Wait until they hear about how town fires are extinguished.
Or how roads they drive on are built.
In Canada, we have provinces with government-run liquor stores and provinces without.
I live in a province with government-run liquor stores and frequently visit two that have privately-run ones. The privately-run ones are typically dingier, have less selection, and the selection they have is lower-quality. So far I have visited only one privately-run liquor store that I actually like. Out of ten.
Yes, that could just be bad luck, but I’ve only visited one government-run liquor store that felt depressing and where I disliked the selection… Out of dozens.
Draw whatever conclusions make you happy.
Plus the private ones charge more than the government stores.
Pennsylvania has a similar setup and while other states’ liquor stores can occasionally be nicer, they are on average less nice, especially when the area isn’t as rich.
Indeed. Unsurprisingly, the one privately-run liquor store I have loved is in an upscale (but not wealthy) plaza in un upscale part of the city. It’s very clean and has a loooooong fine wines fridge. The rest are underwhelming, frequently dimly-lit, and even difficult to walk around in (very narrow aisles).
One is serving addicts, the other connoisseurs
There is certainly a feedback loop there.
I’m confused. Why does the government have to run the booze shops? I’m Australian and I cannot imagine what need there is for public ownership. Are you talking about very very remote or rural places?
At least here in Finland we have government monopoly stores selling alcohol above 8% abv. I don’t mind it, I think it makes sense that the government is the one profiting off of harmful substances. I do wish I could buy wine in grocery stores, but then again most of the government liquor stores are right next to grocery stores anyway.
Why? I don’t know. Very very remote or rural places? Not exclusively.
Need? I don’t know, but it would seem to avoid the things we’ve been talking about: race to the bottom with cost cutting, catering primarily to addicts, wide disparity in quality between affluent areas and low-income areas.
I’m just imagining a Federal Govt bottlo. Crazy. Do your Medicare and get a six-pack.
I grew up in a state with government run liquor stores (Pennsylvania), can confirm that they always seemed clean, safe and well run. (The annoying thing was beer being sold at entirely separate businesses)
Aa to why? I think they wanted to micromanage alcohol sales, presumably prohibition era thinking.
Yeah, it is socialism. Socialism is when the people own the means of production. In a democracy, the people own the government, hence why government services are referred to as “publicly owned”.
Any and all problems with this, either present or past, have nothing to do with socialism, and everything to do with a lack of democracy. The well being of the working class is inextricably tied to the amount and quality of democracy in their country.
Every single country they’re referencing - Venezuela, USSR, China, North Korea - the problems with these countries aren’t because they were socialist or communist. It’s because they were dictatorships. Absolute power always corrupts.
And the same dictatorships currently branding themselves as “socialist” don’t want western leftists to recognize the fact that Europe is actually doing socialism for the working class, and they try to discredit it by claiming they are only enriching their working class off the backs of the global south. But you can’t claim that for countries like Ireland or Finland. They’re examples of socialism working, examples of socialism we should follow.
And it’s for the exact same reasons the American Republicans don’t want you to think of Europe when you think of socialism. Because it threatens hypercapitalism, whether in the form of America, or China.
Tbf, everyone in every state with state controlled liquor stores, hates it and wishes they’d allow local stores and grocers to operate above “beer and wine.”
And in Alabama (and much of the surrounding states) in particular, many wish they’d allow (let’s call them) hobbyist distillers and higher alcohol content, so long as they can pour out the head and the tail. They already do it a bunch even with it being illegal no less, got some shine in the freezer right now, three varieties.
I’m not sure “oh yeah, well your state also has state-(poorly)run stores that you probably already hate and wish would be run privately” is quite the dunk OOP thinks it is.
I think the point is that republicans have put those laws in place. They may hate them but it certainly undermines the narrative that republicans are going to “save people” from “socialism”.
Also most places that don’t have state liquor stores are places that democrats got into power and dissolved the state liquor store system.
Sure, they usually trace back to the temperance movement and the post-prohibition era though, it’s not exactly a Republican talking point anymore. Now it’s mostly about the states wanting all the money, and that’s a pretty bipartisan issue most of the time, at least in my area.
Here’s the map. I think outside the midwest its mainly republican controlled states that still have the policies.
I think it might be democratic states tend to also have ballot initiatives and those are a major vessel for these kinds of reforms.
So while its maybe not partisan the policies that allow it to get removed are more likely to be partisan.
In my area, any time they do try and get rid it, both sides of our legislature say “ehhh naaahhh.” All the citizens are at least mildly annoyed (aside from those who monetarily benefit), but all the politicians want to keep it and have shown as much by their voting records. Even if they have a D next to their name a Nay is a Nay.
Also I’m not sure some of those are quite Republican strongholds, some are notably purple, despite this map’s coloring. And many actual “Republican strongholds” are not on the list, to boot.
Oh neat, Ontario and Alabama have something in common.
Alabama ranked at the near bottom of best states to live in
