Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Three Body Problem
Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2024 20:11:04 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 71
Message-ID: <v9ud45$2nm39$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v9o5kc$1h770$1@dont-email.me> <v9qqv7$20hol$2@dont-email.me>
 <lc74cjp2dkptokrpvmu6o8lngsil5l302t@4ax.com>
 <lif27iF4ceiU1@mid.individual.net> <v9tqn2$mr$1@panix2.panix.com>
 <lifkd9F73c6U1@mid.individual.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 05:11:02 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="cdfdf5d7ec0c6fe4171f431cfab06430";
	logging-data="2873449"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19Y4hEkMCS/eOe7/9aFTxAP"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:MljWAtdr7FEy0hEDgEkX4DqVHu4=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <lifkd9F73c6U1@mid.individual.net>
Bytes: 5319

On 8/18/2024 6:11 PM, Chris Buckley wrote:
> On 2024-08-18, Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
>> Chris Buckley  <alan@sabir.com> wrote:
>>> How about a quote from 4 days ago?
>>> https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/08/15/kamala-harris-price-gouging-groceries/
>>>     In a news release Wednesday, her campaign said the first 100 days
>>>     of her presidency would include the “first-ever federal ban on
>>>     price gouging on food and groceries — setting clear rules of the
>>>     road to make clear that big corporations can’t unfairly exploit
>>>     consumers to run up excessive corporate profits on food and
>>>     groceries.”
>>>
>>> We know so little about Harris's policies; this is not a good first policy!
>>
>> There is very clear price gouging on retail food in poor neighborhoods, and
>> it's a direct consequence of not having any competition in the market.  Go
>> into a dollar store and check what things actually cost relative to the
>> grocery store in a rich neighborhood.  A price ban won't fix this problem,
>> although there might be another government-lead solution possible.
>>
>> BUT.... honestly food in the US is incredibly cheap.  Far cheaper than it
>> was back in the sixties, and much cheaper than it is in Europe.  We grow
>> (dented) corn so cheaply that Mexico wants to put up protective tariffs,
>> and when you can do something more cheaply than Mexico that's impressive.
>> Admittedly overall food quality here is poor, but I don't see bringing
>> food prices in America down as a useful activity.  Now, if you bring
>> down housing costs or medical bills, THAT might be useful.
>> --scott
> 
> Yes, retail food prices in poor neighborhoods are much higher than in
> rich suburbs.  But it's clearly not price gouging, but the cost of
> doing business in an urban, poor area. If it was only lack of competition,
> you'd have supermarket chains fighting each other to open stores in
> those areas. But instead you have cities desperately trying to keep
> the supermarkets they have open, and offering deals to get supermarkets
> to consider opening a new one. The existing supermarkets aren't making
> enough money.
> 
> A few years back, I watched DC trying to woo Walmart to open a large
> store (including supermarket) in an under-served area. It took many
> years of negotiations, rule-changing, and property tax breaks to
> finally get an agreement. It wasn't easy. It never opened - the next
> city council came in and passed a law saying any extremely large
> retail company (basically just Walmart) must pay a minimum wage of $5/hour
> over the current minimum wage. Walmart said they had no chance of
> making money, broke their leases, and left.
> 
> The extra cost of urban business is not only the obvious costs of land
> cost, security/shoplifting, and property tax, but things like just
> getting the food from warehouses to the store!  As you say, the
> overall American cost of food is actually low now, partly because the
> industry has solved the supply chain to the store issues, at least for
> large suburban stores.  My supermarket can handle at least a dozen delivery
> trucks at once, perhaps half of them 18-wheelers. You can't do that kind of
> traffic in an urban environment serving pedestrian customers.
> 
> I don't know how to reduce the cost of urban supermarkets other than
> directly giving subsidies. But any attempts to legislate the price of
> groceries in those urban markets is going to make things worse.
> 
Just for consideration, I know from personal experience that many crops 
in the US are bought from the farmers WAY below cost.  The Federal 
government pays MASSIVE subsidies to farmers to keep them in business 
and it _still_ is barely enough to do that.  The price increases between 
the farm and the market are much higher than anyone is willing to 
believe and the costs along the logistic train have not gone up anywhere 
near as much as the profits over the last several years.

-- 
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky 
dirty old man.