Zohran Mamdani - Democratic Socialist Mayor of NYC

[frank ryan]

If DSAs continue to focus on economic and affordability issues, instead of social justice issues, they may continue to win in very blue areas. Mamdani has tried to keep the focus on affordability, which the GOP, MAGA and Dems have largely ignored. The problem with DSAs is that their platform won't ultimately help with any affordability issues. Government run grocery stores and rent freezes are losers economically. I mean, if economists from all walks of life agree on one thing, it's that rent freezes are never the answer to any issue.

This seems to be a natural response to MAGA, though. I wouldn't be surprised if a DSA gave it a good run in the Dem primary like what Bernie did back in 2016.

That is what they are doing 100 percent. DSA types loathe Biden and Schumer almost as much as they do Trump.

They've had no luck until now.

[LVAllen]

If DSAs continue to focus on economic and affordability issues, instead of social justice issues, they may continue to win in very blue areas. Mamdani has tried to keep the focus on affordability, which the GOP, MAGA and Dems have largely ignored. The problem with DSAs is that their platform won't ultimately help with any affordability issues. Government run grocery stores and rent freezes are losers economically. I mean, if economists from all walks of life agree on one thing, it's that rent freezes are never the answer to any issue.

This seems to be a natural response to MAGA, though. I wouldn't be surprised if a DSA gave it a good run in the Dem primary like what Bernie did back in 2016.

I think you are assuming the government-run stores' purpose is to make money where private stores have either abandoned the area or failed. I don't think they view that as the store's purpose at all. If it loses money, that's simply a subsidy they are willing to make to ensure that people in poor areas have access to some food. The gross revenue simply offsets the subsidy they are willing to pay in the first place. It's kind of like their concept of free public college. The government doesn't need to make any money off it, and if it loses money, that's okay, because it's an investment in people. As a business, sure, it's probably a dog. As a government-sponsored provider of food, it has a different mission. See also BYU's mission and tuition rates.

[dabrockster]

So I head Mamdani held a press conference to tell us how shitty America was and run by Oligarchs who buy elections and Monopolies running rampant in America.. Wait. Isn’t this a Trump rallying cry and one called as total bullshit by the left. Now you got the communist (Democrat Socialist ) letting us know how shitty our county is.

Sitting at George Washington’s desk no less. Happy 250th!!

[dabrockster]

I think you are assuming the government-run stores' purpose is to make money where private stores have either abandoned the area or failed. I don't think they view that as the store's purpose at all. If it loses money, that's simply a subsidy they are willing to make to ensure that people in poor areas have access to some food. The gross revenue simply offsets the subsidy they are willing to pay in the first place. It's kind of like their concept of free public college. The government doesn't need to make any money off it, and if it loses money, that's okay, because it's an investment in people. As a business, sure, it's probably a dog. As a government-sponsored provider of food, it has a different mission. See also BYU's mission and tuition rates.

Not even comparable to BYU’s mission nor our welfare program. And while it is not built to be a revenue generating store, it should be one wheee it can bama CE its books annually rather than take a loss each year.

This is just the one in Kansas City. It may still be open but is still draining money from the city to even stay open.

Year	Public funding
2014–2018	~$17 million (capital investment)
2024	~$750,000
2025	~$1.36 million (emergency funding, rent relief, and legal settlement)
2026	~$500,000 authorized for reopening support

It’s worth noting that these later annual amounts were not intended to cover all operating costs. The grocery operator also incurred substantial losses. For example, the nonprofit operating the store reported spending more than $4 million of its own funds, and the store lost approximately $885,000 in one year and $1.3 million in another.


https://www.kansascity.com/news/loca...311717987.html

[LVAllen]

Byu's mission is not to make money, or even to break even in tuition vs expenses. Despite the use of the term University in its name, BYU's goal is not to produce scholars. Because its mission is unrelated to the revenue it produces, a situation in which the Church spends money every year to keep BYU open isn't a metric to judge the mission's success.

In a COMPARABLE manner, the mission of a government-run grocery store is not to make a profit. It is to provide food in an area where private grocery stores may not be doing so. You may think that is a unwise investment, and that's okay. But just pointing to a store and complaining that the city needs to keep spending to keep it open ignores what the city is actually spending money towards. Why do you think a service needs to balance its books?

[Moliere]

Byu's mission is not to make money, or even to break even in tuition vs expenses. Despite the use of the term University in its name, BYU's goal is not to produce scholars. Because its mission is unrelated to the revenue it produces, a situation in which the Church spends money every year to keep BYU open isn't a metric to judge the mission's success.

In a COMPARABLE manner, the mission of a government-run grocery store is not to make a profit. It is to provide food in an area where private grocery stores may not be doing so. You may think that is an unwise investment, and that's okay. But just pointing to a store and complaining that the city needs to keep spending to keep it open ignores what the city is actually spending money towards. Why do you think a service needs to balance its books?

I agree with what you are saying. However, I think it’s reasonable to ask why a private grocery store can’t operate at a profit in the area when they seem to be doing fine in other areas. Is it unjust government regulation? Is crime too high?

[LVAllen]

I agree with what you are saying. However, I think it’s reasonable to ask why a private grocery store can’t operate at a profit in the area when they seem to be doing fine in other areas. Is it unjust government regulation? Is crime too high?

It could be a number of factors, including property cost, insurance cost, chasing higher margin locations. Lower income areas cost more to insure, and the food deserts are all over the area, but especially in low-income zones. New York has been studying this issue for a while: https://www.nyc.gov/html/misc/pdf/going_to_market.pdf

[frank ryan]

It could be a number of factors, including property cost, insurance cost, chasing higher margin locations. Lower income areas cost more to insure, and the food deserts are all over the area, but especially in low-income zones. New York has been studying this issue for a while: https://www.nyc.gov/html/misc/pdf/going_to_market.pdf

Little kids lives are shortened and complicated because of food deserts . Capitalism doesn't see enough reward to address the issue. Governments should help with stuff like this

[Jeff Lebowski]

It could be a number of factors, including property cost, insurance cost, chasing higher margin locations. Lower income areas cost more to insure, and the food deserts are all over the area, but especially in low-income zones. New York has been studying this issue for a while: https://www.nyc.gov/html/misc/pdf/going_to_market.pdf

From the same people who brought you rent control.

[LVAllen]

From the same people who brought you rent control.

I guess you take issue with the Planning Commission's recommendations to modify land use regulations to make it less expensive for supermarkets and to keep supermarkets in mind when considering future rezoning?

[dabrockster]

Byu's mission is not to make money, or even to break even in tuition vs expenses. Despite the use of the term University in its name, BYU's goal is not to produce scholars. Because its mission is unrelated to the revenue it produces, a situation in which the Church spends money every year to keep BYU open isn't a metric to judge the mission's success.

In a COMPARABLE manner, the mission of a government-run grocery store is not to make a profit. It is to provide food in an area where private grocery stores may not be doing so. You may think that is an unwise investment, and that's okay. But just pointing to a store and complaining that the city needs to keep spending to keep it open ignores what the city is actually spending money towards. Why do you think a service needs to balance its books?

It may not be the mission to make a profit. I can agree with that, but it should also not be such a failure that it loses so much money. The majority of nonprofits rely on donations and also must balance their budget as well. It has not worked and I do not see it ever effectively working especially if it is government run.

comparing the church with a government program to me is not. One has a mission based on religious beliefs while the other is run by corruptible men.

[frank ryan]

I guess you take issue with the Planning Commission's recommendations to modify land use regulations to make it less expensive for supermarkets and to keep supermarkets in mind when considering future rezoning?

Let them eat cake!

[Moliere]

From the same people who brought you rent control.

I don’t know the intricacies of NYC regulations to have an informed opinion on this (I doubt anyone on this board does either) but it’s not unlike NYC to over regulate things to the point that the city has to step in to save residents from the cities own regulations. That’s exactly what rent control does. It makes investment in housing untenable and the city then has to step in and subsidize housing in one for or fashion. Food deserts naturally exist in more rural areas but it’s weird they exist in a very large city with great population density. You can’t go more than a block or two in Paris without running into a grocery store so I’m not sure why NYC is so bad.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I don’t know the intricacies of NYC regulations to have an informed opinion on this (I doubt anyone on this board does either) but it’s not unlike NYC to over regulate things to the point that the city has to step in to save residents from the cities own regulations. That’s exactly what rent control does. It makes investment in housing untenable and the city then has to step in and subsidize housing in one for or fashion. Food deserts naturally exist in more rural areas but it’s weird they exist in a very large city with great population density. You can’t go more than a block or two in Paris without running into a grocery store so I’m not sure why NYC is so bad.

Rent control is idiotic.

[LVAllen]

It may not be the mission to make a profit. I can agree with that, but it should also not be such a failure that it loses so much money. The majority of nonprofits rely on donations and also must balance their budget as well. It has not worked and I do not see it ever effectively working especially if it is government run.

comparing the church with a government program to me is not. One has a mission based on religious beliefs while the other is run by corruptible men.

Problem: People in a particular geographic location have difficulty accessing fresh food. Consumption of fresh fruits and vegetables lead to better medical outcomes and reduced strokes and heart disease, thereby reducing demand in emergency departments, which is a good thing. This is a combination of supermarkets not being in the geographical area as well as difficulty accessing transportation to farther away locations. Low income means lower access to private vehicles.

Solution: You can provide food directly, using the purchasing power of the government to negotiate lower prices. Issue with that is political capital to do that, as well as long-term competition with private businesses (both supermarkets and existing convenience stores, which are called bodegas for some reason). As an alternative, you can provide subsidies to purchase food. See above for political capital. Also, where transportation is an issue, subsidizing the purchase of food doesn't help, and is more likely to result in subsiding of non-fresh food in local bodegas.

Solution: increase public transportation to improve access to existing supermarkets. See above for political capital.

Solution: subsidize or reduce barriers to supermarket entry. Still relies on private enterprises to actually enter.

Solution: Embrace the label of socialism and work on a government/private partnership in a supermarket?

People need access to better food for better health. The BYU Board of Trustees isn't going hogwild and promising the moon and a degree for a $1, but their mission is to develop educated disciples. They are willing to invest in that every year. I don't think the New York City Council is likely to go hogwild and promise steak and lobster for free, but their goal is to improve food accessibility. The "loss" is simply their investment towards that goal.