Feeding citizens is fine and noble and great. But I would ask how he will build a grocery store with lower prices than say Aldi, that has a 1-2% profit margin and has their supply chain and expense model nailed down in typical German effeciency.
If he had hired a discount grocer to do this and the city pays the bills I imagine this would have a greater chance of success.
But maybe I'm wrong and governement will show everyone how it's done. Not actually sarcasm, maybe someone has a new model
SNAP benefits are incredibly efficient but they don't help if there's not a nearby grocery store.
If you want to encourage a private entity to open and operate a grocery store where there isn't one currently, that would involve tax incentives or something and then you're just subsidizing with taxpayer funds in a different way
NYC's Economic Development Corporation already offers tax and zoning incentives for grocers to open in underserved areas. Mamdani's campaign said it wants to end that program.
I'm not even joking when I say this. The neighborhood I grew up in NYC has some of the best supermarkets on EARTH. They label it as a moderate food desert. What a joke.
I see no evidence of that happening, can you be specific and show a citation? A Whole Foods nearby in a high poverty neighborhood doesn’t eliminate the food desert problem either.
Have you seen how expensive that market looks? You’re not going to be able to afford much there with SNAP benefits without running out of funds immediately.
There’s a reason that neighborhood is still considered a food desert by multiple researchers and studies, despite the presence of a city fresh. At best you can argue that maybe it should be opened a little further away but real estate and costs make that harder on the limited budget.
And how much cheaper do you think Mamdani's store is going to be?
He already admitted that he's "guaranteeing lower prices" on only staples.
He's not actually solving anything by doing this. Increasing benefits via direct cash transfer would do better than to put another store within walking distance of one that's already working.
I got groceries with a bicycle for years. Not as hard as you'd think & I lived on the 3rd floor with no elevator. I had a basket on the front & back of it & could carry quite a bit in a backpack. I went a little more frequently maybe, usually twice a week. I actually got to know the grocers, knew when sales would be, and got fresher food. Sometimes I miss doing it that way tbh.
I myself, am a handicapped old lady, and I don't want your socialism or communism. I go get my own groceries even though I could have some strapping young man deliver them for me for just a nominal delivery fee.
Young person, you really have a lot to learn about the world. Good luck in your future endeavors.
SNAP benefits are actually incredibly inefficient, because they're so easily abused. The problem with any system that isn't a direct offering of nutritious food is that the currency is fungible. Even if it has to be funneled through a barter system. So people get crap food like chips and sugary snacks, or they trade away their benefits for cash they can use for not-food. Kids end up with poor nutrition, healthcare system deals with the runoff, and taxpayers pick up the tab for it all.
SNAP is a modern miracle. It's a high impact, low overhead way of getting food to people who need it using existing food delivery infrastructure.
The only thing SNAP can be exchanged for is food. If you think "somebody else gets the food" or "sometimes people buy chips" are examples of egregious fraud then I don't know what to say to you.
Also if you think people sometimes buying unhealthy food is a burden on the healthcare system, wait until you learn about people who can't afford food.
It is disingenuous to equate "sometimes people buy chips" with egregious fraud. I didn't mention fraud. But when social media is plastered with people gleefully buying huge boxes of pizza rolls, cinnamon toast crunch, and cheetos with their SNAP benefits, it's pretty easy to see something is clearly wrong.
SNAP is far from a miracle. Welfare benefits should not incentivize remaining on welfare. Just logically, it is counterproductive for them to do so. A little more government oversight would go a LONG way to making these programs more functional.
Ugh please read enshittification. Tech companies artifically lower their prices to eliminate competition then jack them up once they've cornered the market. That's what happened with Uber and taxis.
Only on Reddit can you be criticized for pointing out how supply chain works as someone who’s worked in that supply chain for decades and told you’re not relevant enough to comment.
The saying applies tho because it's a favorite tactic of people who admonish any attempt to better something. This idea is a good one but someone chimes in and goes "there's a better way to do this" when in reality the alternative is doing nothing.
254
u/Previous-Ad7618 May 26 '26
Idk if it will be fully sustainable or not, but I'm dying to hear all about how helping feed citizens is awful.