Absolutely. At the time, the store I worked at would bring in around $20m/yr for the state all while having the revenue to pay employees well and extra for divestiture and investing into the liquor commission.

Yeah it's always a situation of "it depends" and in this case it's been run efficiently so I support the government running it as well. An insider tip: depending on the store (the stores on 93 will sometimes do this - bigger stores more capability), you can request certain bottles that aren't in stock so long as you buy a couple bottles of it. So if there's like a rare whiskey or wine they don't have in stock throughout the state, some stores will order a case just to put on the shelf if they know a customer requested it and will buy a bottle or two.

Yeah that makes more sense. That's what I would have expected the rate to be. If I recall correctly, Sundays you get 1.5x and Holidays are also 1.5x and if both coincide you get 2x pay as well. So it's definitely a decent job overall if you get the hours.

Damn. When I worked at a store 10 years ago that was the going rate for the sales/laborers. Was hoping it woulda increased in ten years but guess not.

I for one would definitely be up for the state doing it to increase tax revenue, but I don't want to wait til fed government makes it legal for them to do it either.

The stores produce a lot of tax money for the state and they generally pay decent as well. At least they did when I worked at one. Aside from that, since they have all the buying power collectively for the state, they actually get discounts from merchants since they can buy so much product in bulk. This is why the liquor stores in NH are cheaper than everywhere else. So not only do they provide a lot of tax revenue, they provide jobs and lower cost product. This would normally be the benefit of competing commercial companies but in this case the solution works just as well.

In the late 90s, a climate report said by 2020 NH would have the climate of Rhode Island / Connecticut and it'll be apparent in our snowfalls and that seems to be playing out here.

NH was covered in rail until the 1930s. Literally my hometown of Weare had 7 stations itself. Then we had a huge hurricane as well as a huge flood in 1936/1938 that destroyed a lot of the infrastructure. Fast forward to WWII, wartime economy didn't focus on rebuilding this infrastructure and some of the metal from rails was used for the war effort. Followed by federally mandated floodzones and new dams that destroyed even more rail. So between 1936-1960s NH gutted a lot of its rail. Now we have conservative nimbys who pretend we never had rail and have bogus arguments for why it's not needed or helpful in the state.

Projecting again, are we?

Projection at its finest right here.

Case and point. Thank you.

Is this your way of ignoring the point that you can't prove your claims..? You realize that by continuing to defer and ignore evidence and then insulting anyone who points it out means you are the one acting like a child right? Or is that too difficult to understand?

You're the one denying climate change, so provide the proof. Quit acting like a child.

Was that.. was that supposed to be a point or something? I don't think you understand how many logical fallacies you're using to "prove" climate change isn't real.

You sound like a townie who's never left their town. The state is very purple and often more democratic considering the senators and reps we send to the federal government.

Shares a sensationalist article sensationalizing past sensationalist articles and presents it as proof

Can't get any better than that.

You're aware most of the anti-Biden rhetoric is directly sourced from the Kremlin and the GQP media-outlets eat it up like hot garbage because they understand their watchers won't actually research any of it... right?

Literally labeling Biden "corrupt demented old president" is a Kremlin talking point.

Maybe you wanna get your news somewhere other than Facebook memes and Fox News..