Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Newspaper contacts | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS

Latest numbers more validation for state store privatization

October 22, 2013

The latest numbers tell you all you need to know about whether liquor privatization for Pennsylvania is viewed as something that should be don....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Oct-22-13 7:52 AM

Well since this paper does not want you to see the poll questions or the order they were asked you will have to look them up for yourself. I'll just say that the the very first question eliminates anyone that has worked for a polling company or in the news media, effectively eliminating respondents that would see right through the scam. I challenge the paper to print the full PDF so we can go over it line by line, just for laughs.

You would think a paper wanting to preserve integrity should have done that in the first place. Guess not. Wonder why?

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-22-13 8:50 AM

Isn't it odd that when the union paid for a poll it was all fair and great according to JohnRZ but when anybody else pays for a poll it is biased and wrong. Doesn't matter that the result pretty much matches what almost every poll for the last 40+ years. I guess they were all biased.

The people have consistently shown they do not want the state store system which is unthinkable to the union rep posting here. It is time to do what the people want and not what some small amount of store clerks want. Time to get the freedom of choice most states have and not let some guy sittting in a cube in Harrisburg decide what the entire state can or can not buy. Time to allow businesses and employment to grow. Every place that has privatized has seen employment increase dramatically. Washington went from 931 state store workers to 3,000+ private employees. Alberta went from 1,200 to 4,000. Iowa and West Virginia saw similar gains.

Privatization IS Modernization.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-22-13 9:19 AM

What ****** can't destroy privatization of the liquor industry will. As if the drug and alcohol problem in PA isn't bad enough. Mark my words! Give each of the commenters random blood tests and see what you get, the results may surprise you.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-22-13 9:21 AM

Not ****** but "H e r o i n"

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-22-13 9:22 AM

Censorship is alive and well in Williamsport, PA.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-22-13 9:49 AM

Censorship is alive and well in Williamsport, PA.-MrFredErikson

But from what I read on these posts all the time is that we have to return to the Constitution. Guess that is as long as you stick to what is "allowed" to be said.-Scott

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-24-13 7:43 AM

Mr Acker will remember the union poll was meant to be internal. That was obvious by the questions asked. After eliminating those that might catch on to the scheme a typical question in the CF marketing survey is the one asking what would be the most important benefit of privatization. Strong suggestion that these things will all happen, just pick your favorite. However none of these has happened in recently privatized Washington State, save booze is for sale most everywhere. Prices are up, so is border bleed, selection is down with Washington's own craft distillers losing up to 50% in sales this year. Liquor theft is up and the wholesalers who were supposed to make up any revenue shortfall (a little more than 100 million) are withholding payment by tying things up in court.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-24-13 10:40 AM

JohnRZ seems to be a bit behind. The distributors have paid. Washington overall selection is up, convenience is up, DUI is down, wineries in-state sales are up and revenue to the state is up too. Most importantly there is no person or committee deciding what an entire state is allowed or not allowed to buy like in PA.

I can't find the survey of all craft distillers in Washington but one did report a decrease in in-state sales, which does not mean they all did unless you are trying to stretch the facts.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 8 of 8 comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web