this post was submitted on 06 Feb 2026

159 points (98.8% liked)

News

35749 readers

2504 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 biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.

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. Clickbait titles may be removed.

Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.

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, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.

7. No duplicate posts.

If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. 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 or news aggregators.

All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.

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

JonsJava@lemmy.world

gedaliyah@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

159

Mamdani takes sardonic view of Polymarket’s ‘free grocery store’ stunt in New York (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 1 week ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

38 comments fedilink hide all child comments

This is what Polymarket posted

top 38 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 124 points 1 week ago (6 children)

Mamdani proposed the city-owned stores not have to pay rent or overhead taxes, leading to lower consumer prices. They would buy and sell groceries at wholesale prices, centralize warehousing and distribution, and partner with local neighborhoods to source products.

Thats a great idea actually

[–] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world 40 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I agree, socialism is a great idea.

[–] Saapas@piefed.zip 1 points 1 week ago

Do the workers workung it own the production chain? This seems like it is the city owning some parts, which is publicly owned for sure but different to worker ownership

[–] jimmy90@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

all socialism? or just what you say is socialism

[–] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

I don't claim to be the ultimate authority on what is or is not considered socialism.

[–] enterpries@sh.itjust.works 23 points 1 week ago (1 children)

City-owned, does this mean all 'profit' goes back into the city and the business is not operated in a way to maximize profit?

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 46 points 1 week ago

If they're selling at wholesale prices, there won't be any profit. That's the idea.

It's a good idea. Food should be distributed as efficiently as possible, and a city funded by people's taxes should do that for them. It makes total sense. And sourcing products from local businesses is just a bonus.

[–] JPAKx4@piefed.blahaj.zone 18 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Grocery stores don't have a lot of margins, so this move won't reduce prices by much or at all. What it will do is improve low income areas the "market" has left alone to improve the availability and quality of nearby food. I've heard a lot of people skeptical of the "lower prices" part, when I think the food desert part is a much more important part of the plan tbh.

[–] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 13 points 1 week ago (3 children)

They have low margins because they have high costs (like rent, logistics and insurance stuff), so if those get reduced then they can lower prices by exactly that amount while keeping the same margin.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 2 points 1 week ago

And presumably, higher wages can be included in the formula as well as lower prices.

[–] village604@adultswim.fan 1 points 1 week ago

Not to mention spoilage

[–] JPAKx4@piefed.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 week ago

That makes sense, but it does mean the private grocery stores won't lower their prices in response. So unfortunately it won't have as good of an effect as affordable housing can have, but still a positive one where these are created.

[–] AliasAKA@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

One thing to also note, is that grocery margins are tight after they give shareholders and c level staff hundreds of millions of dollars. In other words, if you’re not intent on making a profit and distributing that profit only to billionaires and friends, there’s plenty of space to subsidize costs even before accounting for tax breaks (which probably net even) and controlled rent factors.

People shouldn’t get wealthy off selling groceries while people go hungry.

[–] village604@adultswim.fan 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Not all grocery stores are corporate owned and they still have thin margins.

[–] AliasAKA@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

That’s where rent control and tax breaks come in, as well as scale if you’re opening multiple stores. I’m not aware of a large non profit grocery chain.

[–] nandeEbisu@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

Low margins because they're expected to have returns equal or better than alternative investments. If they drop below that, then its not worth running a grocery store and you might as well liquidate and put your money where it will make higher returns.

If you don't care about that, or can even run on a slight loss with some taxpayer subsidies then you can make the food a lot more affordable.

[–] redhat421@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

It could be subsidized. In that case you could easily save money over retail stores.

Note that some grocery items are sold below cost at retail stores as part of a loss leader strategy (milk for example).

[–] jimmy90@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

as i just learned in another lemmy post the US military call it a commisary

which is also socialist btw because we're on lemmy

[–] redhat421@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

The US commissaries are subsidized and provide a mandatory ~23% savings on prices over retail stores.

NYC could totally do the same thing if they wanted.

More Perfect Union has a breakdown on this, it's pretty good/ informative.

[–] VitoRobles@lemmy.today 9 points 1 week ago

I want this to work. NYC is massive and has a lot of money. But it only works with a strong arm, because individual greedy fucks always ruin things. Like if a distributor wants to monopolize specific products and forces NYC to pay higher than average prices. Or some shitty politician wants bribes to get the expensive product over the cheaper alternative.

Costco does show that it works.

They have such an efficient system to transport goods from their warehouses to customers, and can enforce pricing on the goods they buy at scale. Everyone has to play by Costco's rules, and consumers get a lot of savings (and appreciation) of the brand.

[+] yes_this_time@lemmy.world -11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

The government has a responsibility to ensure policies drive affordable food prices, but a government run grocery stores seems like a terrible idea.

[–] monkeyslikebananas2@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago

So instead of a government-run country, we have a billionaire-run one? What’s wrong with the “government” making sure that we prioritize getting people better, cheaper, healthier food?

[–] muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 week ago

It’s government run not government mandated. Don’t like it? Shop elsewhere. Want something better? Prove your point by making something better.

[–] qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The model certainly works for other things

municipal broadband in the USA is often very well regarded.

[–] yes_this_time@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago

I don't disagree with public broadband it's a natural monopoly

[–] pycorax@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

What's wrong with that? Where I live, we have government run (technically run by an company that's owned by a government investment holding but close enough) and a number of private companies. Everything's fine.

[–] yes_this_time@lemmy.world -4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

The only way I could see it making sense is if a government was doing it as an exercise to understand what it takes to open a business.

What environment have governments created where no one wants to open a grocery business?

Is it overly dominated by a handful of large corporations? Should these be taxed or broken up to make the market more competitive? Is the supply chain competitive or is it also not competitive?

Should government socialize insurance costs instead, for businesses that drive public good? Or other incentives like health coverage?

Are there bylaws and zoning barriers that are making entry prohibitive?

These are areas I think governments should be in, not operating a retail store. Policy is their area of expertise and has major impact.

[–] liuther9@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Tell me why it has to be opened by some businessman?

[–] yes_this_time@lemmy.world -2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Because of things like this:

Round tables and town halls for apple varieties, 8 years to get a shop underway... absolutely ridiculous.

There is obviously an issue, and government has a role, but this isn't it

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/jul/25/mamdani-nyc-public-grocery-stores

"According to Overstreet, the councilmember from Atlanta, community buy-in is key. In her district, Overstreet sought feedback about what kinds of products community members wanted access to, down to the preferred variety of apple. Overstreet and her team did this through roundtables, pop-up meetings, and both paper and online questionnaires to try to reach the widest array of people"

"Lastly, noted Christine Caruso, Myer’s co-author on the grocery store research, it is worth reminding community members that such an initiative will take time to realize. Overstreet noted that it took her eight years of work to get the new grocery store in her district under way."

[–] pycorax@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

What environment have governments created where no one wants to open a grocery business?

I'm not sure we're even remotely talking about the same type of environments. I think you're blowing these far out if proportion. It's simply a company that's run like a regular company except owned by the government who sets up supermarkets along side numerous other supermarket companies.

Policy is their area of expertise and has major impact.

The people running the stores and figuring how this works are experts in this field, not the member of parliament that the public has elected. Governments are more than the executive and legislative branches, the agencies and other bodies also exist.

[–] yes_this_time@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

It's not just a government run store, the products sold are being subsidized. Which is quite unfair to any small businesses/independents who have invested in the blast radius. Will they be compensated? (I'm not concerned about the large corps).

It wouldn't surprise me if NYC saw a net reduction in grocery stores as a result.

So public money to subsidize costs of goods, and public money to subsidize costs of less efficient operations.

Is this the most effective use of public dollars?

I see NYC has incentives to open up grocery stores, good idea. Starting footprint is 5k sq feet.. why so large? That would require something like an a million dollar build out... who is that incentive for?

[–] Proprietary_Blend@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Agreed. The government can barely run itself.

[–] carrotfox@piefed.social 19 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Lmao his response was great: https://archive.is/JdNYG

[–] kbobabob@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I'm not sure what you're trying to link but here is the actual response.

https://xcancel.com/NYCMayor/status/2019105073423327680?s=20

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 16 points 1 week ago

Polymarket's "free grocery store" will not be permanent. It will be a limited time, 5 day pop-up.

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 8 points 1 week ago

Everyone in the comments is acting so surprised, like did they think he would turn into a square just because he won an election?

But then again, it's twatter, so anyone still on there is either an uncritical automaton or a neonazi...

[–] carrotfox@piefed.social 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's an archived version of the tweet

[–] kbobabob@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 week ago

Ah, it wouldn't load for me