this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2026
389 points (100.0% liked)

politics

31043 readers
3264 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BigMacHole@thelemmy.club 38 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I can't WAIT to VOTE him OUT so I can pay MORE for Groceries again!

-LITERALLY Republican Voters!

[–] Surp@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Excuse me for wanting to be poor!

[–] holy_scroller@lemmy.zip -1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Not a Republican, but there is a lot of nuance.

He can sell groceries at a loss because the money comes from other places...all of which is eventually paid for in taxes (in this case there is probably a small resitribution from rich to poor which I am happy with).

I don't mind Democrats getting caught helping their constituents. But let's not pretend he found some cheap grocery loophole; grocery store are already incredibly efficient, they only make ~3% profit. I am just speculating that the logistics needed to spin up govt groceries is much larger than the existing ~3% markup from the private sector.

[–] potpotato@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Ag/food production is already subsidized, so it’s not like buying from for profit stores eliminates social aspects of the industry. On the other side, what NYC is doing is removing CEOs with multimullion dollar comp packages from the equation.

[–] holy_scroller@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 month ago

The problem is we are only talking about grocery stores where the revenue is only about 3%. Ton of problems with Big Ag which as you said is heavily subsidized. I don't mind the redistribution. I think it is great optics. But I just think it is ineffective, because grocery stores (only talking stores) are in fact very efficient already.

[–] bowsertattoo@piefed.social 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

grocery stores are efficient for their owners, but not for food. grocery stores waste a lot of food. source: i used to eat grocery store dumpster food

[–] holy_scroller@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If they were efficient for their owners, there profit would be a shit ton more than 3% of revenue.

Food dumping is its own issue. I bet the government grocery stores will have to follow the exact same laws.

The Piggly Wigley or the Bodega are not raking it in.