Sounds like all a government run non for profit needs to do is just track the market price of items, record the how much the thereotical profit would be and then they can say “hey we saved consumers this much money”
Keep in mind businesses can and do, already do this type of accounting. The biggest difference is that would drive up demand due to the lower prices, which may drive up overall consumption and or cost. Of course the government can do 3 basic things: order more goods and absorb the cost, reduce the quality of goods to save money, use a check out system that ensures that nobody is using an exorbitant amount of food and if they do, offer to allow them to use a different system that tracks how much food they bought and let’s them buy at production costs
Homeboy about to learn how deadweight loss will cause breadlines. Thank god this is only a fringe option, likely only to be used by EBT/low income folks.
Exactly! First off, this is the U.S., not Venezuela, our systems and oversight are completely different. Military commissaries already show that this model can work: stable pricing, reliable access, and significantly lower costs for consumers. That’s the whole point.
Have you ever actually been to a military commissary? Pretty much everyone I knew would go far out of their way to shop at a Walmart, and for good reason.
Served 8 years in the military and shopped at commissaries a lot, both stateside and overseas, and that doesn’t match my experience at all. They’re not perfect, but calling the savings “negligible” doesn’t align with the broader data showing consistent savings.
During what years did you serve? I was in 05-17 and it was far cheaper to shop off base, than on. I would swing by the commissary, if I was driving past it and needed a few things, but full on grocery shopping was done off base.
2007–2015. I’m sure it varied by base, but that wasn’t my experience overall. During that same timeframe, DoD was already tracking commissary pricing against local stores and consistently reporting around ~20% average savings.
So I’m not saying every item was cheaper every time, but “far cheaper off base” across the board doesn’t really line up with the broader data from that period.
GAO found ~17.7% savings vs local stores:
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-22-104728
And DeCA itself explains the model and savings here:
https://corp.commissaries.com/our-agency/about-deca
Commissaries sell at cost plus a small surcharge and are specifically designed to provide savings compared to commercial retailers.
The margin argument is off. Prices aren’t just margin. Commissaries remove profit markup and operate differently, so the savings come from total price comparisons, not just margins.
Prices aren’t just margin. Commissaries remove profit markup
"profit markup" is just an imprecise term for margins. You're missing the whole point. Grocery stores don't have 17.7% margins, so selling items below cost is only possible if taxpayers are paying the rest (which we are, at $1.53 billion this year).
They operate at a loss. They are kept afloat by tax payers. Meaning the people are still paying for it, just not at the register. If you still spend the same amount (more when you cover the inefficiencies like payin 30million for 1 location) everyone ends up poorer. The everyday U.S. citizens would have more money in their pockets if they didnt have to fund commisaries.
Where are you getting the $1B–$1.4B number from? The Defense Commissary Agency budget is public, and yes, it’s subsidized, but that’s by design.
The relevant question isn’t whether it costs money, it’s what the outcome is. DoD and GAO still measure ~20%+ savings compared to local markets, so it’s not just “operating at a loss,” it’s producing lower prices for users.
That is how much they take in subsidies each year. The prices are only lower on the shelf because the product cost to get the product there has been absorbed by the tax payer. Profit margins in grovcery stores average 2 percent. That means when you buy something at a for profit grocery store they pay 98 cents to sell you that 1 dollar piece of food. If they operated at a loss but used tax payer money to cover those losses they would be able to do the same thing as comissaries. The problem is that just because you see 20% lower prices on the shelves doesnt mean that they are 20% cheaper, it means you paid them in a diffefent way which for commisaries would be through taxes. As far as efficiency goes the private market will always be more efficient because they get rewarded for being efficient, commisaries get tax money and thus have nothing compelling them to be efficient. If they didnt have tax money they wouldnt be able to offer the on shelf price 20% less.
If you spend 25 dollars in taxes which go to the commisary and buy 80 dollars worth of goods at the comissary, which would be ewual to 100 dolars worth at a for profit grocery store you are actually paying 105 dollars on groceries, 25 in taxes and 80 in store. A for profit grocery store on the other hand charges you nothing covertly.
You’re blending real facts with assumptions and presenting them like they’re the same thing.
Yes, commissaries are subsidized. That’s not disputed. The question is what the outcome is, and GAO/DoD data compares actual shelf prices to local markets and still finds ~17–20% savings on average. That’s a real price difference, not just accounting.
Your “you’re actually paying more through taxes” example isn’t sourced and assumes a 1:1 cost transfer that doesn’t reflect how tax funding or public goods actually work. Do you have data that supports that breakdown, or is that just a hypothetical?
Also, saying the private market is always more efficient is an assertion, not evidence. Commissaries exist precisely because markets don’t serve certain areas or populations well.
If your argument is that subsidies are bad in principle, that’s a separate ideological position. However, if the argument is about outcomes, then the available data shows the model produces lower prices for users.
Im not blending anything. If the comisary has to be subsidiezed that would be losses if it were any other bussiness operating in the same exact way. You are right that not all bussinesses operate more efficiently, but if they do not operate efficisntly in the free market they go out of bussiness. And my point about the prices is if they were not getting subsidies they would not be able to offer the prices they do, which means you are still paying the full price but the price is hiden by the subsidy.
If they are not operating at a loss then why do they need the subisdy? What is the subsidy for? Also look at private grocery store profit margins. They are very very small. The free market is not exploiting people. They provide a service of which the customer recieves 98% of the benefit of the grocers labor but pay 2% more than the grocer paid themselves.
You’re asserting that people “actually pay more,” but you haven’t provided a single source that measures total cost per user to support that.
GAO/DoD data compares real prices and still shows consistent savings. Your argument relies on a 1:1 tax assumption that isn’t reflected in any published analysis.
So, where is the data that proves your claim, or are you just inferring it?
The FY26 subsidy for the Defense Commissary Agency is $1.53B. That is the only way the stores can afford to offer the price discounts to military families, according to the DCA itself.
U.S. citizens would have more money in their pocket if they didn't have to fund Medicaid either. But as a society, we've decided that it's a worthwhile cause to prevent our poorer seniors from living in destitution. The same logic applies here.
3 things, it has made health care costs sky rocket true. 2nd just because you do something that loses money in one field doesnt make it a good idea to do it in another. 3rdly sadly society as a whole does not understand economics and how exactly the market works, how government manipulation never meets societies needs as well as society does throught the market. Economics is simply a way to allocate scarce resources, history has proven time and time again that if government wants to enrich people and make it so that society as a whole has the best standard of living is for government to focus on protecting property rights.
The affordable care act did not make health care affordable, pel grants and government contributions to colleges did not make higher education better. The federal reserve did not prevent the great depressions which was exactly the kind of thing it was designed to prevent. Government assistance programs does not get people out of poverty but instead incentivizes people becoming impoverished to take advantage of those systems.
If you take a step back and think about society as a whole you will realize the heartless capitalists are the ones that actually are trying to get done what is in everyones best interest. Get government out and prices will go down. Look at the housing market 75% of residential land has laws preventing multifamily homes from being built. Developers want to make money, let them build high density housing and prices will fall. But government does not allow this, so builders can not meet demand. It literally works with almost everything. If you allow the market to do its thing people will seek the most efficient way to provide services because the more efficiently they provide services the more they profit, as competitor adopt these efficient methods prices go down due to competition. In the end the public gets better stuff at lower prices.
Agreed, if my money is being taken i would much rather a 30 million grocery store than a 30 million dollar missle, but it would be best for people not to have their money taken in the first place.
Right…”Let people do what they want, as long as they don’t harm others, and keep government out of it as much as possible.” What part of this says: tal money out of people’s mouths and children’s futures to fund foreign government that bomb and kill and commit genocide with money stolen from people’s pockets? You sure you’re a libertarian and an an ultra boot eater screaming “ harder daddy govment hardaaa”
You’re assuming a subsidy just shifts costs 1:1, but that’s not necessarily how it works. Commissaries remove profit maximization from a thin-margin industry, which changes the pricing structure. That’s why DoD and GAO data still show ~20%+ savings on average.
So it’s not just “paying somewhere else,” it’s a different cost model producing different outcomes.
The problem is that if soldiers steal from the military commissary and get caught, they get punished. Will the NYPD and DA punish civilian stealing from the government run store?
Civilians already get punished for theft, laws don’t suddenly stop applying because a store is government-run. The real question is whether enforcement is consistent, not who owns the store.
They won't, be they should. I want nice things but we can't have them because we can't keep each other accountable. Other countries are able to do this, but U.S. society is too far gone.
Certain district attorneys in the past have chosen not to prosecute people committing certain crimes, including theft. If you have a district attorney who doesn't want to go after certain crimes or persecute people of certain ethnic groups, then they won't get punished.
You’re mixing two separate issues, store ownership and law enforcement. If prosecution is inconsistent, that’s a system-wide issue, not a flaw in the model. And claiming it varies by ethnicity without evidence just sounds like a generalization, not an argument.
Let me use a different example to show you. Under Obama the Dept of Education was tasked with cutting the racial disparity of school punishment. Even though there was little evidence this disparity was caused by racism. It was even evidence of the opposite showing that black teachers disciplined black students more frequently than white teachers. There was no room in this new federal policy to account for different groups misbehaving at different rights. The only way schools could reduce the punishment disparity, was to not punish the more frequent groups and over punish the groups that acted out less.
I get the point you’re trying to make about government policy, but that’s a different domain. Education policy and retail operations aren’t comparable systems. We already have a direct, real-world example in commissaries operating under the same legal and enforcement framework, and they’re still working. That’s the relevant comparison.
That concern applies to any system, public or private. People in charge can apply rules unfairly anywhere. That’s an enforcement and oversight issue, not something unique to this model.
It doesn’t really differ, and that’s the point. Theft laws and enforcement apply equally, no matter who owns the store. If enforcement is inconsistent, it affects all stores, not just government-run ones. We already have a working example with military commissaries, the same legal system and enforcement environment, and they’ve operated successfully for decades.
That’s a broader ideological argument, but this discussion is much narrower. This isn’t really about socialism vs capitalism. We already have mixed systems in the U.S., and commissaries operate within that system as a non-profit, cost-based model alongside private markets.
This isn’t about eliminating capitalism, it’s about evaluating whether a model works in practice, not the label attached to it. And we already have a real-world example of it working. Commissaries have been operating for decades with stable pricing and consistent savings. They’re not perfect, but they show the model can work in practice.
The PX and commissary set prices to the local market so that military personnel and their families go and spend money in the local economy, too. They could sell for much less, but the government gets up to its old tricks and picks winners and losers.
Commissaries actually operate at cost plus a small surcharge, not to match market prices. The goal isn’t to “pick winners,” it’s to provide consistent, affordable access while still coexisting with the local economy.
in my experience the commissary does tend to be slightly cheaper (maybe 10-15%) than other options out in town but the drawback is you only get like 2-3 options for items, (you like sugar free creamer? thats fine but we only stock it in the 16oz bottles not the 32oz.)
But the absolute buying power from the commissary is meat, when you get to a new commissary, you go multiple times a day everyday for a week and you check the discount meat freezer. Once you find out what day it's fullest you go on that day and get what you need. Consistently I've been able to fill my freezer with weeks worth of meat for 50-75% off, hell just yesterday I picked up a 3lb pork loin for $1...
You don’t need hypothetical “success stories” we already have one. Military commissaries have been operating for decades with lower prices and consistent access, which is what people are advocating for exactly.
Have you ever been to a military commissary or exchange?! Go to the military subs and they complain about them all the time. They stock them with products people don’t want, and it is usually not cheaper. The only advantage is on gas or maybe meat because there is no sales tax.
The Exchange (AAFES) does not really belong in this conversation. They're tax free, and any relevance basically stops there. They're a for profit contract, and wildly predatory.
I did 8 years in the military and used commissaries regularly even overseas, so I’m sure experiences vary, but that wasn’t mine. They weren’t perfect, but they were generally more affordable. And that lines up with DoD/GAO data showing ~20%+ average savings, so it’s not just anecdotal.
I agree that overseas they are great due to limited access to American food even if it’s not fresh. I’ll have to go look up the stats on how they are calculating this 20% savings because yes in my anecdotal experience I find that hard to believe. I would want to know how much of that is just tax savings.
I get where you’re coming from, and it’s fair to question it. I’d just say don’t take my word for it alone, look at the data behind how they calculate savings.
The DoD and GAO both track this using market basket comparisons, and the target is about 23–25% savings compared to local stores, though it can vary by location. https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-22-104728
So yeah, definitely worth looking into how they calculate it, but it’s not just based on anecdotal experience.
Military commissaries are directly government subsidized to maintain their pricing. The NYC government could simply choose 5 stores near the areas they want to introduce the city owned stores, directly subsidized them to get to the price points they want, and save a whole bunch of money on construction.
Several cities have tried it. A total failure in every case. These stores are opened in “food wastelands” because the regular supermarkets incur such heavy losses they close down.
I love this post. Private enterprise failed and government attempted to float the enterprise and also failed in the conditions but clearly that’s a problem with such government firms in general and people in those areas I guess just do not deserve produce and should eat pop tarts instead. Awesome!
Yes, I think a lot of libertarians are all government is bad, which I get, but there are examples of small isolated services that have a specific mandate of providing lowest cost and do that without massive waste and abuse we see in other organizations
Fundamentally, I don't want a government official making choices about what I eat. The free market gives me options of classic grocery stores, super healthy stores, vegan stores, meat markets, etc. You're not going to get that variety if we switched to government run grocery stores.
That assumes government-run stores would replace the free market, which isn’t the case. The idea is to operate alongside private stores, not eliminate them. You’d still have all the same options, this would just add a cost-based alternative.
And commissaries already show this in practice. They don’t eliminate variety, they reflect local demand. They stock many of the same brands people buy off base and adjust inventory based on what sells. So choice isn’t going anywhere, if anything, it increases.
By virtue of it's existence, it has replaced at least one store or at a minimum, engaged in anticompetitive practices that make it that much more difficult for a competing private store to open in the area. The government should not be in the grocery store business out in the regular public. This is just government growth beyond it's need and purpose. Subsidizing government run businesses to compete with the private sector is just a terrible idea. That ends poorly.
Commissaries are evidence of a tax payer subsidized government benefit. It works because they offer lower prices to the users as a benefit to them while the tax payer eats the losses. It's not meant to and doesn't stand on its own two feet financially. It's not a sustainable model, it's a subsidized one. If we move that model to publicly available grocery stores, it just means even more taxes to cover the losses and eventually, as anticompetitive practices kill of private competitors, less choice.
It's a redistribution of wealth scheme. Property taxes will cover the losses and so taxes will rise, and that money will subsidize the rest of the population. It's anti-free market, big government behavior.
You’re making a lot of assumptions there. Simply existing doesn’t make something anticompetitive, private and public options coexist all the time in the U.S.
And calling it “unsustainable” doesn’t really line up with reality. Commissaries have been operating for decades with a defined cost structure, and the savings are measured against local markets, not just shifted 1:1 into taxes.
More importantly, this doesn’t replace private stores, it operates alongside them. So the outcome isn’t “less choice,” it’s adding a cost-based option where the market isn’t serving people well.
That’s not eliminating the free market, it’s supplementing it where it falls short.
It's anticompetitive when the government store makes 'rules for thee and not for me.' Not having to pay property taxes and sales tax is a massive advantage. Not having to pay employees out of the income of the operation or the administration costs of the operation is a massive advantage. Being subsidized for losses is a massive advantage. Stacking the deck, by enacting laws, that work against the competition is anticompetitive behavior. Business have no recourse against those measures. It's all dressed up as cost savings but it is, by design, meant to out compete other stores on price. Designing and enacting a "can't lose" subsidized operation that is meant to directly competes with private business is anticompetitive. By it existing, it directly drives out at least one option for a private business to be there or, at a minimum, makes it a substantially tougher go for the nearest private grocery business.
Commissaries exist as a monopoly on a base. They don't exist alongside private grocery stores. Private grocery stores are off base and can't operate on base. The public can't go onto a military commissary and shop there. Commissaries are strictly an employee benefit, they are not a public good outside of military bases.
When I said it's not sustainable, I was discussing it's finances, in that it can't operate on its own without subsidies. Without subsidies, it will not survive, i.e. not sustainable. "It's not a sustainable model, it's a subsidized one." It requires an additional extraction of taxes from the people to persist.
Just watch, some vendor or shop owner will go out of business because of this store. 100% going to happen. You can't compete on price when they build a can't lose, at cost competitor.
That's what SNAP is for. If people need subsidies, there are programs for that. The actual operation of a store in the public is outside of the government's role by a large margin. Government shouldn't be competing with private business. Government should only be operating/managing public goods (ones that cannot be offered by the public sector for pragmatic or other substantial reasons, ex: not going to have twelve sewer companies all running big ass pipes everywhere in one city).
It runs at a loss of billions of dollars a year. 25-30% of it's revenue is from junk mail that creates billions of dollars in trash a year that local governments have to deal with.
There's value in a service that reaches people in rural areas that wouldn't otherwise get any mail service, I'll admit that, but outside of that and probably some other exceptions, it's a pretty shit program financially for the majority of people. What I'm saying is, the cost benefit for the majority of people isn't there.
It's also a forced monopoly. You are absolutely required to use it. Letter mail service that isn't USPS is super illegal and the literal mail cops will come after you.
That’s a fair comparison. USPS isn’t perfect, but it operates at a national scale and works reasonably well, which shows public systems can function under the same framework. That’s the same point people are making with commissaries.
It’s the right wing. Everything is perfectly acceptable if you put “military grade” on it. Military grade groceries. Military grade housing. It fits the identity politics so its fine.
You’re focusing on the label instead of the outcome. Commissaries are just an example that a non–profit-driven model can provide stable pricing and reliable access, that’s the argument.
You’re right that grocery margins are low, but that actually reinforces the point. Private stores still optimize for profit within those margins, while commissaries don’t, since their pricing is constrained by law.
And thin margins don’t get better in large cities, they usually get tighter. That’s part of why private stores struggle in those areas to begin with.
So while it’s not a perfect comparison, commissaries are still a real-world example of a cost-based model working under the same system.
But this didn't work in Venezuela so there's no way it will work in New York City! /s
This whole clip seems like propaganda to demonize any form of socialism and to keep capitalism alive and well so the ultra wealthy can keep milking hard working people for all they got..
You think government stores are a winning concept? When Poles used to move to America during socialist time theyd send pics of grocery stores stocked with everything, it was the most impressive thing.
How dumb do you have to be to not see the difference being this is a single grocery store and not an entire socialist run system?
Elements of socialism run all throughout our capitalist system and it actually helps to balance out the harsher parts of unchecked capitalism.
And if you disagree then let's just get rid of public schools, social security, Medicare for seniors, fire fighters, police, libraries, and a whole list of other things no one complains about because they relatively work.
In fact you could argue many of these are the more important part of this country when they are managed correctly.
It also didn't work in the Soviet union, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Bulgaria, and every other socialist country. I don't know how many times socialism has to tear down a country for people to finally stop thinking it will work.
There's many different ways socialism plays it's part in our modern capitalist society and it's helpful in many ways.
A single government run grocery store isn't going to bring down the entire country and if that's your take then we really need to get rid of things like fire fighters, police, and public roads because all of those things involve elements of socialism..
There are more versions of socialism than the ones that fail, this is bad faith slippery slope nonsense. Canada for example, considered democratic socialism. Just because some people want more socialist policies doesn't mean the country will fall off the extreme socialist cliff you're all conditioned to fear.
The outcome where it "works" is where they undercut legitimate local businesses and increase people's reliance on government. There is no positive outcome.
you getting downvoted on this…. i havnt been using reddit much anymore, but to see the reponse on this video in a libertarian subreddit is wild. idk if reddit is even worth it anymore if subreddits don’t even have separate beliefs and points of view.
This will not give access to necessities for low income families, but more profits for scalpers and billionaires. Isn't it a negative outcome in your eyes?
What the fuck is this sub where morons promoting socialism are upvoted, and the sane person is downvoted? Haven’t visited the libertarian sub in a while. Is it overrun?
Like those giant supermarket that sells stuff cheaply arent in the first place. People reliance on govt, when the govt is smoking dollar bills over a war.
Yea I'm trying to find the comments noting on this. Me and my girlfriend don't wanna spend $130 for 4 items at Costco so we don't shop there. This isn't the own he thinks it is. Also it's a mile away in new york that's very far for a lot of people this will be more convenient
Any extra competition in the grocery store marketplace isn't a bad thing. I know a lot of libertarians are strongly against publicly funded healthcare but u would like a public insurance option just so it forces insurance companies to compete. Any sort of "government baseline" in terms of service is a good thing not a bad thing because it establishes a floor and offers competition.
That's not competition, the government can never be part of the competition (that's even morally wrong), that's not even the definition of competition in a free market.
France, Australia, and the Netherlands all have a combined public and private healthcare marketplace and their average healthcare cost per year is about 1/3 of what the average American spends on healthcare per year. Whether you want the government involved in specific industries or not, you can't ignore the math. They spend less than Americans do.
There's plenty of examples of this working. Look at the USPS competing with FedEx and UPS. Sure FedEx and UPS are faster for overnight deliveries but USPS is generally cheaper for ground shipping.
Also, government ran grocery stores already exist. Every military base has a PX (commissary) and that's ran by the government and they tend to be a bit cheaper than your local Walmart or Kroger.
I think your whole idealized version of "but muh free markets" is a bit outdated in this day and age when the barriers to competition are so high and most marketplaces are essentially oligopolies that have no checks on their competition.
Most of the healthcare costs from Europe are subsidized by US healthcare corporations, we cannot compare the two because both industries are intertwined to the core. But we can look at Switzerland's fully private universal healthcare for that matter (and keep in mind, Switzerland citizens have the greatest purchasing power in Europe).
When you say that the government creates competition, that's just blatantly wrong. There's no instance of government corporations existence that drive other corporations to lower their prices. Quite the opposite by experience.
You can have both gov corps and citizens corps working together, but that does not mean the industry is more competitive than a fully citizens owned one. The government cannot provide true competition because it relies on funds completely unrelated to market incentives that reflect the true realities of the production chain.
Regardless of the business model, the money is directly connected to the consumption, no money for all the consumption is only going to drive the profit motive for Costco and you'd ask in 4 years why profits have been going up while everything is more expensive...
Venezuela, Venezuela and Venezeula. I am phd economist, Costco, Walmart and Amazon will save us. This style of propaganda worked during Bernie's first few runs but gen z is not having it. The capistalist system they have experienced in 21st century America does not offer better wages, provide health insurance, or good stable jobs. But it has heavy right wing subsidies for war and is increasingly dominated by monopolies that have deep connections with the government. Actually since the beginning of time. Those with wealth and money attempt to exert power and control over governance. You kinda need regulations to stop it
In this world, you are more likely to have lower wages if you did that. A good example is employers not paying waiters living wages because they expect customers to pay that.
I am not in favor of having a gov run grocery store. You don't see that kind of stuff in wealthy left leaning countries like Denmark, Norway, Sweden, etc.
I feels like they would be better off partnering with independent farmers for an essentials pop up market for daily bread, dairy, and grains. Wave the permits, tolls, and other barriers to see if that works and scale from there. I don't see value in NYC spending 30M to make this happen. BUT - I don't live in NYC and if it helps the people, so be it. It is their tax dollars after all.
Well, the government funded state universities claiming they would make “degrees more affordable,” and how did that turn out in the long run? College is less affordable than ever. I rarely believe those lame ducks when they claim to put tax dollars to beneficial use. These are the same quacks that gave away 300 billion dollars to Israel while letting welfare scammers in Minnesota rob us billions.
( I don’t hate our ally Israel but we need to stop being overgenerous with tax payer dollars. )
In our current world we have lowering wages because the government can't stop spending so they keep raising taxes and printing money.
How about stop spending millions and billions on shiny new projects designed to save me money that usually get mismanaged and instead just stop taking money from me?
In our current world we have lowering wages because the government can't stop spending so they keep raising taxes and printing money.
IDK if I am fully onboard with that. There are countries that have wages still going up, the gov isn't spending more than they bring in, and their currency is not devalued because they aren't just printing more.
I believe if we weren't wasting money on active warfare, insane spending on defense (1.5 Trillian FY2027), and everyone paid the same percentage in tax with no loop holes ... The projects that are shiny, wouldn't be hated as much. I am all for NASA's projects but the entire dept budget is typically less than 0.5% of any tax dollar. I wish we had several JWSTs out there and more HubbleSTs with more capable sensors and tech. But those things aren't war, so they barely get a focus.
I don't think my math is wrong, if you took the 30 million and gave it to the 2 million (low income) of the 8 million residents of NYC, that would only be $15 each. Not really worth it. This project will obviously be spread out over time since the NYC budget is typically around 125 million USD. I am running a lot of these numbers and it is crazy to me. They are taking about 6% of their budget over the next 4 years on this project. I really wonder what the data is that supports the logic. If this ends up lowering their cost of groceries by more than 15$ over the next few years, it might be worth it in the long term but maybe my math is off. Groceries in NYC is typically 10-40% higher than the national average. I have saved more than 15$ just shopping around or going to Aldi instead of Walmart or Publix (an over priced southeastern grocery chain). Apparently Aldi is in NYC and is anywhere from 8-50% cheaper than the other local grocery chains there. I wonder if NYC gov will somehow undercut Aldi.
Anyways, I am really down a rabbit hole now. I am really curious where these goes long term since the dollar is being devalued, inflation is still bad and will continue, distribution of food is going up due to actions by the USA in Venezuela + Iran, and even a change of power by congress wouldn't fix these issues for months or years.
The crux of my Internet argument typed between calls is the fact that this project will eat up that 30 million faster than you can imagine and will have nothing to show for it.
If he manages to do something of worth for 30 million I'll eat my words
... this project will eat up that 30 million faster than you can imagine and will have nothing to show for it.
I couldn't agree more. I feel like 30 million will become 60 million fast.
If he manages to do something of worth for 30 million I'll eat my words
Same. I can't imagine he will undercut Aldi and ultimately, if you live in NYC and you are struggling, you should already be shopping there. At my lowest income times, I went to rice, beans, ramen, etc. I don't foresee him getting prices lower for meats than Aldi but I could see him maybe matching prices for grains but but then why have the program if it is matching another retailer.
I live in California so I've seen a ton of waste. There is no incentive for government to do a good job especially at the project management levels.
We passed bills to spend around 150 million to get rid of lead from school drinking water. Guess what! There is no oversight committee to see if they're doing a good job. The audits that were tied to that money were voluntary and had no specifics for small amount size, frequency, database to collect it into.
Lead free water for children at government facilities should be a layup for a well functioning government that cares about the tax payer.
You’re blending real facts with assumptions and presenting them like they’re the same thing.
Yes, commissaries are subsidized. That’s not disputed. The question is what the outcome is, and GAO/DoD data compares actual shelf prices to local markets and still finds ~17–20% savings on average. That’s a real price difference, not just accounting.
Your “you’re actually paying more through taxes” example isn’t sourced and assumes a 1:1 cost transfer that doesn’t reflect how tax funding or public goods actually work. Do you have data that supports that breakdown, or is that just a hypothetical?
Also, saying the private market is always more efficient is an assertion, not evidence. Commissaries exist precisely because markets don’t serve certain areas or populations well.
If your argument is that subsidies are bad in principle, that’s a separate ideological position. However, if the argument is about outcomes, then the available data shows the model produces lower prices for users.
Silly take, no one's saying you can't make profit to maintain your operations. You're just not going to get profiteering like the grocery corps currently do. Walmart offers products cheaply because they have buying power. Enough of these stores establish, they too will have buying power.
Costco is not direct competition for a neighborhood grocery store. Often people go to both in one errands trip. People needing a quick jug of milk don't usually go to Costco, and people buying food for Thanksgiving dinner will drive past a dozen grocery stores to shop at Costco.
This debate on being this or that is hilarious. USA has many socialist policies and they all favor being rich to in order to qualify for the hand out. Or being a farmer and receiving subsidies to grow product that shouldn't be able to compete in a "free" market. The semantics of whether an individual is or is not a socialist is truly a symptom of the USA propaganda.
Countries off the top of my head that I know there is WELL documented shortages and failures of government run stores you can look up individually- The Soviet Union, East Germany, Poland/Ukraine/Baltic nations during the Warsaw Pact Era, North Korea, early Vietnam, Cambodia, Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Angola
In the U.S. , there is a line between government subsidized and fully owned, here are some notable “fully owned” examples-
Their labor costs will eat up any property tax/profit motive advantage they have. Municipal workers will be paid way more than market rate, probably triple, and do half the work. 15 minute breaktime will be stretched out to 35 minutes as an apathetic supervisor turns a blind eye. Workers will congregate in the back room sitting on boxes chatting it up. Cashiers will need a potty break outside their normal break and then spend 25 minutes sitting on the toilet scrolling on their phones.
These overpaid, underworked municipal jobs are the domain of political cronies. I suggest volunteering for for your council member, collecting signatures working fundraisers etc for free. Make sure to give an annual donation to him also, And after some years you might be able to land one of these jobs.
I really don’t know what the first two arguments were… 1: low income families aren’t shopping at Costco, and Costco shoppers are buying food in bulk and additional non grocery items. 2: analytics can be done regardless of profit or not to determine which items sell more. That was a dumb af argument. 3: just set standards on food items. We also have the FDA (until it’s defunded) that sets food standards. Sorry Venezuela didn’t do that 🤷♂️
not understanding opening next to a Costco is actually a good thing and won’t hurt the private firm but probably expand their business (any reason not to believe that? Costco is a destination and people tend to visit surrounding firms; i imagine la marqueta is the same and subsidy will lead to more Costco customers)
this money could go to people who need it jk wants to grind poor people into dust
But if New Yorkers don't like it they get punished for not paying taxes for it, which you apparently have no problems with. Also unfair - immoral - is using extorted money to open a business which competes with private individuals. So yes, if you believe in fairness or have a moral sense, you would have some objection to this.
Walmart isn't exactly a private individual. In fact, Walmart has done to thousands of private individuals and family businesses what you are warning us this state-operated grocery store will do to them.
Many of those "state projects" usually don't succeed in their purpose. And that trial to collect people's votes with populist projects is just repeating all history examples of the government trial to buy social peace with OUR tax money.
For example, during the war in Yugoslavia, Milosevic's backed businessmans opened sponsored banks just to collect money for financing weapons. And shortly after formation, thousands of people were waiting to invest money in pyramidal scheme which offered 150% interest rate for deposits in national currency.
Have in mind that 98% of population didn't have any sense how the financial system was functioning - since they had lived in communist regime for decades before.
They didn't have any option for financing since the country was expelled from international financial markets, due to international isolation, so printing money and pyramidal banks were the only resoruce.
It resulted in 313.000.000.000% hyperinflation and the bankruptcy of those banks, so the government confiscated all the savings from citizens.
So, don't think government intervention will succeed anytime in anything.
Youre thinking about this as a consumer. Yes, you can go to a competitor.
Now consider that you are the owner of that grocery store that you decided not to shop at. You no longer have the ability to choose, your tax dollars are going into that investment whether you like it or not (and it quickly becomes apparent that it only loses you money and is run with complete incompetency and eventually corruption).
Maybe not a big deal for one store. It becomes a massive problem at scale.
Ehh paying for a ‘competitor’ with my taxes does sound annoying but this is NY, too many here need real help. If there is a net social good, everyone will benefit
Alll that corruption and incompetence you mention is just you being emotional
Fair competition will always produce more "net social good" than government run anything. The government provides force; it doesn't provide incentives.
The saying is the customer is always right in matters of taste. If you keep thinking in such a narrow scope you let socialists like the ones in NYC get away with dumb shit like that grocery store. If you really dont want to support Costco despite them being one of the very few actually good brands then go to a mom and pop store.
They would be closest competitor in any way for Mamdani's store. It won't be different in any way from Costco, so it's meaningless to open that kind of store by our tax money.
Costco is a members only club, it's not going to be a direct competitor. Most of Costco's members are higher income earners than the clientele of a state run store.
Classic progressive argument...but everyone knows once it fails they will only double down because certain people have their hands in taxpayer pockets and their ideology will not permit failure.
I honestly think what’s happening in New York is a good thing. We all know Mamdani’s policies are gonna fail and because it’s NY and how popular he is with young people, all eyes are gonna be on him. So when it does fail, some people will make excuses, but most people will realize just how stupid socialism is and not vote for it when it shows up in their city
Hopefully -- at least enough people to see change before it's too late. But they might just import people in while those with sense leave the city/state as they've been doing. Then you are left with a shitwhole with terrible political ideology + entrepreneurs fleeing. Terrible combo
New York may end up as an even bigger shithole than it is now. I more meant that people in other cities and states across the country will see how bad NYC has become under Mamdani and not vote for the self-described socialists running in their elections
Grocery store margins are razor thin as it is. A government run chain will have no idea how to keep costs low or keep shelves stocked, and won't particularly care. This will lead to cost overruns and empty shelves.
if a govt can subsidize business, give them tax break. Why can't they subsidize groceries and put a limit on how much a person can take away from the store. Have special cards designated to each family. And within the family if they sign up, will have the ability to purchase more. Maybe get ur groceries even more affordable. All through tax payer money. So money cut from tax payer benefits the tax payer.
If the store could maintain a steady supply, nobody would hoard. Just needs to be distributed fairly geographically.
100% my opinion as well, stores that run sales on certain items most likely lost a few cents on each item; however, it incentivizes consumers to buy more while they’re shopping
The profit margins of grocery stores are already razor thin. In the low, single digits thin. Not pricing groceries for profit isn’t going to save as much money as people think.
if a govt can subsidize business, give them tax break. Why can't they subsidize groceries and put a limit on how much a person can take away from the store. If the store could maintain a steady supply, nobody would hoard. Just needs to be distributed fairly.
That was what I learned 20 years ago as well, but I tend to think that’s not the case anymore. Covid and the self checkout registers really changed everything.
My uneducated guess now is that grocery stores are substantially more profitable than single digit.
Self checkout is largely a result of government’s push to raise minimum wages. When the cost of labor is higher than the market value, fewer workers are going to be employed. All the minimum wage hikes did was ensure the raise the rate of pay for a few, at the cost of the jobs of many.
I feel like I worded this really poorly. I was up all night. I think you’ll get my point.
Profit margins for grocery retailers were indeed higher during COVID. According to the Food Industry Association, as of 2024 (the latest data I could find after a few minutes of Googling) profit margins are back down to the 1.5 - 1.7 percent range.
I guess all those COMMIEsaries we've been using with the military since like... 1900 just don't work. I knew I felt a chill going up my spine every time I stepped inside to grab some afforable groceries.
Unfortunately the US is designed for stuff like this not to work, all the competition has monopolized supply chains and they aren't forced to provide the benefits that government employees would get so all the money you save by taking out the profit will probably be lost in operating costs. New York isn't China and this stuff doesn't work in isolation.
I didn't watch the whole video so I have no Idea if what he is saying is good or bad. What I do know is that if you are hand holding a clip on mic, you look like an imbecile.
Anything can work if you throw enough taxpayer money at it, then they will go and say see, see how well it works, when if you consider the unpaid taxes and subsidies et al the food costs twice as much as at a normal store.
The argument ive seen for them is that the intent is not to be profitable, but to act as a provided service. Military grocers operate on the same principle with thier budget. Feeding people is the intended goal as a net nuetral out come.
We need to have the "why it doesn't work." part nailed down and added to the conversation and real-life examples of it not working every time. It's the only way for people to get a better understanding of the dangers of things being government run.
Big difference between an emargo’d country’s grocery stores and the US grocery stores. I’ve got family in VZL and the lines and shortages won’t happen in NYC — sorry but it’s a false equivalency.
To be honest, they’re going to spend $30,000,000 on dumber shit. At least thing is feeding people.
Idk Sacramento has a socialized electrical grid and everyone loves SMUD over PG&E. The CEO of smud makes good money and the company is slightly for profit, just much much less so than shareholder based companies.
A government ran grocery store is DEFINITELY not libertarian I’ll give you that.
Part of the objective of the store was to provide food in an otherwise food desert. Cheaper groceries is just a byproduct since the motive of the store is not profit. In poor inner cities it’s not easy to find fresh vegetables or fruits, and it’s those people who don’t have means or access to a vehicle to get to and from the store. Hence a “food desert”
I don’t think the government run grocery store is trying to replace Costco. But it could serve as a cheaper alternative for low-income households or people struggling to get to the next paycheck.
As to the business plan, the next-door Costco figures right in.
The Mamdani-Mart will employment flock of teenage homies/homegirls (don't forget that public relations op!) to bull rush the membership check at the Costco with a couple of pallet jacks, and roll a few loads of Costco goodies through the exit to the Z-Mart one door over.
'Cause you know those poor disadvantaged teens aren't going to be prosecuted for shoplifting, right? Not in oh-so-progressive, kinder and gentler NYC, they're not. Next - sell the filched goods at the Z-Mart on the cheap. Profits? We don't need no stinkin' profits.
REMOVED: due to a large amount of brigading, we are temporarily restricting posts from drive-by users. If you are unfamiliar with our beliefs or ideology, take some time to lurk, or do some research. Do not message the mod team, this will be reviewed when we have time. Messaging the mod team asking us to approve this will result in an automatic denial and potential ban as we will assume you are a clanker sending automated messages.
HimuTime@reddit
Sounds like all a government run non for profit needs to do is just track the market price of items, record the how much the thereotical profit would be and then they can say “hey we saved consumers this much money”
Keep in mind businesses can and do, already do this type of accounting. The biggest difference is that would drive up demand due to the lower prices, which may drive up overall consumption and or cost. Of course the government can do 3 basic things: order more goods and absorb the cost, reduce the quality of goods to save money, use a check out system that ensures that nobody is using an exorbitant amount of food and if they do, offer to allow them to use a different system that tracks how much food they bought and let’s them buy at production costs
Dontcomecryingtome@reddit
If people hate the govt so much why do they want it in their livesssssss. It kills me
Pensive_Koala@reddit
https://claude.ai/public/artifacts/9095a327-d482-4a16-9ae3-2b964cc99ecf
Pensive_Koala@reddit
Homeboy about to learn how deadweight loss will cause breadlines. Thank god this is only a fringe option, likely only to be used by EBT/low income folks.
waheheheeeler@reddit
Sounds like a military grocery
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
Exactly! First off, this is the U.S., not Venezuela, our systems and oversight are completely different. Military commissaries already show that this model can work: stable pricing, reliable access, and significantly lower costs for consumers. That’s the whole point.
PhysicsJa1@reddit
Have you ever actually been to a military commissary? Pretty much everyone I knew would go far out of their way to shop at a Walmart, and for good reason.
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
Served 8 years in the military and shopped at commissaries a lot, both stateside and overseas, and that doesn’t match my experience at all. They’re not perfect, but calling the savings “negligible” doesn’t align with the broader data showing consistent savings.
map2photo@reddit
During what years did you serve? I was in 05-17 and it was far cheaper to shop off base, than on. I would swing by the commissary, if I was driving past it and needed a few things, but full on grocery shopping was done off base.
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
2007–2015. I’m sure it varied by base, but that wasn’t my experience overall. During that same timeframe, DoD was already tracking commissary pricing against local stores and consistently reporting around ~20% average savings.
So I’m not saying every item was cheaper every time, but “far cheaper off base” across the board doesn’t really line up with the broader data from that period.
FarChampionship1838@reddit
Do you have a source for this? Supermarket grocers have narrow profit margins (<10%), so I don't see how commisaries can save 20%.
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
Yeah, GAO and DoD actually track this.
GAO found ~17.7% savings vs local stores: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-22-104728
And DeCA itself explains the model and savings here: https://corp.commissaries.com/our-agency/about-deca
Commissaries sell at cost plus a small surcharge and are specifically designed to provide savings compared to commercial retailers.
The margin argument is off. Prices aren’t just margin. Commissaries remove profit markup and operate differently, so the savings come from total price comparisons, not just margins.
libertycoder@reddit
"profit markup" is just an imprecise term for margins. You're missing the whole point. Grocery stores don't have 17.7% margins, so selling items below cost is only possible if taxpayers are paying the rest (which we are, at $1.53 billion this year).
italktobotz@reddit
They operate at a loss. They are kept afloat by tax payers. Meaning the people are still paying for it, just not at the register. If you still spend the same amount (more when you cover the inefficiencies like payin 30million for 1 location) everyone ends up poorer. The everyday U.S. citizens would have more money in their pockets if they didnt have to fund commisaries.
TJZ24129@reddit
This isn’t true. They legally sell products at the price they pay. But there’s a 6% fee added to pay employees/keep the lights on.
italktobotz@reddit
You are wrong. They do operate at a loss of between 1billion to 1.4 billion per year. The fees dont cover its operation.
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
Where are you getting the $1B–$1.4B number from? The Defense Commissary Agency budget is public, and yes, it’s subsidized, but that’s by design.
The relevant question isn’t whether it costs money, it’s what the outcome is. DoD and GAO still measure ~20%+ savings compared to local markets, so it’s not just “operating at a loss,” it’s producing lower prices for users.
italktobotz@reddit
That is how much they take in subsidies each year. The prices are only lower on the shelf because the product cost to get the product there has been absorbed by the tax payer. Profit margins in grovcery stores average 2 percent. That means when you buy something at a for profit grocery store they pay 98 cents to sell you that 1 dollar piece of food. If they operated at a loss but used tax payer money to cover those losses they would be able to do the same thing as comissaries. The problem is that just because you see 20% lower prices on the shelves doesnt mean that they are 20% cheaper, it means you paid them in a diffefent way which for commisaries would be through taxes. As far as efficiency goes the private market will always be more efficient because they get rewarded for being efficient, commisaries get tax money and thus have nothing compelling them to be efficient. If they didnt have tax money they wouldnt be able to offer the on shelf price 20% less.
If you spend 25 dollars in taxes which go to the commisary and buy 80 dollars worth of goods at the comissary, which would be ewual to 100 dolars worth at a for profit grocery store you are actually paying 105 dollars on groceries, 25 in taxes and 80 in store. A for profit grocery store on the other hand charges you nothing covertly.
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
You’re blending real facts with assumptions and presenting them like they’re the same thing.
Yes, commissaries are subsidized. That’s not disputed. The question is what the outcome is, and GAO/DoD data compares actual shelf prices to local markets and still finds ~17–20% savings on average. That’s a real price difference, not just accounting.
Your “you’re actually paying more through taxes” example isn’t sourced and assumes a 1:1 cost transfer that doesn’t reflect how tax funding or public goods actually work. Do you have data that supports that breakdown, or is that just a hypothetical?
Also, saying the private market is always more efficient is an assertion, not evidence. Commissaries exist precisely because markets don’t serve certain areas or populations well.
If your argument is that subsidies are bad in principle, that’s a separate ideological position. However, if the argument is about outcomes, then the available data shows the model produces lower prices for users.
italktobotz@reddit
Im not blending anything. If the comisary has to be subsidiezed that would be losses if it were any other bussiness operating in the same exact way. You are right that not all bussinesses operate more efficiently, but if they do not operate efficisntly in the free market they go out of bussiness. And my point about the prices is if they were not getting subsidies they would not be able to offer the prices they do, which means you are still paying the full price but the price is hiden by the subsidy.
If they are not operating at a loss then why do they need the subisdy? What is the subsidy for? Also look at private grocery store profit margins. They are very very small. The free market is not exploiting people. They provide a service of which the customer recieves 98% of the benefit of the grocers labor but pay 2% more than the grocer paid themselves.
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
You’re asserting that people “actually pay more,” but you haven’t provided a single source that measures total cost per user to support that.
GAO/DoD data compares real prices and still shows consistent savings. Your argument relies on a 1:1 tax assumption that isn’t reflected in any published analysis.
So, where is the data that proves your claim, or are you just inferring it?
libertycoder@reddit
The FY26 subsidy for the Defense Commissary Agency is $1.53B. That is the only way the stores can afford to offer the price discounts to military families, according to the DCA itself.
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2025/12/08/lawmakers-move-to-block-effort-to-privatize-military-commissaries/
https://www.heritage.org/budget/pages/recommendations/1.050.97.html
italktobotz@reddit
I have you dont understand. People pay the taxes. 1.5 billion which you agree is taken is the source.
CreamyBagelTime@reddit
U.S. citizens would have more money in their pocket if they didn't have to fund Medicaid either. But as a society, we've decided that it's a worthwhile cause to prevent our poorer seniors from living in destitution. The same logic applies here.
italktobotz@reddit
3 things, it has made health care costs sky rocket true. 2nd just because you do something that loses money in one field doesnt make it a good idea to do it in another. 3rdly sadly society as a whole does not understand economics and how exactly the market works, how government manipulation never meets societies needs as well as society does throught the market. Economics is simply a way to allocate scarce resources, history has proven time and time again that if government wants to enrich people and make it so that society as a whole has the best standard of living is for government to focus on protecting property rights.
The affordable care act did not make health care affordable, pel grants and government contributions to colleges did not make higher education better. The federal reserve did not prevent the great depressions which was exactly the kind of thing it was designed to prevent. Government assistance programs does not get people out of poverty but instead incentivizes people becoming impoverished to take advantage of those systems.
If you take a step back and think about society as a whole you will realize the heartless capitalists are the ones that actually are trying to get done what is in everyones best interest. Get government out and prices will go down. Look at the housing market 75% of residential land has laws preventing multifamily homes from being built. Developers want to make money, let them build high density housing and prices will fall. But government does not allow this, so builders can not meet demand. It literally works with almost everything. If you allow the market to do its thing people will seek the most efficient way to provide services because the more efficiently they provide services the more they profit, as competitor adopt these efficient methods prices go down due to competition. In the end the public gets better stuff at lower prices.
brotherdaru@reddit
I’d rather my taxes go to this than to funding genocides
italktobotz@reddit
Agreed, if my money is being taken i would much rather a 30 million grocery store than a 30 million dollar missle, but it would be best for people not to have their money taken in the first place.
BlimpGuyPilot@reddit
Wrong sub buddy.
brotherdaru@reddit
Right…”Let people do what they want, as long as they don’t harm others, and keep government out of it as much as possible.” What part of this says: tal money out of people’s mouths and children’s futures to fund foreign government that bomb and kill and commit genocide with money stolen from people’s pockets? You sure you’re a libertarian and an an ultra boot eater screaming “ harder daddy govment hardaaa”
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
You’re assuming a subsidy just shifts costs 1:1, but that’s not necessarily how it works. Commissaries remove profit maximization from a thin-margin industry, which changes the pricing structure. That’s why DoD and GAO data still show ~20%+ savings on average.
So it’s not just “paying somewhere else,” it’s a different cost model producing different outcomes.
GenFatAss@reddit
The problem is that if soldiers steal from the military commissary and get caught, they get punished. Will the NYPD and DA punish civilian stealing from the government run store?
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
Civilians already get punished for theft, laws don’t suddenly stop applying because a store is government-run. The real question is whether enforcement is consistent, not who owns the store.
sans-serif@reddit
That’s it. This sub has been overrun. Time to pack up and leave.
somerville99@reddit
You don’t get punished for theft in NYC. That’s the point.
Caledron@reddit
Why would that be more of a problem for a government run store than a private sector one?
cft1848@reddit
Because gubmint bad duh…unless it’s the gubmint I voted for
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
This right here ☝️
CreamyBagelTime@reddit
They won't, be they should. I want nice things but we can't have them because we can't keep each other accountable. Other countries are able to do this, but U.S. society is too far gone.
JestFlamez@reddit
Why would they not get punished for stealing from a government run store?
stache1313@reddit
Certain district attorneys in the past have chosen not to prosecute people committing certain crimes, including theft. If you have a district attorney who doesn't want to go after certain crimes or persecute people of certain ethnic groups, then they won't get punished.
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
You’re mixing two separate issues, store ownership and law enforcement. If prosecution is inconsistent, that’s a system-wide issue, not a flaw in the model. And claiming it varies by ethnicity without evidence just sounds like a generalization, not an argument.
stache1313@reddit
Let me use a different example to show you. Under Obama the Dept of Education was tasked with cutting the racial disparity of school punishment. Even though there was little evidence this disparity was caused by racism. It was even evidence of the opposite showing that black teachers disciplined black students more frequently than white teachers. There was no room in this new federal policy to account for different groups misbehaving at different rights. The only way schools could reduce the punishment disparity, was to not punish the more frequent groups and over punish the groups that acted out less.
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
I get the point you’re trying to make about government policy, but that’s a different domain. Education policy and retail operations aren’t comparable systems. We already have a direct, real-world example in commissaries operating under the same legal and enforcement framework, and they’re still working. That’s the relevant comparison.
stache1313@reddit
My point is that the people in charge of the systems can choose to disproportionately apply the rules to racial groups.
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
That concern applies to any system, public or private. People in charge can apply rules unfairly anywhere. That’s an enforcement and oversight issue, not something unique to this model.
stache1313@reddit
Very true.
JestFlamez@reddit
How does this issue differ between privately owned grocery stores and government run grocery stores?
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
It doesn’t really differ, and that’s the point. Theft laws and enforcement apply equally, no matter who owns the store. If enforcement is inconsistent, it affects all stores, not just government-run ones. We already have a working example with military commissaries, the same legal system and enforcement environment, and they’ve operated successfully for decades.
jordanpatriots@reddit
For now. If socialists had it their way, there would not be capitalism and there goes your checks and balances
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
That’s a broader ideological argument, but this discussion is much narrower. This isn’t really about socialism vs capitalism. We already have mixed systems in the U.S., and commissaries operate within that system as a non-profit, cost-based model alongside private markets.
This isn’t about eliminating capitalism, it’s about evaluating whether a model works in practice, not the label attached to it. And we already have a real-world example of it working. Commissaries have been operating for decades with stable pricing and consistent savings. They’re not perfect, but they show the model can work in practice.
Low_Abrocoma_1514@reddit
This has to be bait
PhilRubdiez@reddit
The PX and commissary set prices to the local market so that military personnel and their families go and spend money in the local economy, too. They could sell for much less, but the government gets up to its old tricks and picks winners and losers.
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
Commissaries actually operate at cost plus a small surcharge, not to match market prices. The goal isn’t to “pick winners,” it’s to provide consistent, affordable access while still coexisting with the local economy.
mcbride-bushman@reddit
in my experience the commissary does tend to be slightly cheaper (maybe 10-15%) than other options out in town but the drawback is you only get like 2-3 options for items, (you like sugar free creamer? thats fine but we only stock it in the 16oz bottles not the 32oz.)
But the absolute buying power from the commissary is meat, when you get to a new commissary, you go multiple times a day everyday for a week and you check the discount meat freezer. Once you find out what day it's fullest you go on that day and get what you need. Consistently I've been able to fill my freezer with weeks worth of meat for 50-75% off, hell just yesterday I picked up a 3lb pork loin for $1...
rikrok58@reddit
Didn't Kansas City try this a couple of years ago?
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
I’m not sure what you mean by “tried” this model has actually been in place for over 150 years across the U.S. and is still active.
trufus_for_youfus@reddit
Please link us to some success stories.
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
You don’t need hypothetical “success stories” we already have one. Military commissaries have been operating for decades with lower prices and consistent access, which is what people are advocating for exactly.
Citadel16@reddit
Have you ever been to a military commissary or exchange?! Go to the military subs and they complain about them all the time. They stock them with products people don’t want, and it is usually not cheaper. The only advantage is on gas or maybe meat because there is no sales tax.
scaryjobob@reddit
The Exchange (AAFES) does not really belong in this conversation. They're tax free, and any relevance basically stops there. They're a for profit contract, and wildly predatory.
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
I did 8 years in the military and used commissaries regularly even overseas, so I’m sure experiences vary, but that wasn’t mine. They weren’t perfect, but they were generally more affordable. And that lines up with DoD/GAO data showing ~20%+ average savings, so it’s not just anecdotal.
Citadel16@reddit
I agree that overseas they are great due to limited access to American food even if it’s not fresh. I’ll have to go look up the stats on how they are calculating this 20% savings because yes in my anecdotal experience I find that hard to believe. I would want to know how much of that is just tax savings.
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
I get where you’re coming from, and it’s fair to question it. I’d just say don’t take my word for it alone, look at the data behind how they calculate savings.
The DoD and GAO both track this using market basket comparisons, and the target is about 23–25% savings compared to local stores, though it can vary by location. https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-22-104728
So yeah, definitely worth looking into how they calculate it, but it’s not just based on anecdotal experience.
itsnotthatsimple22@reddit
The only way commissaries are able to operate and sell at those prices are through significant government subsidies.
itsnotthatsimple22@reddit
Military commissaries are directly government subsidized to maintain their pricing. The NYC government could simply choose 5 stores near the areas they want to introduce the city owned stores, directly subsidized them to get to the price points they want, and save a whole bunch of money on construction.
somerville99@reddit
Do you honestly compare military commissaries to this?
somerville99@reddit
Several cities have tried it. A total failure in every case. These stores are opened in “food wastelands” because the regular supermarkets incur such heavy losses they close down.
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
“Total failure in every case” is a strong claim and what sources support that?
GAO and DoD data show commissaries using a cost-plus model with ~23% savings in practice:
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-22-104728
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/2484
If you have data showing consistent failure, I’d like to see it.
dontreplywiththisacc@reddit
I love this post. Private enterprise failed and government attempted to float the enterprise and also failed in the conditions but clearly that’s a problem with such government firms in general and people in those areas I guess just do not deserve produce and should eat pop tarts instead. Awesome!
miguellan@reddit
It always comes back to USPS for me. It does a decent job and shows that public run entities can work relatively well.
I bet mail is also public in Venezuela and it also sucks, doesn’t mean that the USPS sucks.
waheheheeeler@reddit
Yes, I think a lot of libertarians are all government is bad, which I get, but there are examples of small isolated services that have a specific mandate of providing lowest cost and do that without massive waste and abuse we see in other organizations
ManyThingsLittleTime@reddit
Fundamentally, I don't want a government official making choices about what I eat. The free market gives me options of classic grocery stores, super healthy stores, vegan stores, meat markets, etc. You're not going to get that variety if we switched to government run grocery stores.
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
That assumes government-run stores would replace the free market, which isn’t the case. The idea is to operate alongside private stores, not eliminate them. You’d still have all the same options, this would just add a cost-based alternative.
And commissaries already show this in practice. They don’t eliminate variety, they reflect local demand. They stock many of the same brands people buy off base and adjust inventory based on what sells. So choice isn’t going anywhere, if anything, it increases.
ManyThingsLittleTime@reddit
By virtue of it's existence, it has replaced at least one store or at a minimum, engaged in anticompetitive practices that make it that much more difficult for a competing private store to open in the area. The government should not be in the grocery store business out in the regular public. This is just government growth beyond it's need and purpose. Subsidizing government run businesses to compete with the private sector is just a terrible idea. That ends poorly.
Commissaries are evidence of a tax payer subsidized government benefit. It works because they offer lower prices to the users as a benefit to them while the tax payer eats the losses. It's not meant to and doesn't stand on its own two feet financially. It's not a sustainable model, it's a subsidized one. If we move that model to publicly available grocery stores, it just means even more taxes to cover the losses and eventually, as anticompetitive practices kill of private competitors, less choice.
It's a redistribution of wealth scheme. Property taxes will cover the losses and so taxes will rise, and that money will subsidize the rest of the population. It's anti-free market, big government behavior.
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
You’re making a lot of assumptions there. Simply existing doesn’t make something anticompetitive, private and public options coexist all the time in the U.S.
And calling it “unsustainable” doesn’t really line up with reality. Commissaries have been operating for decades with a defined cost structure, and the savings are measured against local markets, not just shifted 1:1 into taxes.
More importantly, this doesn’t replace private stores, it operates alongside them. So the outcome isn’t “less choice,” it’s adding a cost-based option where the market isn’t serving people well.
That’s not eliminating the free market, it’s supplementing it where it falls short.
ManyThingsLittleTime@reddit
It's anticompetitive when the government store makes 'rules for thee and not for me.' Not having to pay property taxes and sales tax is a massive advantage. Not having to pay employees out of the income of the operation or the administration costs of the operation is a massive advantage. Being subsidized for losses is a massive advantage. Stacking the deck, by enacting laws, that work against the competition is anticompetitive behavior. Business have no recourse against those measures. It's all dressed up as cost savings but it is, by design, meant to out compete other stores on price. Designing and enacting a "can't lose" subsidized operation that is meant to directly competes with private business is anticompetitive. By it existing, it directly drives out at least one option for a private business to be there or, at a minimum, makes it a substantially tougher go for the nearest private grocery business.
Commissaries exist as a monopoly on a base. They don't exist alongside private grocery stores. Private grocery stores are off base and can't operate on base. The public can't go onto a military commissary and shop there. Commissaries are strictly an employee benefit, they are not a public good outside of military bases.
When I said it's not sustainable, I was discussing it's finances, in that it can't operate on its own without subsidies. Without subsidies, it will not survive, i.e. not sustainable. "It's not a sustainable model, it's a subsidized one." It requires an additional extraction of taxes from the people to persist.
Just watch, some vendor or shop owner will go out of business because of this store. 100% going to happen. You can't compete on price when they build a can't lose, at cost competitor.
rhm54@reddit
What about government run grocery stores that provide just the basics and the free market for any extras you might want?
ManyThingsLittleTime@reddit
That's what SNAP is for. If people need subsidies, there are programs for that. The actual operation of a store in the public is outside of the government's role by a large margin. Government shouldn't be competing with private business. Government should only be operating/managing public goods (ones that cannot be offered by the public sector for pragmatic or other substantial reasons, ex: not going to have twelve sewer companies all running big ass pipes everywhere in one city).
ManyThingsLittleTime@reddit
It runs at a loss of billions of dollars a year. 25-30% of it's revenue is from junk mail that creates billions of dollars in trash a year that local governments have to deal with.
There's value in a service that reaches people in rural areas that wouldn't otherwise get any mail service, I'll admit that, but outside of that and probably some other exceptions, it's a pretty shit program financially for the majority of people. What I'm saying is, the cost benefit for the majority of people isn't there.
Thrawn089@reddit
It's also a forced monopoly. You are absolutely required to use it. Letter mail service that isn't USPS is super illegal and the literal mail cops will come after you.
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
That’s a fair comparison. USPS isn’t perfect, but it operates at a national scale and works reasonably well, which shows public systems can function under the same framework. That’s the same point people are making with commissaries.
latortillablanca@reddit
And the only reason it doesnt function as well as it could is we keep fucking with its funding/operations
Jamesaya@reddit
It’s the right wing. Everything is perfectly acceptable if you put “military grade” on it. Military grade groceries. Military grade housing. It fits the identity politics so its fine.
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
You’re focusing on the label instead of the outcome. Commissaries are just an example that a non–profit-driven model can provide stable pricing and reliable access, that’s the argument.
KilljoyTheTrucker@reddit
Cost plus is a profit driven model.
It's just not a maximum profit model.
Not to mention the complete lack of similarities between the average customers of a military cost plus commissary and a city run grocer.
Your average grocery store essentially operates in a cost plus environment. The margins are consistently low.
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
You’re right that grocery margins are low, but that actually reinforces the point. Private stores still optimize for profit within those margins, while commissaries don’t, since their pricing is constrained by law.
And thin margins don’t get better in large cities, they usually get tighter. That’s part of why private stores struggle in those areas to begin with.
So while it’s not a perfect comparison, commissaries are still a real-world example of a cost-based model working under the same system.
eterneraki@reddit
which works really well. although a bit different because you can lose your privileges so that probably enforces a degree of honesty and less theft
CAgovernor@reddit
This failed in Kansas City. I believe they spent about $18 million or so.
crakked21@reddit
they didn't spend enough!!1
CryingEagle626@reddit
Any capitalist nut only needs to take a look at china to realize that a mix of socialism and capitalism is going to be the future.
Significant_Leg_8097@reddit
China is only successful because of their market economy
Keyhunter2009@reddit
Isn't this a Libertarian sub? It's so weird seeing people who support this on this sub
Significant_Leg_8097@reddit
It’s just a bunch of leftist lurkers who couldn’t help but comment
enough_ofthisofthis@reddit
Nah let Mamdani cook let’s see if it works or if it doesn’t.
Lord_Kromdor@reddit
wait but this random dude on tiktok said it wouldn't work!
Swimming-ln-Circles@reddit
But this didn't work in Venezuela so there's no way it will work in New York City! /s
This whole clip seems like propaganda to demonize any form of socialism and to keep capitalism alive and well so the ultra wealthy can keep milking hard working people for all they got..
notzoidberginchinese@reddit
You think government stores are a winning concept? When Poles used to move to America during socialist time theyd send pics of grocery stores stocked with everything, it was the most impressive thing.
Swimming-ln-Circles@reddit
How dumb do you have to be to not see the difference being this is a single grocery store and not an entire socialist run system?
Elements of socialism run all throughout our capitalist system and it actually helps to balance out the harsher parts of unchecked capitalism.
And if you disagree then let's just get rid of public schools, social security, Medicare for seniors, fire fighters, police, libraries, and a whole list of other things no one complains about because they relatively work.
In fact you could argue many of these are the more important part of this country when they are managed correctly.
notzoidberginchinese@reddit
What would the point of one store be? It's a trial run, five stores to begin with.
Swimming-ln-Circles@reddit
To provide affordable food to people struggling to survive in one of the most expensive places to live in the world?
notzoidberginchinese@reddit
Government will spend more than it will give, otherwise wed have government stores all over the world out competing normal grocery stores.
If new york wants to lower costs then lower the cost of doing business.
Swimming-ln-Circles@reddit
Yea I don't disagree.
who_put_dat_there@reddit
It also didn't work in the Soviet union, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Bulgaria, and every other socialist country. I don't know how many times socialism has to tear down a country for people to finally stop thinking it will work.
Swimming-ln-Circles@reddit
This is such a dumb take.
There's many different ways socialism plays it's part in our modern capitalist society and it's helpful in many ways.
A single government run grocery store isn't going to bring down the entire country and if that's your take then we really need to get rid of things like fire fighters, police, and public roads because all of those things involve elements of socialism..
Lord_Kromdor@reddit
There are more versions of socialism than the ones that fail, this is bad faith slippery slope nonsense. Canada for example, considered democratic socialism. Just because some people want more socialist policies doesn't mean the country will fall off the extreme socialist cliff you're all conditioned to fear.
Lord_Kromdor@reddit
Yep.
browni3141@reddit
The outcome where it "works" is where they undercut legitimate local businesses and increase people's reliance on government. There is no positive outcome.
Ejack1212@reddit
you getting downvoted on this…. i havnt been using reddit much anymore, but to see the reponse on this video in a libertarian subreddit is wild. idk if reddit is even worth it anymore if subreddits don’t even have separate beliefs and points of view.
Hairy_Locksmith_4130@reddit
its libertarian by only name
jfaliszek@reddit
More low income families people having access to necessities isn’t a positive outcome in your eyes?
MiracleHere@reddit
This will not give access to necessities for low income families, but more profits for scalpers and billionaires. Isn't it a negative outcome in your eyes?
uncreative1776@reddit
What the fuck is this sub where morons promoting socialism are upvoted, and the sane person is downvoted? Haven’t visited the libertarian sub in a while. Is it overrun?
Accomplished_Egg_580@reddit
Like those giant supermarket that sells stuff cheaply arent in the first place. People reliance on govt, when the govt is smoking dollar bills over a war.
Ejack1212@reddit
wtf, is this even the libertarian subreddit anymore
Pizza_Ninja@reddit
Right next to Costco because that's where they purchase their inventory.
HJWalsh@reddit
Well, this is a BS propaganda video that is blatantly misrepresenting the facts.
unodostrace@reddit
Costco is cheap for people who can afford to buy in bulk.
Mosloth@reddit
Yea I'm trying to find the comments noting on this. Me and my girlfriend don't wanna spend $130 for 4 items at Costco so we don't shop there. This isn't the own he thinks it is. Also it's a mile away in new york that's very far for a lot of people this will be more convenient
Tronn3000@reddit
Any extra competition in the grocery store marketplace isn't a bad thing. I know a lot of libertarians are strongly against publicly funded healthcare but u would like a public insurance option just so it forces insurance companies to compete. Any sort of "government baseline" in terms of service is a good thing not a bad thing because it establishes a floor and offers competition.
MiracleHere@reddit
That's not competition, the government can never be part of the competition (that's even morally wrong), that's not even the definition of competition in a free market.
Tronn3000@reddit
France, Australia, and the Netherlands all have a combined public and private healthcare marketplace and their average healthcare cost per year is about 1/3 of what the average American spends on healthcare per year. Whether you want the government involved in specific industries or not, you can't ignore the math. They spend less than Americans do.
There's plenty of examples of this working. Look at the USPS competing with FedEx and UPS. Sure FedEx and UPS are faster for overnight deliveries but USPS is generally cheaper for ground shipping.
Also, government ran grocery stores already exist. Every military base has a PX (commissary) and that's ran by the government and they tend to be a bit cheaper than your local Walmart or Kroger.
I think your whole idealized version of "but muh free markets" is a bit outdated in this day and age when the barriers to competition are so high and most marketplaces are essentially oligopolies that have no checks on their competition.
MiracleHere@reddit
Most of the healthcare costs from Europe are subsidized by US healthcare corporations, we cannot compare the two because both industries are intertwined to the core. But we can look at Switzerland's fully private universal healthcare for that matter (and keep in mind, Switzerland citizens have the greatest purchasing power in Europe).
When you say that the government creates competition, that's just blatantly wrong. There's no instance of government corporations existence that drive other corporations to lower their prices. Quite the opposite by experience.
You can have both gov corps and citizens corps working together, but that does not mean the industry is more competitive than a fully citizens owned one. The government cannot provide true competition because it relies on funds completely unrelated to market incentives that reflect the true realities of the production chain.
IDrinkMyBreakfast@reddit
30 Million? Doesn’t it take far less to build and run a grocery store? Like a couple million?
jordanpatriots@reddit
You gotta staff the store with well paid diversity officers
MiracleHere@reddit
Funny you think that the money is going directly to the worker and not the bureaucrats.
jordanpatriots@reddit
Um, that would be a bureaucrat. A useless one
MiracleHere@reddit
We gotta stop financing useless bureaucrats
BO1ANT@reddit
I think its going to be in manhattan so everything is more expensive. The 30 mil is probably mostly for purchasing the location and any renovations.
IDrinkMyBreakfast@reddit
The article said the government owns the real estate, but that may still be a purchase
TheSphinx1906@reddit
If you believe his “economics” then you are uninformed and/or unaware of the multitude of government run retail business in the US.
There is nothing wrong with a government run grocery store that aims for a 0% net margin on the business.
That is COSTCO’s business model. You know they make ll their money on the membership fees right?
You can do the same thing without the membership fee…
Pseudo intellectuals on the internet are more dangerous than you think…
…sigh…
MiracleHere@reddit
Regardless of the business model, the money is directly connected to the consumption, no money for all the consumption is only going to drive the profit motive for Costco and you'd ask in 4 years why profits have been going up while everything is more expensive...
chettybaker@reddit
Venezuela, Venezuela and Venezeula. I am phd economist, Costco, Walmart and Amazon will save us. This style of propaganda worked during Bernie's first few runs but gen z is not having it. The capistalist system they have experienced in 21st century America does not offer better wages, provide health insurance, or good stable jobs. But it has heavy right wing subsidies for war and is increasingly dominated by monopolies that have deep connections with the government. Actually since the beginning of time. Those with wealth and money attempt to exert power and control over governance. You kinda need regulations to stop it
MiracleHere@reddit
And you support a direct monopoly directly connected to the government? Are you truly an Economist or are you just a gov sponsored graduate?
Loominardy@reddit
The US is not some dystopian “capitalist system”. It is a mixed economy and has only gotten more left wing over time.
Historical-Mud5845@reddit
if you dont mindme asking what was ur thesis on and where did you get it from
dontreplywiththisacc@reddit
If it wasnt the George Mason Palantir institute in comparative child labor I don’t trust em
saul_soprano@reddit
Isn’t the profit margin for the average grocery store less than 2%? Lol
MiracleHere@reddit
Yes, state-run grocery stores will change that
broomosh@reddit
If you just stopped taxing hourly workers, they'll have more money to spend at grocery stores
Taking 30 million dollars from the tax payers to create a Byzantine mechanism to give them their money back isn't the way.
Step1Mark@reddit
In this world, you are more likely to have lower wages if you did that. A good example is employers not paying waiters living wages because they expect customers to pay that.
I am not in favor of having a gov run grocery store. You don't see that kind of stuff in wealthy left leaning countries like Denmark, Norway, Sweden, etc.
I feels like they would be better off partnering with independent farmers for an essentials pop up market for daily bread, dairy, and grains. Wave the permits, tolls, and other barriers to see if that works and scale from there. I don't see value in NYC spending 30M to make this happen. BUT - I don't live in NYC and if it helps the people, so be it. It is their tax dollars after all.
pervertoftime@reddit
Well, the government funded state universities claiming they would make “degrees more affordable,” and how did that turn out in the long run? College is less affordable than ever. I rarely believe those lame ducks when they claim to put tax dollars to beneficial use. These are the same quacks that gave away 300 billion dollars to Israel while letting welfare scammers in Minnesota rob us billions.
( I don’t hate our ally Israel but we need to stop being overgenerous with tax payer dollars. )
broomosh@reddit
In our current world we have lowering wages because the government can't stop spending so they keep raising taxes and printing money.
How about stop spending millions and billions on shiny new projects designed to save me money that usually get mismanaged and instead just stop taking money from me?
Step1Mark@reddit
IDK if I am fully onboard with that. There are countries that have wages still going up, the gov isn't spending more than they bring in, and their currency is not devalued because they aren't just printing more.
I believe if we weren't wasting money on active warfare, insane spending on defense (1.5 Trillian FY2027), and everyone paid the same percentage in tax with no loop holes ... The projects that are shiny, wouldn't be hated as much. I am all for NASA's projects but the entire dept budget is typically less than 0.5% of any tax dollar. I wish we had several JWSTs out there and more HubbleSTs with more capable sensors and tech. But those things aren't war, so they barely get a focus.
I don't think my math is wrong, if you took the 30 million and gave it to the 2 million (low income) of the 8 million residents of NYC, that would only be $15 each. Not really worth it. This project will obviously be spread out over time since the NYC budget is typically around 125 million USD. I am running a lot of these numbers and it is crazy to me. They are taking about 6% of their budget over the next 4 years on this project. I really wonder what the data is that supports the logic. If this ends up lowering their cost of groceries by more than 15$ over the next few years, it might be worth it in the long term but maybe my math is off. Groceries in NYC is typically 10-40% higher than the national average. I have saved more than 15$ just shopping around or going to Aldi instead of Walmart or Publix (an over priced southeastern grocery chain). Apparently Aldi is in NYC and is anywhere from 8-50% cheaper than the other local grocery chains there. I wonder if NYC gov will somehow undercut Aldi.
Anyways, I am really down a rabbit hole now. I am really curious where these goes long term since the dollar is being devalued, inflation is still bad and will continue, distribution of food is going up due to actions by the USA in Venezuela + Iran, and even a change of power by congress wouldn't fix these issues for months or years.
broomosh@reddit
The crux of my Internet argument typed between calls is the fact that this project will eat up that 30 million faster than you can imagine and will have nothing to show for it.
If he manages to do something of worth for 30 million I'll eat my words
Step1Mark@reddit
I couldn't agree more. I feel like 30 million will become 60 million fast.
Same. I can't imagine he will undercut Aldi and ultimately, if you live in NYC and you are struggling, you should already be shopping there. At my lowest income times, I went to rice, beans, ramen, etc. I don't foresee him getting prices lower for meats than Aldi but I could see him maybe matching prices for grains but but then why have the program if it is matching another retailer.
broomosh@reddit
I live in California so I've seen a ton of waste. There is no incentive for government to do a good job especially at the project management levels.
We passed bills to spend around 150 million to get rid of lead from school drinking water. Guess what! There is no oversight committee to see if they're doing a good job. The audits that were tied to that money were voluntary and had no specifics for small amount size, frequency, database to collect it into.
Lead free water for children at government facilities should be a layup for a well functioning government that cares about the tax payer.
Dry_Entertainment688@reddit
You’re blending real facts with assumptions and presenting them like they’re the same thing.
Yes, commissaries are subsidized. That’s not disputed. The question is what the outcome is, and GAO/DoD data compares actual shelf prices to local markets and still finds ~17–20% savings on average. That’s a real price difference, not just accounting.
Your “you’re actually paying more through taxes” example isn’t sourced and assumes a 1:1 cost transfer that doesn’t reflect how tax funding or public goods actually work. Do you have data that supports that breakdown, or is that just a hypothetical?
Also, saying the private market is always more efficient is an assertion, not evidence. Commissaries exist precisely because markets don’t serve certain areas or populations well.
If your argument is that subsidies are bad in principle, that’s a separate ideological position. However, if the argument is about outcomes, then the available data shows the model produces lower prices for users.
Ok-Courage798@reddit
Silly take, no one's saying you can't make profit to maintain your operations. You're just not going to get profiteering like the grocery corps currently do. Walmart offers products cheaply because they have buying power. Enough of these stores establish, they too will have buying power.
robotic_love_brigade@reddit
Maybe the best looking economist I've seen in a long while
dockstaderj@reddit
I can't find any news sources saying that one will be right next to a costco
BadAndNationwide@reddit
They’re a mile apart. Not exactly right next to each other but close enough for gov work.
RootHouston@reddit
Right 1 mile is not usually enough to isolate competition. Although, maybe in NYC?
Ejack1212@reddit
for a grocery store, it 100% is
JayJayDoubleYou@reddit
Costco is not direct competition for a neighborhood grocery store. Often people go to both in one errands trip. People needing a quick jug of milk don't usually go to Costco, and people buying food for Thanksgiving dinner will drive past a dozen grocery stores to shop at Costco.
mandara33@reddit
In NYC those might as well be separate towns. Your bubble is one avenue block and 3-5 street blocks
dockstaderj@reddit
Thanks for the research on this! Its good to call out liars like in this video.
BadAndNationwide@reddit
I prefer the liar in the video to Mamdani. The guy makes good points.
RealSteelHrothgar88@reddit
"making good points" = factually incorrect. You may want think more in this one bud
P1xelEnthusiast@reddit
You are a socialist.
Outside of you not liking the distance to the referenced Costco, what points did he make that are "factually incorrect"?
You aren't a libertarian and you know it. You are the "liar" by participating here.
dontreplywiththisacc@reddit
You trust a demonstrated liar in your assessment lol what are these magic points he made aside from say venezuellllllllaaa
P1xelEnthusiast@reddit
You are a clown. His points are clearly made.
You are not a libertarian
BadAndNationwide@reddit
Yeah I wasn’t even planning on answer that silly shit
P1xelEnthusiast@reddit
You are such a clown calling this guy a liar in other comments.
The fact you are upvoted is proof positive that this sub is not a libertarian community.
dockstaderj@reddit
As the other commented demonstrated, he did lie. The city grocery still will not be "right next to a costco," it's a mile away.
P1xelEnthusiast@reddit
I love how the semantics regarding the distance to the Costco is the issue for you, not the fact that his content and argument is spot on.
Learn how to make an argument instead of calling your opponent a "liar" over literally nothing.
You aren't a libertarian. You are a socialist. You are the bigger "liar" by participating here.
dockstaderj@reddit
Not a socialist.
daleDentin23@reddit
This debate on being this or that is hilarious. USA has many socialist policies and they all favor being rich to in order to qualify for the hand out. Or being a farmer and receiving subsidies to grow product that shouldn't be able to compete in a "free" market. The semantics of whether an individual is or is not a socialist is truly a symptom of the USA propaganda.
P1xelEnthusiast@reddit
This is r/libertarian not r/politics
The assumption here would be that you aren't a socialist
browni3141@reddit
I don't think the sub is usually like this. This post feels astro-turfed and/or brigaded.
RealSteelHrothgar88@reddit
It is, it just sounds like you aren't a librarian. That or you aren't smart enough to understand what libertarians are.
nutznyamouph6969420@reddit
BASED!!!
KAZVorpal@reddit
The argument in the video is okay. A little weak compared to what it could be, but it's the right idea.
But idiots who use those lapel mics as if they were hand mics need to be banned.
Not the using mics, the people who do it.
Illegal.
CavalierRigg@reddit
List of failed government-run grocery stores:
Countries off the top of my head that I know there is WELL documented shortages and failures of government run stores you can look up individually- The Soviet Union, East Germany, Poland/Ukraine/Baltic nations during the Warsaw Pact Era, North Korea, early Vietnam, Cambodia, Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Angola
In the U.S. , there is a line between government subsidized and fully owned, here are some notable “fully owned” examples-
Sun Fresh Market - Kansas City, MO: failed to overcome high crime, empty shelves, and supply chain issues. Total loss = approximately $18 million
Baldwin Market - Baldwin, FL: failed to overcome competitor prices, empty shelves, and supply chain issues. Total loss = approximately $1.2 million (about 200k a year)
Erie Market - Erie, KS: Unique situation, town lost its only private grocery store, government stepped in. Failed to overcome logistics/supply issues and workforce management issues. Total loss = approximately $1 million (about 400k initially, then 600k over 4.5 years)
But I am sure New York City will have figured it out, no pressure /s
hugeness101@reddit
This guy is just making in assumptions. There is no fact in his argument….
BOGDOGMAX@reddit
Their labor costs will eat up any property tax/profit motive advantage they have. Municipal workers will be paid way more than market rate, probably triple, and do half the work. 15 minute breaktime will be stretched out to 35 minutes as an apathetic supervisor turns a blind eye. Workers will congregate in the back room sitting on boxes chatting it up. Cashiers will need a potty break outside their normal break and then spend 25 minutes sitting on the toilet scrolling on their phones.
brassknuckl3s@reddit
Idk how any of that is a bad thing
sqdcn@reddit
Wait, isn't that a good thing. Work less for more. I'm siding with the labor (aka me) here.
BOGDOGMAX@reddit
These overpaid, underworked municipal jobs are the domain of political cronies. I suggest volunteering for for your council member, collecting signatures working fundraisers etc for free. Make sure to give an annual donation to him also, And after some years you might be able to land one of these jobs.
corey-worthington@reddit
EXACTLY! And this is only one small aspect of how a lack of any proper incentives will cause this project to crumble.
Aielwyd@reddit
So making a grocery store more affordable is....not making things more affordable? Lol
acemedic@reddit
I really don’t know what the first two arguments were… 1: low income families aren’t shopping at Costco, and Costco shoppers are buying food in bulk and additional non grocery items. 2: analytics can be done regardless of profit or not to determine which items sell more. That was a dumb af argument. 3: just set standards on food items. We also have the FDA (until it’s defunded) that sets food standards. Sorry Venezuela didn’t do that 🤷♂️
dontreplywiththisacc@reddit
P1xelEnthusiast@reddit
Leave this sub
dontreplywiththisacc@reddit
Not an argument
P1xelEnthusiast@reddit
I was trying to make an argument.
I was making a statement.
A statement that you are a socialist and a racist.
dontreplywiththisacc@reddit
Still no argument just empty assertions
P1xelEnthusiast@reddit
Your first point is judging the accent of a person you don't know. That is racist behavior. Because you are a racist.
The second point attacks where he is from. That is racist behavior. Because you are a racist.
The last two points are socialist rantings. Because you are a socialist.
I don't really think a libertarian community should welcome racist or socialist behavior.
So you should go back to wherever you are astroturfing from.
ineedtostopthefap@reddit
lol what? If we don’t like it, we can go next door to the Costco.
Also am I supposed to feel bad for COSTCO?!
sqdcn@reddit
Also Costco is in way different market segment.
danneskjold85@reddit
But if New Yorkers don't like it they get punished for not paying taxes for it, which you apparently have no problems with. Also unfair - immoral - is using extorted money to open a business which competes with private individuals. So yes, if you believe in fairness or have a moral sense, you would have some objection to this.
ineedtostopthefap@reddit
lol what? If we don’t like it, we can go next door to the Costco.
Also am I supposed to feel bad for COSTCO?!
danneskjold85@reddit
Stop paying your taxes, "kiddo", and see if you don't get punished.
Herp derp
JestFlamez@reddit
That definition is so vague, you can apply it to everything that usually involves a transaction.
Apparently businesses incentivize customers to pay for goods/services through a mix of extortion and marketing.
Herp derp.
idontagreewitu@reddit
Walmart isn't exactly a private individual. In fact, Walmart has done to thousands of private individuals and family businesses what you are warning us this state-operated grocery store will do to them.
WileEBoycote@reddit
Many of those "state projects" usually don't succeed in their purpose. And that trial to collect people's votes with populist projects is just repeating all history examples of the government trial to buy social peace with OUR tax money.
For example, during the war in Yugoslavia, Milosevic's backed businessmans opened sponsored banks just to collect money for financing weapons. And shortly after formation, thousands of people were waiting to invest money in pyramidal scheme which offered 150% interest rate for deposits in national currency.
Have in mind that 98% of population didn't have any sense how the financial system was functioning - since they had lived in communist regime for decades before.
They didn't have any option for financing since the country was expelled from international financial markets, due to international isolation, so printing money and pyramidal banks were the only resoruce.
It resulted in 313.000.000.000% hyperinflation and the bankruptcy of those banks, so the government confiscated all the savings from citizens.
So, don't think government intervention will succeed anytime in anything.
tgate345@reddit
Youre thinking about this as a consumer. Yes, you can go to a competitor.
Now consider that you are the owner of that grocery store that you decided not to shop at. You no longer have the ability to choose, your tax dollars are going into that investment whether you like it or not (and it quickly becomes apparent that it only loses you money and is run with complete incompetency and eventually corruption).
Maybe not a big deal for one store. It becomes a massive problem at scale.
ineedtostopthefap@reddit
Ehh paying for a ‘competitor’ with my taxes does sound annoying but this is NY, too many here need real help. If there is a net social good, everyone will benefit
Alll that corruption and incompetence you mention is just you being emotional
bloodyNASsassin@reddit
Fair competition will always produce more "net social good" than government run anything. The government provides force; it doesn't provide incentives.
dextercool@reddit
I am a consumer so it's natural to think that way. Remember the customer is always right!
K31lover2@reddit
The saying is the customer is always right in matters of taste. If you keep thinking in such a narrow scope you let socialists like the ones in NYC get away with dumb shit like that grocery store. If you really dont want to support Costco despite them being one of the very few actually good brands then go to a mom and pop store.
WileEBoycote@reddit
They would be closest competitor in any way for Mamdani's store. It won't be different in any way from Costco, so it's meaningless to open that kind of store by our tax money.
Tetragig@reddit
Costco is a members only club, it's not going to be a direct competitor. Most of Costco's members are higher income earners than the clientele of a state run store.
Futanari-Farmer@reddit
i believe the testing is worth a shot, if it works, it works, and if not, then we have (some) proof.
sirrloin@reddit
Classic progressive argument...but everyone knows once it fails they will only double down because certain people have their hands in taxpayer pockets and their ideology will not permit failure.
Futanari-Farmer@reddit
fair.
SexMachineMMA@reddit
I honestly think what’s happening in New York is a good thing. We all know Mamdani’s policies are gonna fail and because it’s NY and how popular he is with young people, all eyes are gonna be on him. So when it does fail, some people will make excuses, but most people will realize just how stupid socialism is and not vote for it when it shows up in their city
jordanpatriots@reddit
Hopefully -- at least enough people to see change before it's too late. But they might just import people in while those with sense leave the city/state as they've been doing. Then you are left with a shitwhole with terrible political ideology + entrepreneurs fleeing. Terrible combo
SexMachineMMA@reddit
New York may end up as an even bigger shithole than it is now. I more meant that people in other cities and states across the country will see how bad NYC has become under Mamdani and not vote for the self-described socialists running in their elections
Thebaronofbrewskis@reddit
They’ve literally tried this in New York, it failed in 6 months due to miss management and lack of quality… giant waste
___John_@reddit
Grocery store margins are razor thin as it is. A government run chain will have no idea how to keep costs low or keep shelves stocked, and won't particularly care. This will lead to cost overruns and empty shelves.
Accomplished_Egg_580@reddit
if a govt can subsidize business, give them tax break. Why can't they subsidize groceries and put a limit on how much a person can take away from the store. Have special cards designated to each family. And within the family if they sign up, will have the ability to purchase more. Maybe get ur groceries even more affordable. All through tax payer money. So money cut from tax payer benefits the tax payer.
If the store could maintain a steady supply, nobody would hoard. Just needs to be distributed fairly geographically.
ColeMinetv@reddit
100% my opinion as well, stores that run sales on certain items most likely lost a few cents on each item; however, it incentivizes consumers to buy more while they’re shopping
savro@reddit
The profit margins of grocery stores are already razor thin. In the low, single digits thin. Not pricing groceries for profit isn’t going to save as much money as people think.
Accomplished_Egg_580@reddit
if a govt can subsidize business, give them tax break. Why can't they subsidize groceries and put a limit on how much a person can take away from the store. If the store could maintain a steady supply, nobody would hoard. Just needs to be distributed fairly.
Accomplished_Egg_580@reddit
see how expensive the eggs are, even though we know eggs are more in supply.
InnateAnarchy@reddit
That was what I learned 20 years ago as well, but I tend to think that’s not the case anymore. Covid and the self checkout registers really changed everything.
My uneducated guess now is that grocery stores are substantially more profitable than single digit.
javier123454321@reddit
At least youre admitting that youre uneducated about this.
BadAndNationwide@reddit
Self checkout is largely a result of government’s push to raise minimum wages. When the cost of labor is higher than the market value, fewer workers are going to be employed. All the minimum wage hikes did was ensure the raise the rate of pay for a few, at the cost of the jobs of many.
I feel like I worded this really poorly. I was up all night. I think you’ll get my point.
savro@reddit
Profit margins for grocery retailers were indeed higher during COVID. According to the Food Industry Association, as of 2024 (the latest data I could find after a few minutes of Googling) profit margins are back down to the 1.5 - 1.7 percent range.
EdgyJellyfish@reddit
Well google took me about 5 seconds and finished the question for me even just to tell me it’s still low single digits and you’d be wrong.
nizerifin@reddit
Being located right by a Costco will force this place to compete. Or just turn into a food bank
VHS_tape@reddit
I guess all those COMMIEsaries we've been using with the military since like... 1900 just don't work. I knew I felt a chill going up my spine every time I stepped inside to grab some afforable groceries.
confederate_yankee@reddit
💯
NeuroSciCommunist@reddit
Unfortunately the US is designed for stuff like this not to work, all the competition has monopolized supply chains and they aren't forced to provide the benefits that government employees would get so all the money you save by taking out the profit will probably be lost in operating costs. New York isn't China and this stuff doesn't work in isolation.
chrisevox@reddit
American patriot in my eyes.
Epstiendidntkillself@reddit
I didn't watch the whole video so I have no Idea if what he is saying is good or bad. What I do know is that if you are hand holding a clip on mic, you look like an imbecile.
Theotherfeller@reddit
Anything can work if you throw enough taxpayer money at it, then they will go and say see, see how well it works, when if you consider the unpaid taxes and subsidies et al the food costs twice as much as at a normal store.
Pyre_Aurum@reddit
I thought the purpose of the government run grocery stores was to fill in the "food deserts"? Doesn't putting it next to a Costco contradict that?
dontreplywiththisacc@reddit
Don’t you need to pay to shop there
latortillablanca@reddit
And afford buying in bulk
WickedNF@reddit
So let's just continue to do nothing and try nothing new
DarthCheezit@reddit
The argument ive seen for them is that the intent is not to be profitable, but to act as a provided service. Military grocers operate on the same principle with thier budget. Feeding people is the intended goal as a net nuetral out come.
bloodyNASsassin@reddit
We need to have the "why it doesn't work." part nailed down and added to the conversation and real-life examples of it not working every time. It's the only way for people to get a better understanding of the dangers of things being government run.
Anen-o-me@reddit
That is f'ing dumb. Guess he gotta learn the hard way.
splitopenandmelt11@reddit
Big difference between an emargo’d country’s grocery stores and the US grocery stores. I’ve got family in VZL and the lines and shortages won’t happen in NYC — sorry but it’s a false equivalency.
To be honest, they’re going to spend $30,000,000 on dumber shit. At least thing is feeding people.
I’m ok with trying this.
Apart_Number_2792@reddit
Excellent post! This guy seems to know from personal experience.
Laurenslagniappe@reddit
Idk Sacramento has a socialized electrical grid and everyone loves SMUD over PG&E. The CEO of smud makes good money and the company is slightly for profit, just much much less so than shareholder based companies.
dcthebrohan@reddit
They really just let anybody say anything and post it these days…….
P1xelEnthusiast@reddit
What is wrong with the content of this video?
esotologist@reddit
It's all hasbara knows how to do tbh
Science0girl@reddit
Looooove The Free Press 🙌🫶
dontreplywiththisacc@reddit
Where did you get you lobotomy
Best-Addendum-2269@reddit
Didnt KC have one for a bit?
_WhiteGoodman_@reddit
Point to me on the map where socialism works and hasn’t turned that country into a sh!thole comparatively?
I’ll wait.
bevelledo@reddit
This is definitely a clickbait post.
A government ran grocery store is DEFINITELY not libertarian I’ll give you that.
Part of the objective of the store was to provide food in an otherwise food desert. Cheaper groceries is just a byproduct since the motive of the store is not profit. In poor inner cities it’s not easy to find fresh vegetables or fruits, and it’s those people who don’t have means or access to a vehicle to get to and from the store. Hence a “food desert”
TopspinLob@reddit
Tax the Rich so I can indulge in a pointless vanity project that improves nothing and helps nobody
tarantulahands@reddit
I don’t think the government run grocery store is trying to replace Costco. But it could serve as a cheaper alternative for low-income households or people struggling to get to the next paycheck.
BO1ANT@reddit
yeah people who are going to a government run grocery were never shopping at costco to begin with.
tarantulahands@reddit
I would argue that there are a whole bunch of people who fit that description
esotologist@reddit
What does venezuelas rotten food have to do with new york? Who paid this guy to... oohhhhhhhhh
Achilles8857@reddit
What is the goal of a government-run grocery store? To appeal to the base, and stay in power.
jhaluska@reddit
It's like the saying goes "A sucker is born every minute."
On the surface, their solutions sounds good, but ends up being terrible. When you're struggling you're more willing to believe lies.
Achilles8857@reddit
As to the business plan, the next-door Costco figures right in.
The Mamdani-Mart will employment flock of teenage homies/homegirls (don't forget that public relations op!) to bull rush the membership check at the Costco with a couple of pallet jacks, and roll a few loads of Costco goodies through the exit to the Z-Mart one door over.
'Cause you know those poor disadvantaged teens aren't going to be prosecuted for shoplifting, right? Not in oh-so-progressive, kinder and gentler NYC, they're not. Next - sell the filched goods at the Z-Mart on the cheap. Profits? We don't need no stinkin' profits.
Problem solved!
JumpinJimRivers@reddit
Unhinged comment
v3ganhack@reddit
https://www.axios.com/2019/11/23/government-run-grocery-store-baldwin-florida
tehclap4@reddit
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2024/02/09/town-owned-grocery-store-in-baldwin-will-close-in-march/72514321007/
v3ganhack@reddit
I government owned a grocery store in rural Florida. They will run you out of town before you talk ill of their grocery store
futuristicplatapus@reddit
Government has one job and they just don’t give a fuck about doing it.
AutoModerator@reddit
REMOVED: due to a large amount of brigading, we are temporarily restricting posts from drive-by users. If you are unfamiliar with our beliefs or ideology, take some time to lurk, or do some research. Do not message the mod team, this will be reviewed when we have time. Messaging the mod team asking us to approve this will result in an automatic denial and potential ban as we will assume you are a clanker sending automated messages.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.