Liquor plan a winner
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Thursday, Feb. 7, 2013, 8:55 p.m.
Liquor plan a winner
The plan that Gov. Corbett has laid out to privatize liquor sales in Pennsylvania is a winning one, with benefits for everyone involved.
Consumers win big when Pennsylvania modernizes liquor sales. Privately run stores will be able to offer greater choice and better prices in the free market when compared with the current government monopoly. And no longer will we be inconvenienced by going to separate stores to buy beer, wine and liquor.
State employees win by getting opportunities for openings elsewhere in state government, while the unemployed also win with the hundreds of new jobs expected as a result of privatizing.
But most importantly, our children win big with Corbett's commitment to use the $1 billion in proceeds from selling off the government stores toward safety and education programs in our public schools, and toward cracking down on individuals who sell alcohol to minors.
Not often does a proposal from government come along that is such a win for consumers, employees and children, but by getting government out of the alcohol business, Corbett has done it!
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Money for litter pickup?
- Term limits’ limits
- School staffers’ challenge
- Do it or shut up
- Kiski board ignores taxpayers
- The Obama Doctrine I wonder …
- Economics dissent
- Shortchanging military
- Not for sale
- Knives vs. guns I
- Touching film