you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

Why not a co-op instead? Owned by members rather than a corporation/shareholders.

On the other hand, if government subsidisation works well for medication (with the PBS) and university (with CSP places), maybe it'd work well for other necessities like food too.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (2 children)

    Like IGA. Pretty sure they’re owned by individuals.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Owned by individual isn't the same thing. Whoever owns the IGA still has an interest in making a profit. A Co-op is like a club where the store is owned by club members. The idea is the store sells everything at/near cost price.

    Whether your co-op can buy cheaper than Colesworth retail prices is a different matter.

    The Government however can in theory buy products at enough scale to be at a comparable wholesale price to Colesworth - and if they start selling at/near wholesale cost price, it can put pressure on the duopoly to actually compete.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    Whether your co-op can buy cheaper than Colesworth retail prices is a different matter.

    Some people are willing to pay a bit more if it means supporting a community store over a big corporate one.

    I'm living in the USA now, and there's a lot more supermarkets here. In my area in California, there's a few local chains with 3-4 stores, some co-ops, and the major stores. The biggest supermarket (Walmart/Sam's Club) only has 20% market share, and even the top 5 companies (Walmart, Kroger, Costco, Albertsons and Ahold Delhaize) still only account for 44% market share. The top 3 in Australia (Coles, Woolworths, and Aldi) account for around 75% market share.

  • source
  • parent