Skip to main content

Government Grocery Stores: A Solution or the Next Food Desert?

 In an era of skyrocketing food prices and growing concern over so-called "food deserts", New York Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani has introduced a strikingly bold proposal: city-owned grocery stores, one in each borough of New York City. The idea, at first glance, appeals toa  certain intuitive sense of justice–public land, public money, and public access to food.

But as history, economics, and pragmatic governance suggest, the reality is likely far more complex–and potentially dangerous for the very communities Mamdani aims to help.

The Proposal

Mamdani's plan centers on building municipal grocery stores using city-owned land. These stores would not pay rent, would not operate for profit, and would offer goods at wholesale prices. In theory, this would undercut large private retailers and make food more affordable for low-income residents.

The stated goal: eliminate food deserts–neighborhoods where fresh, healthy food is hard to access.

A Familiar Problem

The USDA estimates that over 53 million Americans live in areas with limited access to grocery stores. In cities like New York, these food deserts often overlap with areas experiencing economic hardship and racial inequality.

There is no doubt that access to food is a moral issue. Poor nutrition correlates strongly with chronic illness, reduced educational outcomes, and higher mortality rates.

But does that justify government-run grocery stores?

Public Sector Retail: A Historical Caution

The United States has limited experience with government-operated grocery stores, but what exists should caution reformers. In Baldwin, Florida, a city-run grocery store opened in 2018 to great fanfare. It closed within a year. In rural Kansas, the town of Erie supports a municipal grocery store–barely. It operates at a financial loss, requires volunteer labor, and receives donations to stay afloat.

Municipalities are rarely successful at competing in high-turnover, low-margin retail environments. Grocery stores typically run on 1-3% net profit. Any miscalculation in supply chain, management, or local demand can mean failure.

And unlike private businesses, government-run stores rarely close quietly–they drain taxpayer funds long after they stop serving their purpose.

The Risk of Crowding Out

Perhaps the most serious unintended consequence of Mamdani's proposal is the potential for market displacement. If city-run stores operate tax-free, rent-free, and without profit expectations, they will artificially depress food prices–at least initially.

This sounds like a win, but in reality, it undermines neighboring bodegas, immigrant-owned shops, and chain stores that already operate on tight margins. If those stores close, and the municipal alternative fails (as so many have), the result is not food access–but a food desert created by government intervention.

In trying to solve a problem, we may destroy the fragile web of private infrastructure keeping it at bay.

Pragmatic Alternatives

This is not a rejection of the goal–only the method. If the true objective is better access to affordable food, the U.S. has examples of effective public-private cooperation:
  • In Washington, D.C., the Healthy Food Retail Program offers grants to small grocers to expand produce.
  • Pittsburgh has used zoning and subsidies to encourage supermarket development in underserved areas.
  • Mobile markets and food shuttles have proven highly effective in rural and urban neighborhoods alike.
  • Some cities have used voucher expansions, allowing SNAP recipients to get more value when buying fresh food.
These models work with existing grocers, not against them. They don't require the city to become a retailer–but they help ensure every resident has somewhere to buy a tomato.

Final Thoughts

Zohran Mamdani's proposal is well-intentioned, and it taps into the real frustrations of working-class families watching food prices rise. But policy cannot be judged on intentions alone.

We must ask: Will this work? Will it help? Will it last?

Unless municipal grocery stores are managed with unprecedented discipline, transparency, and neutrality–they are more likely to collapse or cannibalize local competition than solve food insecurity.

We need solutions that are rooted in reality, tested in the market, and open to accountability.

I believe in practical answers to real problems–not political theater. Food deserts are a moral challenge. But so is spending public funds on programs that fail the people they're meant to serve.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The OBBBA: The Great, The Good, and The Disappointing

  As of the time that I am writing this the House appears set to approve the final provisions of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. President Donald Trump appears set to secure his landmark legislative achievement 164 days since the commencement of his second term. There is no doubt that this piece of legislation will be the centerpiece of his presidency, likely surpassing the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act in his future presidential biographies. Although I have not been shy in recent days critiquing specific provisions of the bill, I do wholeheartedly believe that on net, the OBBBA will be a positive step for the United States of America and should be applauded. However, in a 940-page bill, in a Congress with the narrowest of majorities, from a Republican Party that has become a broad coalition of anti-leftist, oftentimes contradicting, interests, that there will be provisions that pass that aren’t ideal. Nevertheless, let’s breakdown the One Big Beautiful Bill Act with the great, the goo...
Post a Comment
Read more

I'm Proud To Be An American

It is a strange thing to be born into a nation that both saves and sins. Stranger still to love it. Stranger still, perhaps, not to. In April of 1945, U.S. soldiers liberated Buchenwald. What they found—bodies stacked like cordwood, children too weak to stand—shattered the postwar illusion that history had been moving gradually toward progress. It was a revelation not just of evil, but of its capability to flourish in silence. The United States did not discover evil in Europe. But it confronted it. And more importantly, it resolved to restrain it—not through imperial dominion, but through the creation of institutions, alliances, and post-war norms built on ideas. That moment—when force was met with order, when liberty stared down nihilism—is one of many reasons I am proud to be an American. Because to be an American is not merely to occupy land within borders. It is to be formed by a proposition. And to be responsible for it.
Post a Comment
Read more

Deportation Isn’t Genocide. Let’s Stop Pretending It Is

Lately, I’ve been seeing a lot of people compare President Trump’s deportation efforts to Nazi Germany. Honestly, it’s getting out of hand. It’s not just inaccurate—it’s offensive, too. This isn’t about politics for me. It’s about facts. We can’t let our emotions run wild and twist reality. Deportation is not the same thing as genocide. Not even close. Let’s Start With the Basics Deportation isn’t some new, cruel invention. It didn’t start with Trump. It didn’t start with Bush. It didn’t even start with Obama—although, for the record, Obama deported more people than any president in U.S. history. Millions. He was literally called the “Deporter-in-Chief” by immigration activists. But suddenly now, when Trump talks about deportation, it’s being painted as the start of a fascist regime? Come on. There’s a difference between disliking a policy and misrepresenting it completely. You can be against deportations. That’s fine. But calling it “Nazi-like” is not just wrong—it’s ridiculous. Histo...
Post a Comment
Read more