Grocery store socialism

I am not optimistic. Trader Joe’s (and I presume Lidl and Aldi) have limited SKUs that are all private label. They run at something like 3-5% net margin, I imagine. They’re the best at what they do—cheap groceries. Repurposing a quote from Buffett, I’d sooner wrestle grizzlies than compete with the Albrechts and their progeny.

It’s just dopey to think an city-run grocery chain, working with “private operators”, is going to get anywhere close to them on price. Unless those “private operators” are Trader Joe’s and whatnot, which won’t fly because it means it’d just be a city-run store in name only since every SKU is a Trader Joe’s label. The other “private operators” are unable to compete on price. I doubt the benefit of forgoing 3-5% of net margin and free rent will offset the cost of labor with generous city union level pay & benefits. Cue in the NY Post articles comparing prices against Trader Joe’s.

On the other hand, I’m confident free buses will be cheaper than the competition.

I do not see this as even presenting any opportunity to forego the net margin (and an Economist article back when this was first proposed put the typical grocery store number under 2%), as the operator presumably is going to want to earn a similar margin to operate its own store or someone else's store, and as Inonada points out it is likely to have a higher than typical labor cost carry under some city contract. The only savings is the taxpayer-funded build-out costs amortized over its useful life (assuming some tenant could not get landlord concessions in a private deal to defray some of those costs in retail starved areas), and what recent articles have suggested would be $250k in foregone annual rent. No math or enthusiastic speeches can translate that into materially lower prices.

Isn’t the whole purpose to win election? And spend tax payer money on uneconomic stuff?

@300_mercer - you nailed it. It's grandstanding to his youthful, economically illiterate audience.

MTH, May be I have become too cynical as I age. I think the politicians know what is economic and uneconomic. And on the voter side, when a small percentage of voters pay a large $ percentage of total taxes, voters who don’t pay much taxes think more in terms of redistribution and free money to them rather than what is economic even though many of them know what is economic.

We have it at the federal level two on both sides of the aisle. All the politicians know how to reduce the deficit as they can read the Congressional Budget office report on that.

Or in other words, there is a big difference between what is economic as a whole and what is economic for sub sets of voters. Every subset of voters is voting their economic interest and people who contribute the most to the pot don’t have enough votes. That is why every one rails against the rich as it is in their economic / political interest.

I don't know where these are actually going to be placed, but the concept is to fight food deserts . So they wouldn't be competing against Albrechts. They would not be competing with other supermarkets. They would be competing against high priced bodegas

Enjoy this video, my StreetEasy friends. I recommend breaks every 5 minutes to breathe deeply as you are watching it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/22/opinion/shoplifting-political-protest-microlooting-whole-foods.html?unlocked_article_code=1.c1A.Q9X3.BB4TxkD3E7de&smid=nytcore-ios-share

“I don't know where these are actually going to be placed, but the concept is to fight food deserts . So they wouldn't be competing against Albrechts. They would not be competing with other supermarkets. They would be competing against high priced bodegas”

Call me a little cynical. Harlem is hardly a food desert. In fact, I did a little research, the proposed site of this socialist grocery store is exactly 0.8 miles from an Aldi and 0.9 miles from a LIDL, two of the lowest priced grocery store in the entire United States. The concept is not to fight food deserts. It is to make unrealistic yet highly popular promises to naive New Yorkers (who lack any understanding of basic economics) about dramatically lowering their cost of living and at the same time screwing the “rich”. And these promises, no matter how far-fetched and unrealistic, are made to get elected. You know what? It worked.

30yrs>> I don't know where these are actually going to be placed, but the concept is to fight food deserts . So they wouldn't be competing against Albrechts. They would not be competing with other supermarkets. They would be competing against high priced bodegas.

The East Harlem one will be at 115th and Park, in a place called La Marqueta. The closest full grocery store is 0.1 miles away: City Fresh Market, around the corner, 24/7, rated 4.2 in Google reviews. Moreover, there are Trader Joe's, Aldi, and LIDL all just under a mile in directions west, north, and east. So to me, not exactly a food desert for much of anyone in any direction. Take a look and tell me what you think.

For comparison, the closest grocery store to me is 0.4 miles and rated about the same. I have a Trader Joe's 0.9 miles away. The closest Aldi is 7 miles (the same one in East Harlem!), but thankfully there's a LIDL a mere 2.2 miles away. So I'm in more of a food desert than that, it seems.

@inonada Wow. Although I have to say I feel very differently about intellectual property rights (patent law) vs physical goods. Patents drive prices up for consumers and stifle innovation. So maybe they should be reformed. (This is half baked but maybe for things that are critical to human flourishing - medicine, a cure for cancer, etc - the government creates a bounty - a one time 'thank you from civilization' fund.) When it comes to food, *because* it's food, stealing it is somehow worse. Theft drives prices up for everyone. All the people in that conversation are credentialed knowledge workers. Again, they have been steeped in post-modernist thought. ''One has to belong to the intelligentsia to believe things like that; no ordinary man could be such a fool'' - Orwell

From Wikipedia: Early life and education
Hasan Doğan Piker was born on July 25, 1991, in New Brunswick, New Jersey, to Turkish parents. He grew up in Istanbul and was raised as a Muslim.[6][7] His father's family emigrated from Thessaloniki and Crete, Greece, to Turkey.[8] His father, Mehmet Behçet Piker, is a political scientist and economist who served on the board of directors (and as vice president) of Sabancı Holding, and who is a founding member of the conservative Future Party in Turkey.[9][10] His mother, Ülker Sedef Piker (née Uygur),[11][12] is an art and architectural historian teaching at the New Jersey Institute of Technology.[13][14] His uncle, Cenk Uygur, is a political commentator and co-founder of The Young Turks, a left-leaning news network.[15]

Piker returned to the United States and attended the University of Miami, then transferred to Rutgers University, where he joined the Theta Delta Chi fraternity. In 2013, he graduated cum laude from Rutgers with a double major in political science and communication studies.[16][7][17] Piker then moved to Los Angeles, California.[18] In 2021, he bought a $2.7 million, 3,800-square-foot (350 m²) house in West Hollywood.[19] Most of Piker's streams have been filmed in his house.[18]

MTH>> Theft drives prices up for everyone. All the people in that conversation are credentialed knowledge workers.

No it doesn’t. As they explained, it’s all built into the shrinkage factor. They expect—no they *want* you to steal.

300>> even though many of them know what is economic

I’m not sure these set of folks know Whole Foods net profit margin in their last year of full operations as a standalone company was 3%. They just seem to know: (a) big, bad corporation; (b) unfair wages; (c) prices too high.

Plus less than fabulous customer service considering the prices they charge.

Jerry Seinfeld: So we're gonna make the Post Office pay for my new stereo now?
Kramer: It's a write-off for them.
Jerry: How is it a write-off?
Kramer: They just write it off.
Jerry: Write it off what?
Kramer: Jerry, all these big companies, they write off everything.
Jerry: You don't even know what a write-off is.
Kramer: Do you?
Jerry: No, I don't.
Kramer: But they do, and they're the ones writing it off.

Nada, Isn’t communism on a very fundamental basis fight between labor and capital about $s? Or redistribution of wealth. Pie is fixed. The people in NYT interview are trying to further their own economic interests by creating a following on social media.

Just like Bernie thinks it is fine to get (somewhat) rich by writing a book. But if he employed people to write a book, any profit really belongs to the people writing it in his world.

People stealing from Duane Reade are getting the goods for free - their economic interest.

When people rail again concentration of wealth, they believe that at least some resources are fixed and there wouldn’t be enough left for them. And they would be right about prime housing location.

It is not free market economics as we call economics in financial world but economics nonetheless.

And I am so cynical that the interview didn’t bother me one bit. I have met a few such people in Park Slope who live in a few million $ houses.

And why many people feel it is fine to steal intellectual property - mostly likely they don’t see any incremental labor cost. It is just profit going to a rich corporation.

I found it mostly incoherent.

“Stealing a $1 lemon is just, because the big bad corporation is going to give 3 cents to evil shareholders, of which 2.7 cents will go to pensions and 401ks and individuals and whatnot, but then 0.3 cents is going to big bad Bezos… who’s just gonna end up giving it all to liberal causes like his ex-wife.”

I remember a good (left-leaning) friend in college used to tell people who spoke such nonsense, “I’m sure that sounds real compelling to you right now, but wait until you try play that BS in the real world”. Well, the joke’s on him because HasanAbi is richer than his poor double-doctor household!

Pointing out that they are placing one in a non-food desert has nothing to do with the fact they work in food deserts

The best part about self checkout at Whole Foods is that every second item is free.

>> Pointing out that they are placing one in a non-food desert has nothing to do with the fact they work in food deserts

Putting them in a food desert might be a great idea. But putting one of five in a such an obvious non-desert, spending $30M of a $70M budget to boot, speaks of a greater interest in political theater than good policy. The people who put Mamdani in office do enjoy political theater, no doubt. I was just hoping they’d receive some good policy along the way.

>> The best part about self checkout at Whole Foods is that every second item is free.

Yeah, that’s why I prefer Trader Joe’s. Not only do the tighter SKUs keep everything more fresh, but I’d rather pay highly efficient workers (they’re a marvel to watch) than subsidize ethically challenged customers.

I would actually support getting rid of self-checkout all together. Trader Joe’s doesn’t have it and despite very long lines (have you been to the store in UWS on Broadway??), things move efficiently. Theft is so much easier in the self-checkout as there is always plausible denial (oh, I simply forgot to scan that, oh, I thought I scanned that, etc…). I notice in some grocery stores they have tightened the motion sensors and cameras so there will a warning/alert if you pass an item from your cart to your bag without scanning but in my experience, there are almost TOO sensitive, going off at the slightest “unusual “ movement, requiring an employee to come and reset the alarm, which takes time. I liked the concept of self-checkout but unfortunately the temptation to shoplift ruins it for the honest shoppers

Yeah, I find the whole thing inefficient. Professionals are much faster than customers at scanning, and they know the numbers on produce (the good ones, anyways). And at a place like TJ, they bring additional efficiency by charging either by the piece or box than by weight.

The worst are the self-checkouts who try to track you by the weight of items placed into the checkout area / scale. Sometimes you want to place the scanned item elsewhere, sometimes you need to remove a full bag, sometimes the item weight is wrong in their computer. In all cases, you get delayed until the store rep scans you while you both roll your eyes. And to what end? If someone is trying to steal, the effective route is to bypass scanning and placement on the checkout scale.

I try to avoid stores where the base premise is that their workers’ time is more valuable than mine.

I have a hard time spending more than $40 at TJ's. And can never escape WFs without parting with at least $50.

On self checkout, Whole Foods Union Square just has so few cashiers that self check out is faster. In my mind, self checkout is reducing the employment opportunities for people who need it the most. Or owner weighing the cost of stealing vs cost of honest labor. I still shop at Wholefood as it is just 200 meters closer to me and I find quality of certain things better. And there are more choices at Whole Foods.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/marks-spencer-ms-supermarket-self-checkouts-shoplifting-b2964364.html

I get deliveries of basics from Wholefoods on Tuesdays and shop in-person at TJ or LIDL on Saturdays

I like to bake and for baking ingredients (flour, sugar, milk, eggs, etc…), Target has very good prices, often less than TJ. Their store brand of Greek Yogurt and peanut butter is also on par with Aldi and Lidl prices. Not many people think of Target for groceries, and they are very limited in terms of meat, seafood, produce but for other basics they are not bad at all. I dislike that every Target I’ve shopped in, the food section is always way at the back of the store, forcing you to walk past all the other stuff they want to try to sell you, I’m guessing their margins on food are very low and they are hoping you will buy other stuff. Our Target is 5 mins from our home and it’s been a godsend, I’m probably in that store 5 days a week.