler.
But another aspect of the NLC that I find both annoying and comical is how seriously the people in the organization see themselves. Everything is so "professional". They spend millions of dollars on marketing and advertising. They conduct studies and use focus groups. I have first-hand knowledge of many of the things they do in this area. But they are a MONOPOLY.
It's comical to me because it reminds me of a child who dresses up in his daddy's suit and thinks he is a big business executive. If the NLC was exposed to any real competition, they'd be eliminated before you could say "excise tax". It's easy to appear as a strong, professional organization when you're the only game in town and the police will shut down anyone who tries to compete. I love, for example, the advertising which proudly proclaims you can save $1.50 on a $60 bottle of alcohol which should cost $20.
The whole operation is such a charade. Marketing studies, focus groups, telephone polling, etc, etc. is just so vacuous when you're not even a business, but rather a government monopoly. I realized perhaps they are afraid. Afraid enough people will wake up and realize they are being gauged by these wannabes. If they woke up, their entire mafia operation would be exposed for what it is.
On top of that, they are building an enormous monstrosity near Robin Hood Bay Dump. At least the location is appropriate, given the garbage we put up with from them. This monolithic structure does not contain product or distribution, it is just a huge number of offices, paid for by our excessive taxation.
Low level cashiers at the NLC are usually paid double what someone with a similar job and skill level is paid in the real world. They are often teenagers. Is this fair to hard-working teens who do not work there? Don't get me wrong, I'm all for people earning as much money as they can, and I certainly do not blame anyone for wanting to work there, but should money be stolen from law-abiding citizens to pay for this? I do not think so.
But that's not the half of it. The teens may be making $20 per hour as cashiers, but the real waste is going to the dozens upon dozens of managers and executive who are "playing business" like a child would play house. Any "economic" benefit which may be derived from having a government-run monopoly evaporates when the people in this monopoly pay themselves handsomely and erect giant structures in which to do business.
The NLC is nothing more than legalized theft which hurts the people of the province.
Sources:
http://www.faslink.org/Frequency_of_drinking.htm
First, the price. NLC charges about 52% excise tax on alcohol. This varies by product, but this is the average. On TOP of this, consumers are charged an additional 13% of "normal" taxes. Meaning, right off the bat, you are paying more than double for your alcohol. This is enough of an argument for why alcohol taxes are bad. It rips off consumers. People have limited money, and when a violent, coercive organization FORCES people to pay more for the products they want, it hurts them. They cannot pay for a vacation or a house renovation, or food as easily, because the price of goods they buy is artificially raised. This lowers their quality of life.
Compare this to the United States. There, the average excise tax on beer is a mere 10%! Americans don't have to break the bank to buy a 12-pack. A case of beer that here costs $25, there would probably cost about $15. The American can go to a movie, then come home and enjoy some beer. The Canadian, on the other hand, can only afford the beer.
Some people claim taxing alcohol is good because it recoups some of the cost incurred by government for having to deal with the negative externalities caused by heavy drinkers. For example, heavy drinkers are involved in accidents or require medical assistant and this costs the government. So in order to recuperate lost money, the government adds a tax. However, according to the CATO Institute, a 1989 study showed this would only justify an excise tax of a few percentage points, not 52%!
Another argument put forth is that higher alcohol prices will discourage binge drinking. There are several problems with this reasoning. First of all, once again the majority is being punished for the sins of the minority, a philosophically unjustifiable position to take. Secondly, studies have shown binge drinking rates in Canada to be the same as the United States, even though Canada has significantly higher average prices. It would seem the price of alcohol does not affect binge drinking rates.
Philosophically I believe each individual is responsible for himself and that I am not guilty of someone's else's sins nor should I pay for them. Ultimately high alcohol taxes hurt people like me. To be honest, I haven't bought an alcoholic product in years, and part of the reason is I cannot afford to spend that much money. I am not a teetotaler.
But another aspect of the NLC that I find both annoying and comical is how seriously the people in the organization see themselves. Everything is so "professional". They spend millions of dollars on marketing and advertising. They conduct studies and use focus groups. I have first-hand knowledge of many of the things they do in this area. But they are a MONOPOLY.
It's comical to me because it reminds me of a child who dresses up in his daddy's suit and thinks he is a big business executive. If the NLC was exposed to any real competition, they'd be eliminated before you could say "excise tax". It's easy to appear as a strong, professional organization when you're the only game in town and the police will shut down anyone who tries to compete. I love, for example, the advertising which proudly proclaims you can save $1.50 on a $60 bottle of alcohol which should cost $20.
The whole operation is such a charade. Marketing studies, focus groups, telephone polling, etc, etc. is just so vacuous when you're not even a business, but rather a government monopoly. I realized perhaps they are afraid. Afraid enough people will wake up and realize they are being gauged by these wannabes. If they woke up, their entire mafia operation would be exposed for what it is.
On top of that, they are building an enormous monstrosity near Robin Hood Bay Dump. At least the location is appropriate, given the garbage we put up with from them. This monolithic structure does not contain product or distribution, it is just a huge number of offices, paid for by our excessive taxation.
Low level cashiers at the NLC are usually paid double what someone with a similar job and skill level is paid in the real world. They are often teenagers. Is this fair to hard-working teens who do not work there? Don't get me wrong, I'm all for people earning as much money as they can, and I certainly do not blame anyone for wanting to work there, but should money be stolen from law-abiding citizens to pay for this? I do not think so.
But that's not the half of it. The teens may be making $20 per hour as cashiers, but the real waste is going to the dozens upon dozens of managers and executive who are "playing business" like a child would play house. Any "economic" benefit which may be derived from having a government-run monopoly evaporates when the people in this monopoly pay themselves handsomely and erect giant structures in which to do business.
The NLC is nothing more than legalized theft which hurts the people of the province.
Sources:
http://www.faslink.org/Frequency_of_drinking.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)