Yes but what about his goal of implementing Shakira Law in NY???
What will you do if it’s illegal for hips to lie?
Yes but what about his goal of implementing Shakira Law in NY???
What will you do if it’s illegal for hips to lie?
Having been a rapper works well for him. The dude has way with words and knows how to roast others.
Since this is the Pragmatic Leftist Theory, I will say this:
Mamdani is not really enough, sure, he's doing a lot, but I don't think he can carry the movement alone. But that's fine. What the Left desperately needs is to regain trust lost after the decades of being run by authoritarians that didn't give two shits about workers. The Left needs someone who can attract and unite different people. We need a surplus of left-Liberals that can be radicalized. And I don't think Mamdani is doing a bad job in that.
Yeah, Mamdani isn't a savior, but he's an extremely positive figure for the left's PR in the USA, and a sign of hope for the younger generation's views, the same way that Bernie's surge of support in 2016 was after decades of 'socialism' being a poison word in US politics.
So naturally the "no matter who" wing of the party tried to sink him, after the primaries.
Lol, Puggy downvoted you. He really hates you even though it's pragmatic leftist to acknowledge the rat fucking the DNC does to keep trump in power. https://lemvotes.org/comment/lemmy.world/comment/23318694
Mamdani is how you rebuild that trust and then get to "really enough". After decades of normalizing extreme right and corporate oligarchies, he is even a quite large jump in the correct direction as can be measured by reaction of other politicians, including democrats, to him. Purism is the enemy of change.
Authoritarian and control by wealth, whether it be corporate or billionaire.
The money propping up the authoritarians is the issue.
Because profit-motivated grocery stores can't afford to service these areas, but people still need to be able to eat.
So that working class people will have a place where they can afford to buy groceries at
Non-profit food. Huge difference.
And if the city owns the land, there will also be significant cost savings long-term in rent and property tax.
Imagine how much 'profits' is absorbed by shareholders that could've went back to the public.
If you're thinking that means government run grocery stores are unrealistic keep in mind that they already exist for the military. They're called commissaries and they sell groceries for significantly cheaper prices than private grocery stores, but they are open only to service-members and their families. We are perfectly capable of providing robust social services, but the state wants to keep it exclusive so they have an incentive for people living in poverty to join the military.
This video by More Perfect Union talks about them at length. If I remember right, it is literally required by law to be cheaper overall (25% savings across the board) with a default pricing of cost plus 1% and a variable pricing model where common staples like eggs and milk are sold at a loss and it's made up for on more niche items. They're tax-subsidized through the military, and it's an incredibly tiny portion of the budget. Some locations operate at a loss but they're not allowed to close any stores so that's why they need the subsidies.
So in short, yes, government run shops are cheaper because they're tax-subsidized, and are not required to profit or even break even. Personally I don't see any problem with government operating grocery stores at a loss to provide the working class with affordable groceries and having the rich foot the bill. In fact, I'd say that's the whole point.
Sounds like a good argument for more government run grocery stores.
It mostly means government run doesn’t necessarily mean cheaper.
We've seen that in a lot of cases, corporate-run means not present at all.
Don’t be dense. Food is already subsidized in multiple ways, but those subsidies go into corporate profit margins. This store offers the benefits of subsidy to the common person.
Don’t change the subject. You didn’t ask for details. You said “so subsidized food?”, which is pointing out the obvious. Seems like you’re here to continue arguing instead of just googling the answer, so I’ll fetch the info for you and anyone else who might be curious:
Mayor Zohran Mamdani said during a press conference on Tuesday that New York City’s planned city-run grocery stores would not be traditional municipally staffed supermarkets. Instead, the city would own the land, cover major overhead costs and bring in a private operator to sell staple foods at discounted prices, starting with a Manhattan site near La Marqueta in East Harlem.
…
“The city will subsidize a core set of staples,” he said. “A private operator will run the store, but they answer to the standards that the city will set.” Those standards, he said, would mean lower prices on basics like bread and eggs.
Source: AMNY.com.
I, for one, learned something from this response. Thank you for posting it. You've saved maybe dozens of people from having to search themselves.
Oh god the terror of searching for information myself
You really can't be bothered to spend 30 seconds googling something?
if they hadn't asked the question, we wouldn't have this discussion and i wouldn't have bothered to even learn something about this topic. so i learned about the project in more detail than if it had only been mentioned in a headline and i forgot to search for it myself.
If you're looking for specifics, you could have short circuited this whole thread by typing your original comment into a search engine, instead of posting it in a discussion forum
https://www.amny.com/news/how-mamdanis-city-run-grocery-plan-would-work/
If you really just wanted information, you wouldn't be so confrontational right now.
I think people aren't hurling abuses at you for just asking a question. It's more that your original comment "Why does he want a city run grocery store?" sounds like you didn't even spend 1 second to think about the question yourself.
why would anybody want a city run grocery store? what could possibly be the reason? is it maybe sothat the city can better control what the grocery store does? such as setting food prices? on a politics platform that specifically promised cheaper cost of living for the people? hmmm ...
if you had just guessed some response to your own question and then asked for confirmation, i guess people would respond more empathically, as you would have shown that you even thought about this topic for 10 seconds yourself.
this way, it takes you 2 seconds to write the question and other people 5 minutes to write a well-balanced answer, which is just mean and unfair to them.
People are hurling "abuse" at you because you're acting like a giant fucking asshole in a public space.
If I were you, I'd feel lucky that you're safely online and acting like this within arm's reach of people.
You did not want a discussion. You wanted someone to spoon feed you information.
He wanted to state republican/centrist talking points, but thought that putting a question mark at the end gave him cover.
That shit was old when Glenn Beck was still relevant.
I'm also free to call out disingenuous and lazy people
I‘m just asking a question.
I would like to know more about these groceries store plans.
Then why are you asking Lemmy instead of a search engine? Or just reading the mayor's platform?
only one you responded to was someone reacting negatively, yah your not good at hiding your bad faith.
“Just asking questions” can very easily come across in a way that you didn’t intend. Perhaps you were genuinely curious, but more often than not jumping into a controversial topic it can come across not as genuine curiosity and willingness to know more, but instead more like:
If that's what you want to call "ensuring working class people have access to food", then yeah, sure, subsidized food.
No, it's run at cost, but what's so wrong about subsidizing food at the consumer level? We already do it for the owners of megafarms.
Do you live every day in terror of poor people being able to eat?
The only two nations in the entire world that voted in the UN against a resolution to recognise food as a human right were... the USA and Isreal.
Expensive basic goods and food deserts are a big problem in urban America.
Are you genuinely stupid or merely pretending to be stupid so you can argue with people in bad faith?
Be specific; cite sources.
I assume it is low or no profit and therefore apart from paying salaries is aimed at getting essential needs to people for as cheap as possible. Being non/low profit and to keep prices low it will likely need support from taxes. So your taxes, instead of going to things like Elon's failed hyperloop will go to something like cheaper affordable essentials. You yourself might not benefit from it that much if you are economicalpy ok but the city will and as a result you will be living in a better city.
i personally think that social housing and public transport are more important than a city-run grocery store because especially housing is something that lots of people pay painful amounts of money to, but city-run grocery stores are certainly an interesting concept that could help people to lower their cost of living. which i think is better than giving the money to billionaires.
The NY major should just force everyone to make a living wage!
...
I think a city run grocery store, social housing, and public transport are all far more in reach of a major's influence than regulations which forces the economy to pay people a living wage.
Why do you want a living wage?
Making a decomotized cashless anarchist society is the actual solution.
Says the guy who is all over the thread shitting on the very idea that the poors should be allowed to eat.
Wasn't Mamdani the one condemning his wife for her open support for Palestine?
Sounds like misinformation spread to fight the only politician in america actually doing shit for its constituency
Reminds me of the Kat situation. Was getting flanked by Democrats, but also the most anti-Democrat Tankies because of not supporting Hamas (despite being Palestinian). I do think it's our imperative to realize that no matter whether the Tankie movement is CIA-bankrolled or not, we need to leave it behind, as it only hurts us all with no benefit to us (really, the only benefit is to their accounts social media numbers), and start doing a proper peristalsis towards the Left, not a policy of rejecting the politicians closest to us.
Kat situation? I speak as n outsider looking in
What positive actions has he actually taken? Speech not included.
Well, quicker ones so far are the rent freezes and the 100k potholes fixed because he's offering proper compensation for work. Next up are the city owned supermarkets and the tax on >5 mil 2nd houses on NY.
He is actually opening up a city run grocery store and putting all the pieces together right now. Takes a bit more time than fixing potholes to organize, but it is happening.
Besides the other answer that has more substance. He shoveled snow after a snow storm. It was after he got elected so it wasn't only for PR. He was legit helping at the basic level. Showing people that is a good way to lead. The small things add up.
What makes you say that?
I saw a snippet in the same format as this post earlier saying that
My dude...
You need to get better about what you repeat if that's your bar.
If he's got paid assassins like you rolling around then he must be doing something right
'isn't Yliaster only here because he got banned from reddit for being too annoying??'
you know what go fuck yourself with your attempt to pitch people against each other by asking leading questions
top 96 comments