Let's also add that privatization is no solution at all. It means dumping a state-run monopoly for a heavily state-regulated monopoly. (The privatized entity would still be stuck with contracts and leases that may have more to do with someone's political purpose than the business purpose of the retail wing of PLCB. And customers would have no consumer choice.)
The solution is abolition of the retail operation, with the state auctioning off its stock and facilities. Then the state can do what it should (regulate license holders) and entrepreneurs can do what they should.
"The only difference between the Republican and Democratic parties is the velocities with which their knees hit the floor when corporations knock on their door. That's the only difference."
- Ralph Nader
One of the things that allows Adam's "gorilla" to weigh 500 pounds is the fact that the PLCB is the largest liquor wholesaler in the world. That leaves a plenty of room for monkeying around in the gap between massive volume deals and retail pricing.
©2011 RussDiamond™. No rights reserved®. www.pacleansweep.com
I'd call that the second part of the gorilla most people avoid: the State is addicted to the money it makes off its monopoly.
Just to annoy some in this thread, if this monopoly had formed "naturally" (ie, through market forces) many of you would be railing against state interference with its natural right to do whatever the hell it wanted to.
Indeed, the state can't even maintain its own monopoly without draconian penalties for purchasing outside the state or expensive fees and inconvenient regulations to have something sent into the state. The need for government coercion to prop it up is just more reason to dump the system.
thunda: I don't recall the Democrat prior to Gov. Rendell, Gov. Robert P. ["The Real Bob"] Casey Sr., floating a proposal to sell off the PLCB retail stores during his eight years in office. That doesn't mean he didn't, though. Illiniwek: All the GOP privatization proposals I recall did not call for selling off the State Stores as a single entity -- the system would have been broken up completely. That, I can assure you, never flew with the union.
Sandy Smith, Wanderer in Germantown, Philadelphia
Editor-in-Chief, Philadelphia Real Estate Blog - but all opinions expressed here are mine and mine alone.
""Jazz and blogging are both intimate, improvisational, and individual -- but also inherently collective. And the audience talks over both." --Andrew Sullivan, "Why I Blog," The Atlantic, November 2008
SO how's this then.
(Questions, I'm not against privatization it's not without downsides)
SO you get a "bottle shop" in Fairmount.
What's West and North Philly going to get?
Or Ephrata or Lewisburg or Bristol?
Alcohol is a drug, so you're now deregulating it's sale.
Again, yes there would be winners (yupster parties) and losers (north philly now has wholesale cheap vodka 7 days a week)
there's another reason why verizon is an extremely poor comparable
The Retail component shows no signs of ever being a monopoly save the consolidation of production and retail into one single entity. the freer beer market is actually diversifying. It's worth noting though that eliminating the retail segment is only part of dismantling the worthless regulatory body known as the PLCB. There's no need for a PLCB middleman (wine stores should be able to order directly from the winery) just like there's no need for two classifications of distributors. If the PLCB is the middleman and, you'll still have a distribution monopoly and said markup. If in order to pass the legislation, the PLCB wants to sell off its stores lock, stock, and barrel and set a phase in period like with electricity, so be it.Originally Posted by Illiniwek
desolate-most places would benefit not just wealthy ones, places like middletown might get in town liquor and wine stores. MI hasn't collapsed because markets can sell liquor..it collapsed when the jobs left, justlike camden (not to say all of MI is as bad as camden). Ephrata will also be fine. places like Lancaster will see all sorts of new investment. as seand noted, we already have places like that, so called stop n go's. the basic idea behind the plcb is to make alcohol consumption as expensive and inconvenient as possible. while it does succeed at that, it's ultimate social goal has been a failure. and if people can't drink cheap booze, it's not like there aren't alternatives available round the clock on the street.
"It has shown me that everything is illuminated in the light of the past"
Jonathan Safran Foer