Obsessed with privatization II
The Trib is obsessed with privatizing the Pennsylvania Wine and Spirits stores. Not a day goes by without a column on all the negative effects of having liquor sold by the commonwealth.
Right now, the state stores are thriving, their sales are providing huge revenue to the taxpayers, and people who work there actually make a living wage and pay their taxes. They are not on food stamps or other government handouts.
I have been to other states and privatizing does not lower the sales price or increase the selection of alcohol. Private licenses mean smaller inventory; those stores cannot buy in bulk like the state stores do. So why would you want to end one of the few government businesses that is profitable?
And why is the Trib on this endless witch hunt to privatize? What's in it for the Trib that it is devoting so much time and space in the newspaper?
What did Gov. Corbett promise in return for bringing the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board down?
With all the other problems facing the Legislature — unemployment, drug trafficking, funding PennDOT — having more places to buy cheaper alcohol should be the least of its concerns.
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.
- On right track
- Not ‘too stupid’
- Quarantine quandary
- EPA impoverishing seniors
- Back to ‘Mad Men’?
- Invite God to school
- Armed & prudent