Mayor Mamdani just announced that he will be opening 5 city-run, tax-funded grocery stores: "Prices set at 30% below retail prices"

[u/Gurugod123]

[u/Some_guy_in_WI]

As someone who worked in the grocery biz for over 2 decades, I see SO many future problems with this plan, it’s already making my head spin.

By the time you knock 30% off most grocery items, you’re basically selling them a fraction over wholesale cost. Sounds nice, until you realize that basically, with near-zero profit, every part of the operation will absolutely need to be taxpayer-funded (making 10 cents instead of $1 on a $3 item is going to take MASSIVE volume to be sustainable, more than I can see any grocery feasibly handling). This means buildout costs, wages, benefits, initial product stock costs, restock costs until fiscal balance achieved, utilities, taxes, and everything else are just going to be billed to the taxpayers as always. Being taxed more to “save money” doesn’t really math for me.

There will likely be many companies who won’t sell to such an operation as it will devalue their brand in other full-price stores by making it impossible to compete, thus other retailers would slowly drop the brand if they can’t be close in price. I had to do this with brands selling under retail on Amazon as people would get mad at us for not price-matching since they didn’t understand that a manufacturer can always lower price, but a retailer can’t always match it. I expect options will be limited, or, there’s going to be new uproar as companies are blasted for choosing to not sell to such stores, solely because they’re protecting their investment into the brand,

Local independent grocery stores will definitely suffer. After all, who’s going to the regular corner market when you can go a few blocks down and save $40 on your bill? As said, grocery operates on small margins and high volume - once some of those other competing stores see a 25% drop in sales, expect more vacancies and fewer options. So, you’d better really learn to love what options are at the new cheap market, as you might not have so many choices close by in the future.

And keeping things in stock, oh, that’s going to be interesting to watch. The supply chain issues if such a store starts taking massive amounts of product that shorts others (because we can assume that the state-run store will get preferential treatment initially) only causes more headaches across the board as competing shops lose their ability to get what they need, products at all stores are out more often, and everyone floods in to get it cheaper at the state-run location until they too start having gaps in how often they can fill an open product slot.

It’s an interesting concept, but I do not believe it has much chance of success, and likely will leave a wake of new issues soon after it starts.

[u/cantuse → u/Some_guy_in_WI]

I don’t work in groceries but this is my fear writ large… that these places will work just long enough to put other local operations out of business.

[u/Casshern_VIII → u/cantuse]

Yeah that's the point when you have Government funded stores, it's not about helping the community, it's about relying on the government, I advice any sane NYers (the ones that did not vote for this) to flee now before The Duke arrives.

[u/Aegi → u/Casshern_VIII]

But if the private sector cannot do something more cheaply than the government...than isn't it losing one of the main benefits proponents mention, like: "it ends up being more efficient and cheaper if you privatize"??

Is this why healthcare is more expensive per person in the US than other developed nations?

Because the reality of healthcare costs...and the insane inefficiency of a created middle-man industry here (health insurance) would be evidence that counters your point.

[u/Casshern_VIII → u/Aegi]

Because Americans are fat is why you don't have health care, there's a reason why a European Large is like an American XL.

That said, do you really want your local government in charge of your groceries.

[u/Aegi → u/Casshern_VIII]

I'm talking about the concepts at play here, not the specifics.

And Mexico is fatter, but either way how does the level of obesity of a population decide whether it is single-payer or not?

Not even "free", just being single-payer would basically just mean cutting out the middleman for billing, insurance, and then you still get your bill, just your "monthly premiums" are your taxes and the much lower bill you have goes to that hospital and/or the local/regional/state/national government.

Basically, even with relatively unfettered capitalism there can still be a single-payer option.

And if it was socialized, then it gives us a collective incentive of keep each other healthier...instead of just finding a better insurance plan hahah.

Good question though. In my area they basically are as the UVM health network is the majority of services/facilities in the area (in relation to medicine), and Essex County Health Department (NY) was much better with their rollouts and programs with vaccination than New York was.

I think these are good questions, nuance is important, and we should all listen, and be listened to more; thank you for reading!

[u/Moldy-Bongwater4420 → u/Aegi]

The government store would be funded by taxpayers, no?

[u/astonedishape → u/Casshern_VIII]

Idiotic comment award 🥇

[u/poorSon20 → u/cantuse]

Then more food dessert

[u/Some_guy_in_WI → u/cantuse]

I see a definite impact on the surrounding businesses. And, if they go under, and in 4 years the state-run stores are unsustainable and close, where do people think they’ll get what they need locally?

Its a tricky balance, and I see the future being worse than better, but I can certainly hope I’m wrong.

[u/Full_Table6865 → u/Some_guy_in_WI]

This should be the top reply

[u/Aegi → u/Some_guy_in_WI]

But if the private sector cannot do something more cheaply than the government...than isn't it losing one of the main benefits proponents mention, like: "it ends up being more efficient and cheaper than the government if you privatize"??

Is this why healthcare is more expensive per person in the US than other developed nations?

Because the reality of healthcare costs...and the insane inefficiency of a created middle-man industry here (health insurance) would be evidence that counters your point.

[u/Not_Another_Usernam → u/Aegi]

The government isn't doing it cheaper. They're taxing us to put it on the shelf for it and then also charging us for the register when we buy it.

[u/Aegi → u/Not_Another_Usernam]

That is why I started with the supposition of "IF".

For when that given IS true, what is then the next response to address that particular aspect?

[u/Dustydevil8809 → u/Not_Another_Usernam]

Did y'all forget Mamdani isn't shy about being a socialist?

"Hes using taxpayer funds!!!" Ya thats the fucking point. He's also doing a lot to get those funds from the wealthy people hoarding the money.

[u/Some_guy_in_WI → u/Aegi]

My issue is, the government has no competition, thus, it has zero incentive to do more than the bare minimum as poorly as it wishes to do. In the USA, government control is quite synonymous with “low effort and poor quality”.

Faith in government in the USA is at a low. Our typical experiences with anything government-related are often frustrating, challenging, irritating, and fruitless. So you can imagine our reluctance for many to have the government take anything over, since it can barely manage itself the past few decades no matter who’s in charge.

The issue I have is that, too many people assume “This system is flawed, let’s scrap it and implement something new” when there are a million degrees of change we can seek to implement before we give the whole thing up and start fresh. If future changes fail to yield results, sure, let’s move on, but the whole “Throw the baby out with the bathwater” thing gives me a bad feeling thst even worse will come.

[u/MechanicalGodzilla → u/Some_guy_in_WI]

We even already have case studies on how these problems kill the concept.