Monday, September 28, 2015

Who can answer this?

As reported by numerous papers...

If, as Governor Wolf is suddenly proposing, leasing the State Store System to a private management firm "is a way to make the liquor stores more profitable and provide better service to consumers"...can the Governor answer the following seemingly obvious questions about this latest example of Wolfonomics?

Wouldn't a fully private system provide even better service to consumers?

Wouldn't a private system that puts wine and liquor INTO grocery stores -- on the shelves -- be even better than a system that puts it somewhere in the vicinity of grocery stores?

Wouldn't a private system that allows for different levels of service -- small neighborhood stores, wine or whiskey specialty stores, huge discount mega-stores -- be even better than only one that provides only one level of service, for every store, in the entire state? (Keep in mind: it would still be illegal to go across the border.)

Wouldn't a private system that stocks more items than the entire State Store System stocks (and actually has them, instead of just listing them online) now be even better for consumers?

Wouldn't a private system that at least triples employment (as shown by the experience in Washington State and Alberta, which both fully privatized their monopoly systems) be even better for the state and the citizens that are employed than a system that limits employment and doesn't allow any small businesses?

Wouldn't a private system that triples or quadruples convenience (as measured by number of stores) be even better for the consumer than one that will still limit convenience to fewer stores than there were 40 years ago?

Wouldn't a private system where many suppliers try to bring their product to market be even better than one person or department selecting for the entire state? (In case you missed it, this is what happens when one person has that police-enforced monopoly power.)

Wouldn't a private system be even more responsive to consumers needs and wants, since the individual stores would have to compete for your business, rather than you still having no other choice than the monopoly State Store System...whatever the new name they slap on it is?

Wouldn't life just be far better if Pennsylvania had a normal liquor retail market without the state being involved in retail and wholesale at all?

You bet it would.


Anonymous said...

Got to love your GOP persistence. Keep telling a lie and sooner or later people will think its true. Like the GOP has been telling us that there are no credible scientists that believe climate change is real, or that Obama was born in Africa, etc. So you tell us that every private seller of alcohol under privatization would have a better selection than the state stores. NOT TRUE. Let's try a comparison of private sellers of beer. Take Harpoon UFO White as an example. Privately sold in both PA and DE, even you must agree with that. In PA a beer distributor may only sell beer, malt beverages, or ciders as such they have a wide variety on their shelves. Under privatization they would likely be able to expand their offerings like in DE and I contend the beer distributors would sell fewer varieties of craft beer. Let's test this. Go to 202 Brewer's Outlet and see if they have UFO White (yes), then go to Talley Ho in DE, closest liquor store, do they have it? No. Drive to 2 other liquor stores, until finally getting to the 4th store that does finally have it. Privatization means less selection within a category. However it will mean that I can find a bottle of red at more stores, I just can't be discerning. Yay!

Lew Bryson said...

Bull crap.
"So you tell us that every private seller of alcohol under privatization would have a better selection than the state stores."
No one's said that. Poof! There goes your strawman. See ya.

Anonymous said...

Bull crap indeed. By his logic, we should have one chain of stores for beer, another chain of stores for wine, yet another chain of stores for spirits, maybe even a fourth chain for alcopops, etc.

Albert Brooks said...

Sorry I have been away but I'd love to see a link as to where I've ever said every seller would have a better selection. Did you spend some time thinking up that lie or did it come naturally?

Why do we need to look at private sellers of beer to compare liquor systems? Lets look at liquor systems. The private market can and does provide in a single location with more different items then the entire state of PA provides in all their stores. PA doesn't even have a store that carries half of the limited amount available in the state. How discerning can you be when you can't legally get items that are available to most of the country but just haven't been selected by the cube rat du jour at the PLCB?

Now I do think that philosophically every private liquor store would be better because they wouldn't have the yoke of government intrusion around their necks like the current state stores but that is a different subject.