Content pfp
Content
@
https://warpcast.com/~/channel/cryptoleft
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
EulerLagrangodamus pfp
EulerLagrangodamus
@eulerlagrange
Govt owned grocery stores is a terrible idea. I think what they’re looking for is cooperatives.
2 replies
1 recast
12 reactions
Purp🇵🇸 pfp
Purp🇵🇸
@purp
How so? Why should New York City pay Billions of dollars in subsidies to corporations that pay poverty wages? Why shouldn't that money instead be used to subsidize at cost groceries?
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
EulerLagrangodamus pfp
EulerLagrangodamus
@eulerlagrange
Because there is a history of govts doing this and it never ends well
1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
Purp🇵🇸 pfp
Purp🇵🇸
@purp
Theres a long history of governments subsidizing losses for corporations, and it never ends well Theres a long history of raising police funding and not stopping crime, and it never ends well Theres a long history of lowering taxes on the rich, and it never ends well How come all these are acceptable but subsidizing losses on public grocery stores is a bridge to far
1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
EulerLagrangodamus pfp
EulerLagrangodamus
@eulerlagrange
You’re hitting me with a what about-ism. I’m not really interested in debating moral superiority here, but i’m fame if you wanna discuss how more people can be fed. I’m not advocating for subsidies here. I’m just pointing out that the history of govts trying to force an outcome for such an enterprise is not good. I really doubt NYC is subsidizing grocery stores right now. More likely they give out benefits that look like SNAP. SNAP has the benefit of preserving the benefits of the free market (not saying free market is all good, but they do have good properties in healthy markets). If the mayor instead said NYC will expand SNAP (or NYC equiv), and get more grocery stores to accept it, then you’d get more food to people with less money spent. The government is not good at running small businesses.
2 replies
0 recast
2 reactions
EulerLagrangodamus pfp
EulerLagrangodamus
@eulerlagrange
https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2020/05/22/859853877/food-banks-get-the-love-but-snap-does-more-to-fight-hunger
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
EulerLagrangodamus pfp
EulerLagrangodamus
@eulerlagrange
Curious what our beloved /opacity Marxist @cryptokibbutznik.eth thinks. also @tbsocialist
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Josh | The Blockchain Socialist pfp
Josh | The Blockchain Socialist
@tbsocialist
Other cities in the US have already been doing it to some degree it looks like. According to the article, the state does do a lot of food distribution and logistics as it is. Slight preference for coops but I think it's a worthwhile experiment personally. There are also plenty of state run alcohol stores in places like Sweden and I believe in a couple of US states as well which seem to be doing pretty well. https://foodtank.com/news/2025/06/city-owned-grocery-stores-a-bold-fix-for-food-insecurity/
1 reply
1 recast
1 reaction
EulerLagrangodamus pfp
EulerLagrangodamus
@eulerlagrange
Even with free rent and tax breaks, Chicago’s feasibility study showed government stores would still need large annual subsidies. Illinois tried this before - 6 stores opened with state funding, 4 closed. Meanwhile, enhanced SNAP benefits are proven to work and reach 9x more people than all food banks combined. If you want cheaper food for low-income people, just increase SNAP - it’s simpler, more effective, and doesn’t require taxpayers to subsidize failed retail operations. Government retail almost always loses to private competition on both cost and efficiency.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ Govt stores can’t match the purchasing power of govt grocery stores.
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
Purp🇵🇸 pfp
Purp🇵🇸
@purp
Im not advocating or even implying that the government can compete with retail businesses Im saying for the 10-15% of new yorkers that are dealing with food insecurity the current system is not working, and maybe there are other ways to address this issue
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
EulerLagrangodamus pfp
EulerLagrangodamus
@eulerlagrange
I’m all for solving problems for people. The data shows the SNAP approach is way more effective. Like the numbers don’t even compare on bang for your buck. What’s the reluctance for that approach?
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
EulerLagrangodamus pfp
EulerLagrangodamus
@eulerlagrange
> Im not advocating or even implying that the government can compete with retail businesses Thats not my point. The goal as i understand it is to offer at cost groceries. What i’m saying is the profit part is less important in determining price than the scale at which you can source produce. So a for-profit massive grocery chain could offer cheaper good than a non-profit grocery chain.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Purp🇵🇸 pfp
Purp🇵🇸
@purp
Snap in almost half of situations (44% of snap households has one person working) is government subsidies for companies paying poverty wages, that funny enough ends up back in the companies hands (Walmart is the number one employer of people on snap, and receives 18% of all food stamp money)
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction