United States | Welcome to Trader Zoh’s Should cities run their own supermarkets? New York’s mayoral front-runner thinks so Many a New Yorker dreams of not paying rent. So do New York’s shops; **retail space **there is pricier than anywhere else in America, by a lot. Seldom is this wish granted. But for a select few publicly owned grocery stores, Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic nominee for New York City mayor, hopes to do just that. Alongside more typical left-wing fare, like rent controls and free buses, he pitched a more novel idea: a “public option” for groceries in the form of a state-run rival that would undercut existing supermarkets. Food prices have spiralled, Mr Mamdani argues, and New Yorkers shouldn’t “subsidise private grocery-store operators” during their weekly shop. Another problem he flags is that some New Yorkers live in “food deserts”, without ready access to fresh produce (the US Department of Agriculture found that New York had fewer such areas than any other state). The plan is to** pilot **one store in each of the city’s five boroughs, and scale up if those succeed. This is a curious proposal. Grocery stores have among the lowest margins of any business in America: they generally make 1-2% in profit after tax. New York City, with a dense population, aggressive competition and high rental and wage costs, is particularly competitive. Mr Mamdani’s stores would not pay rent or property taxes—he wants to put them on city-owned land. But denying New York’s government the revenue those plots would otherwise have earned amounts to a chunky subsidy. If Mr Mamdani’s stores do manage to offer lower prices than privately run peers, it will be thanks to that implicit subsidy, funded by New Yorkers’ taxes. At best, then, these stores might sell groceries** a smidge more** cheaply than conventional grocers, largely due to back-door taxpayer funding. For a government concerned about affordability for the poorest New Yorkers, indiscriminately part-financing **the grocery haul **of anyone who steps into one of Mr Mamdani’s stores is a curious way to do it. Worse, private supermarkets could get run out of business, because even squeezing their margins to zero wouldn’t be enough to match a competitor that doesn’t pay rent. All this presumes that Mr Mamdani’s stores are run as well as a conventional supermarket or bodega. But from affordable housing to subway extensions, American cities have a sorry record of letting costs spiral. New York has been** trial**ling a new set of *no-frills public toilets*, and budgeted about $1m for each one. Rather than creating a cheap and hyper-efficient city-owned grocery chain, a more plausible outcome is that mismanagement will eat up any savings made from not needing to pay rent or turn a profit. ■ 許多紐約客都夢想著不用付房租。紐約的商店也一樣；那裡的零售空間租金比全美其他地方都高得多。這樣的願望鮮少實現，但民主黨籍紐約市長候選人左赫蘭·曼達尼（Zohran Mamdani）希望能讓少數幾家公營雜貨店例外。除了較典型的左翼政見，如租金管制和免費公車外，他還提出了一個更新穎的構想：推出一種“公營選項”，讓州政府開設超市來與現有的超市競爭並壓低價格。曼達尼認為，食品價格已經飆漲，而紐約客在每週採買時不該“補貼私人雜貨店業者”。他還指出，部分紐約客居住在“食物荒漠”地區，無法方便取得新鮮農產品（美國農業部的調查發現，紐約州的此類地區比全美其他州都少）。曼達尼的計畫是先在紐約市的五個行政區各試辦一家公營雜貨店，如果成效良好再進一步擴大規模。這是一個頗為奇特的提案。雜貨店是全美利潤率最低的行業之一：稅後淨利通常僅有 1-2%（見圖表）。紐約市人口稠密、競爭激烈，且租金與人事成本都極高，使得經營環境更加艱困。曼達尼計劃讓這些公營雜貨店免付租金和地產稅——他希望將它們設於市政府擁有的土地上。然而，這等於讓市政府損失原本可以從這些土地獲得的租稅收入，形同提供大筆補貼。若曼達尼的雜貨店真能比私人同業提供更低的價格，這也將歸功於這種隱性補貼，而這筆錢最終由納稅人負擔。即便如此，這些店家最多也只能因為背後有納稅人資助，而稍微便宜一些。對於一個關心最貧困紐約客生活負擔的政府來說，這種不分對象地部分資助任何走進曼達尼雜貨店的人，實在是個耐人尋味的做法。更糟的是，私人超市可能會被迫退出市場，因為即便把自身利潤擠壓到零，也無法與一家免付租金的競爭對手匹敵。以上還假設曼達尼的店能像傳統超市或便利商店一樣有效營運。然而從平價住宅到地鐵延伸線，美國城市在控制成本方面的記錄一向不佳。紐約市近來試辦新型簡易公廁，每一座的預算竟高達約 100 萬美元。與其說會誕生一條廉價且高效的市營雜貨連鎖，更可能的結果是，管理不善將吞噬掉省下的租金和利潤。 -- Hosting provided by SoundOn

Ask this episode

“What did the council decide on item 42?” — answered with the speaker and the moment.

Transcript

Related