It's great. Beat out other grocery stores so prices drop to compete. Have grocery stores donate soon to be expired food to these gov stores for tax breaks. That handles safe disposal. If it's not sold. Turn it into feed for farm animals. Sell it cheap to farms. Their stuff goes down.
this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2025
577 points (99.0% liked)
News
33081 readers
2892 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Plus, it's probably going to go to the food *desert areas first. I dig it.
Dessert is what you have after a meal. You can help remember this by thinking there are more S's because you want more dessert.
Thanks for coming to my Ted Talk.
that's exactly the goal of the program.
there's something like one grocery store per 1500 residents in new york (far more, per capita, than my entire county).
many residents have multiple options nearby, but some (around 750,000) do not live within 5 blocks of even just one. those are the neighborhoods this program would target.
these city-run stores are not intended to serve 'everybody', just those who aren't served by anything.
If I recall correctly, it’s only one store per borough, only in areas without access to healthy foods, and where public private partnerships had failed in the past.
I love it when a policy that could be populist and rubbish has some thinking and substance behind it!
It's not the grocery stores, it's the food corporations. And animal feed can't just be left over groceries. There's a science to feeding livestock at scale. Not that some.ofnitncouldnt be used, just saying it's not all that simple. Otherwise I 100% agree with the sentiment.
load more comments
(20 replies)
The other issue is what's going to keep prices low at these stores?
A hugely important piece of history here is the Robinson-Patman Act. I'll throw a bit of AI slop for context, but it's consistent with what I know. Basically, the direction to the FTC to stop enforcing this act is what created food deserts and Walmart.
From the 1930s until the early 1980s, the Robinson-Patman Act was enforced by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), ensuring that suppliers offered similar pricing to all retailers, regardless of size. This allowed independent grocers to compete effectively with large chains.
No, the Robinson-Patman Act was not repealed, but its enforcement by the government was virtually non-existent for decades until the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently began reviving its enforcement in 2021. While the act remains on the books, it was largely unenforced for a period, but recent actions by the FTC indicate that it is still considered a live statute, say Norton Rose Fulbright, American Bar Association, and Every CRS Report.
- History of non-enforcement: The Department of Justice announced it would stop enforcing the act in 1977, and the FTC had not brought an enforcement case since 2000.
- Reasons for non-enforcement: Enforcement agencies largely abandoned the act due to concerns that it could harm consumers by punishing legitimate volume discounts and that it was anticompetitive, say The Federalist Society, Anderson Kill P.C., and American Economic Liberties Project.
- Recent revival: In recent years, including under the Biden administration, the FTC has signaled renewed interest in enforcing the act and has initiated investigations into potential violations.
A classic example of this is the story where Walmart almost put Vlassic pickles out of business.
Ugh, that's a depressing read, and I already knew the story. Tl;dr: Walmart kills brands. The Walton family gets richer. Everyone else suffers.
For me the biggest question is: "Will these City-ran grocery stores, be able to complete with the Walmart juggernaut?"
Yes, initially the city-ran stores will be placed in "food deserts", but if the program is to succeed it need to go toe-to-toe with Walmart. Otherwise, the program won't be able to reach the people who need it the most.
... and based on the article you posted, I'm sure Walmart won't take this lying down. Walmart will have no second thoughts or remorse to sacrifice their suppliers in order to compete (thus, keeping customers flocking to their store).
It doesn't look like there are any Walmarts in NYC. Honestly they probably don't care about this, their model is big box stores that sell everything. You can't put a big box store in NYC.
There aren't, and most of the big box stores are about a third to half the size of their equivalents outside the city
In the article, it’s says 1) they will direct the subsidies away from privately owned stores to spend on the city grocers, and 2) the city will pay rent and taxes on the store.
I don’t know how well it will work, or if some chain tries to mess with their price, like you mentioned, but I’m excited to see it in action and see what happens.
No matter what, I appreciate that he is actually trying something to combat a problem.
The easier way would be to make a law that mimics Robinson-Patman and actually enforce it within the confines of NYC.
But hey, I'm willing to see what happens.
It's a bold move, and I want it to work, but I can't see how it does at this point.
One store per borough.
Population estimates as of 2023:
Bronx - 1,356,476
Brooklyn - 2,561,225
Manhattan - 1,597,451
Queens - 2,252,196
Staten Island - 490,687
One per borough as a pilot program, to see if it’s feasible to expand.
This is the way it should be done. Instead of spending millions of dollars on a multi-year feasibility study and building hundreds of stores, just build a few and see how it goes.
So, using agile approach here might work?
Only if there are a pair of employees at each store.
I mean, it did say at least one per borough. But, still not as many as we'd like. Maybe if it succeeds on a small scale, it'll be expanded.
load more comments
(3 replies)
It's a pilot program, like how they tried one free bus per borough. Easier to get past your opposition, and you gather data on if expanding to a program with real impact makes sense. And it makes sense that they don't want to spoil or reveal how big this might get if it starts working, because that's just handing ammo to your opposition. It's exactly how thing like this ought to be done, slowly and scientifically, and in a way that is not so immediately threatening to the status quo that it will get squashed before we can see if it works or not as a solution.
Not everyone will need to go to the city run grocery stores so it’s not 100% of a borough to a to a single store
It’s a bold move, and I want it to work, but I can’t see how it does at this point.
Could you expand on your thoughts here? Which part do you see as failing or what your definition of failing for this project?
I'm guessing the original OC is pointing to the enormous customer bases each store would have to service and how inadequate the amount of stores per borough are relative to the amount of customers
The stores aren't supposed to replace the existing stores or serve the whole city population. They're supposed to put some outlets into underserved neighborhoods whose residents now have to subsist on junk food or else use transit for basic groceries.
I haven't looked into the proposal much but this is what I envisioned with the term food deserts.
All areas have bodegas but they don't often have a selection of fresh fruits, vegetables, or food staples.
source: I've lived in NYC.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Yeah this was always my issue with it. I can understand the plan to drive down the price of goods with government subsidized competition, but that only works if it's a highly available alternative.
focusing on food deserts, or areas with limited access to full-service supermarkets,
he isn't out to take on the competition to 'drive down' prices, but rather to serve neighborhoods that have no stores..where you have to walk a half hour just to get a carton of milk and a loaf of bread.
Oh, well if that's the primary goal - to eliminate food deserts - then hell yeah. Makes total sense
view more: next ›