The Canadian government has all kinds of monopolies, the LCBO is just one of several. You can really see how Canada has its roots in The Hudson Bay Company when you study how that came to be.
In the US, we have state monopoly liquor stores as well. They were instituted as part of the regulation scheme when alcohol was legalized at the end of Prohibition. They continue on as major revenue generators for the states. Many states don't have them, but many do as well.
It's really interesting how disconcerting this is. I live in Pennsylvania, which has the same state store concept. I've lived here all my life. I don't travel much, and so the once a year or so that I leave the state, I have a roughly five second period when I walk into a 7-11 and they have beer in the cooler.
My first experience with state owned liquor stores was in Norway. At first I was shocked at finding them - they look more like a pharmacy than a store - after thinking about it, I could probably accept those in my life.
After all - if you want to purchase liquor you still can. But why not monopolise the revenue from the stores to the state, while distributing what is a dangerous substance in a controlled way. If you start purchasing too much, then you can get flagged as needing help. I'm pretty sure that's why Norway does it - you don't want too much dangerous drinking during the long winters.
I'm normally against any type of state intervention like this, but I can see the benefits. Provided, of course, that the revenue is used to offset personal income taxes- which is probably naive on my part.
