Slashdot Mirror


Why Some US Cities are Fighting 'Dollar Stores' (eastbaytimes.com)

The Washington Post reports on why some U.S. cities are restricting the spread of discount "dollar stores": Residents fear the stores deter other business, especially in neighborhoods without grocers or options for healthy food. Dollar stores rarely sell fresh produce or meats, but they undercut grocery stores on prices of everyday items, often pushing them out of business...Grocery stores run on thin profit margins -- usually between 1 and 3 percent. And they employ more workers than dollar stores to keep perishable food stocked.

"It's no longer the big-box grocery store" that threatens local businesses, said David Procter, a Kansas State University professor who studies rural grocery stores. "But it's the discount retailer that's coming to town and setting up shop right across the street."

"As the stores cluster in low-income neighborhoods," the Post writes, "their critics worry they are not just a response to poverty -- but a cause."

384 comments

  1. Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I thought this was America, where people have choice and freedom to choose what they want to eat. If they are choosing unhealthy shit, that's their choice. There will still be some supermarket if there is a demand.

    1. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Apparently communities and groups of individuals have zero rights according to you. Just the single individual.

      So the communities of people who fight for municipal broadband are all wrong. Because it comes between the right for an individual to choose Comcast. (Because that's his only choice.)

      I'm libertarian myself and these 3rd grade libertarian fantasies regularly spouted embarass the fuck out of me.

    2. Re:Why fight them? by jonwil · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem is that the unhealthy crap sold by fast food joints and convenience stores and dollar stores and the like is cheaper (thanks to farm subsidies and other factors that distort the market) than the good healthy stuff.

      So the retailers who sell the healthy stuff can't complete with the retailers selling the crap which leads to "food deserts" in these lower-class areas where there just aren't healthy options.

    3. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same with any group who fights for the common good.

      Nobody is saying you can't live off Doritos. They're saying they want to stop a practice that LIMITS the choice of good food for those who lack good transportation.

      You can still buy Doritos at Safeway.

      You are right on

    4. Re:Why fight them? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I thought this was America, where people have choice and freedom to choose what they want to eat. If they are choosing unhealthy shit, that's their choice. There will still be some supermarket if there is a demand.

      There’s another dynamic at play as well. For some people, buying at the dollar store is a budget issue. They cannot afford to buy things like detergent at a grocery store because, even if it is cheaper on a per unit basis, the $5 spent on it means not enough left over for gas or even food. The dollar store is a better match to their cash flow than a grocery store, even if it a worse long run choice. In other cases, the dollar store is near where they live and the nearest grocery store is miles away, making the dollar store the store of choice.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    5. Re:Why fight them? by gtall · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yah! If the people want to choose unhealthy shit, then they have also chosen increased health costs. Of course, those costs don't show up until later years, and then they have the rest of us to pay for them. MAGA.

    6. Re:Why fight them? by religionofpeas · · Score: 0

      There are no barriers to better budgeting.

    7. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But, how many Safeway's are built in a poor area? One, two? This is city planning to the extreme. The next thing, will be, not allowing poor into a neighborhood, unless for day work. Yuppie areas, and cutting manufacturing jobs for Gentry jobs. Oh, that's already happening. Next they raise the barriers to transportation to areas, cut busses and educational standards, oh, that's happening, then they consolidate the gentrification by shrinking the space allowed, to do business with you. Oh, that's happening, then, the religions say lying to others is expected, hoarding is good, and greed is good. That does not sound like the Bible or the Koran, does it. But Joel says it's good, therefore, discriminate, hate to your heart's content.

    8. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I thought Wal-Mart was doing more damage to locale
      grocery stores, but they're not mentioned at all. Hmmm......

      Is Sam behind this study, by any chance?

      CAP === 'posture'

    9. Re:Why fight them? by colfer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And on the other end of the volume scale, Costco skims off the profitable customers who can and want to buy bulk. Costco also skims off any profitable sector it can simplify and remove from the traditional shop accoutrements around it, like tires. The Costco tire shop only does two things: sell tires and maintain tires. No other repair of any type.

      Prices are not actually that great at Costco, but quality is assured. The quality at the dollar store is typically suspect. I remember some outrageous price for a cell phone charger at a Radio Shack. The clerk told me to go next door to the dollar store. It was a hope-for-the-best situation there. The Radio Shack is out of business though.

      Both dollar stores and Costco are highly capitalized and can big-foot into new markets. They have that in common against locally owned retail. It's the scale of it that makes people nervous, not anti-capitalist ideology. No one doubts these entities give people what they want at the price/quality they more or less want, given the choices (which the companies help create).

    10. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Safeway sells the same stuff at a higher price. That's better, right?

    11. Re:Why fight them? by OzPeter · · Score: 4, Informative

      There are no barriers to better budgeting.

      You need to read Boots theory of socio-economic unfairness to understand why I think you are mistaken in your point of view.

      The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money.
      Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles.

      But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet.

      This was the Captain Samuel Vimes 'Boots' theory of socioeconomic unfairness.

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    12. Re:Why fight them? by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      Walmart has groceries, including fresh produce, with a more limited selection than Safeway or Kroger. Dollar stores are all small sizes of prepackaged goods, and no fresh produce. It's the Walmart haters' own goddamn fault when they drive a big box store out of town to have its stock incompletely replaced by a series of dollar stores.

    13. Re:Why fight them? by Entrope · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Pratchett wrote comedic fantasy, not economic research. He made things up, including Sam Vimes, the relative costs of boots, and especially their durability.

    14. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Socialism, welfare and insulated monopolies for the rich; crushing austerity, artificially-high prices for everyone else.

      Cities are corrupt AF, propping up big businesses because they're worried about "competition" and making sure customers keep getting overcharged for items that should cost $1. If you shop at a big box store or in bulk, you'll see how much supermarkets and their few megacorp branded products screw over customers routinely.

      Maybe these cities should instead lure fresh produce stands and delis near dollar stores to make up for that? No supermarket megacorp protectionism required.

    15. Re:Why fight them? by religionofpeas · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Even though the story about the boots is fictional, there's a way out of that trap. You have to realize that you only need to buy a single pair of the good leather boots, to solve that particular problem for the rest of your life. After you get your first pair, you slowly save up the $50 for the next pair over the next 10 years. And then with the net money saved, you can get out of other traps.

      The reason why people fail is because they cannot hold savings long enough to buy the expensive but durable goods. Instead, they'll spend their savings on something they don't need (as much).

    16. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Dollar store, deli+seafood+butcher, and produce market or permanent farmers market. No supermarket required. The. End.

    17. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      then one should wear flip flops until they can afford the good boots .

    18. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dollar stores are a fucking rip off.

      they pretty much exist solely to gouge the fuck out of 'food stamp' and 'wic' participants in smaller towns. everything purchasable with those costs more than even a gas station. other vulnerable prey include the elderly that wouldn't or can't drive to a neighboring town with more options. that's the primary business plan of dollar general right now and what's driving their current rapid expansion.

      they often obtain lower quality products, even from 'name brands' and pass it off as being the same thing other stores have.

      they may sell smaller packages for less money, but per-unit, cost more than other stores. their own branded 'generics' are worse quality than others' store brands.

      they jack up prices of dairy, frozen foods, and many other items. double or triple or more the cost for a gallon of milk or a package of cheese as you can find elsewhere.

      half the square footage is 'impulse' buys that are absolutely worthless in quality (i.e. cheap chinese shit and plastic trinkets and other crap that simply will not last even through first use).

      household goods (e.g. a frying pan, utensils, blankets and pillows, etc) are total shit quality.

      there is literally NOTHING inside a 'dollar store' worth going there for that you can't get at a 'regular' retailer for the same or less money. NOTHING. it's a fucking scam.

    19. Re:Why fight them? by OzPeter · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Pratchett wrote comedic fantasy, not economic research. He made things up, including Sam Vimes, the relative costs of boots, and especially their durability.

      So Captain Pedantic, never in your life have you experienced cheaply made goods not lasting as long as more expensive goods?

      And yes Sam Vines is a work of fiction, but it is a work of fiction used to illustrate a genuine point - That having money increases your options for saving money. For example at some point up the socio-economic tree it becomes financially viable for a person to establish a presence in a tax haven in order to reduce/eliminate a tax burden. (Double Irish with a Dutch sandwich anyone?) Such options are out of the reach of people with lesser means.

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    20. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have rights, like not to shop at places they deem bad for $GROUP. Do they have the right to make that choice for me? No.

    21. Re:Why fight them? by bobbied · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Even though the story about the boots is fictional, there's a way out of that trap. You have to realize that you only need to buy a single pair of the good leather boots, to solve that particular problem for the rest of your life. After you get your first pair, you slowly save up the $50 for the next pair over the next 10 years. And then with the net money saved, you can get out of other traps.

      The reason why people fail is because they cannot hold savings long enough to buy the expensive but durable goods. Instead, they'll spend their savings on something they don't need (as much).

      It's even worse today with credit. Now you can buy what you want now, and pay over time for it. What ends up happening for the undisciplined is they buy frivolous stuff on credit, then end up struggling to make the payments WITH INTEREST and that drives their eventual standard of living down. You have less to live on if you have to service that interest on your debt because that big TV you purchased on "sale" now costs you 30 months of interest too, making it cost more than the bigger TV outright. Or that new car costs you more than you can afford for 80 months and when it's 5 years old and you want to trade, you still have 20 months of payments.. But don't worry, they will roll that onto your next car's payment... It's a slippery slope and it take discipline to get off of it, lots of discipline.

      But that's really what makes the difference here, discipline and hard work. I've meet very few folks who where poor because they didn't have the ability or opportunity to not be poor. And I've meet some desperately poor people growing up in the back woods of North Carolina. Many where living this way by choice, they didn't want more, or couldn't be bothered to make it happen. It was a social thing for them. One young man who graduated high school with me, 4th in the class, had a dream of moving out of his mother's house so he could get his own address and start collecting his own welfare checks. He was a bright guy, could have gone to college for nearly free and easily pulled himself, and his family out of poverty, but that's not what he chose to do.

      Not all poor are there by choice, but unless they are unable to work though no fault of their own, they need not stay in poverty.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    22. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Talking about motorbike boots: I bought expensive boots that were crap. I bought cheap boots that weren't crap. Even buying the same boots (as close as possible, same manufacturer, same model/type a few years later) and the quality varies.

      And this is true for most products. Fiction is fiction, reality is variable.

    23. Re:Why fight them? by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Apparently communities and groups of individuals have zero rights according to you. Just the single individual.

      So the communities of people who fight for municipal broadband are all wrong. Because it comes between the right for an individual to choose Comcast. (Because that's his only choice.)

      I'm libertarian myself and these 3rd grade libertarian fantasies regularly spouted embarass the fuck out of me.

      Your are mixing a discussion about 'rights' with market principles, hence your confusion. If you are open to allowing market principles, communities are free to get together and decide not to buy from dollar stores which in the end results in their shutdown or lack of desire to expand in those communities. If enough individuals still shop there, the market will know. However, using legislation to determine who can sell in a community would not be market driven result.

      As to who has 'rights', that is defined constitutionally, and communities do have the 'right' to create such legislation, even if it does not follow market principles.

      Should communities have the 'right' to limit shopping choices for individuals in the community, some or many of who may want to shop at dollar stores?

      Striking the right balance between both can be a challenge, different people will have different opinions on to where that balance line should be.

    24. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is just an excuse , a talking point that the progressives who pushed an arbitrary minimum wage of $15 will use when the supper markets close Down because labor costs make them unable to operate large full service stores . Any logical person knows that at $15 an hour you canâ(TM)t operate large full service labor intensive supper markets .

    25. Re:Why fight them? by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      Reminds me of a proverb (I think from Russia): "We cannot afford to buy cheap", meaning that spending more on quality goods is cheaper in the long run.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    26. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quit being logical. The left want the state to determine right and wrong. They create the free market. The future of grocery stores are app schedule pickup in your car like walmart does.

    27. Re:Why fight them? by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      _Thank you_ for mentioning this. The DiscWorld stories contain startlingly good explanations of money (in Making Money), of the evolution of information technology (in Going Postal), of women's rights (in Equal Rites), evolution of biology and evolution of colture (Science of DiscWorld, books 1 and 2)

      I can attest to the economic theory and the relative costs of _really good_ boots and other tools that last years, versus much lower cost boots. Ladies' boots are an entirely distinct market. But for men's boots, even a casual glance at Amazon shows cheap boots at $40, and the much more robust boots, especially waterproof boots, as at least $130. A 4 to 1 ratio of their durability is not unexpected. The soles of the more robust boots are far more durable, as are their seams, and finding a cobbler who can repair them today has become quite difficult.

    28. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if the man needs a pair today, the cheap pair would benefit him. Then he is able to save 4 dollars every month until they break down. In one years time, he can have the nice pair and be happy for a long time.

      The theory assumes no saving. Why not live on less than you make or get a temporary second job?

    29. Re:Why fight them? by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Sorry but horseshit, its cheaper because its more shelf stable and thus they aren't paying for food that goes in the dumpster. Ask your local grocer how much of that "healthy fresh food" ends up going into the garbage and be ready for a shock, its quite a lot and guess who pays for that? YOU DO in the form of higher prices.

      Now personally I'm all for more healthy ways of preserving food, GMOs designed to last longer, irradiating to kill bacteria, promoting more healthy ways of making things shelf stable like pickling, but at least two of those methods have serious scare mongers out there making sure people are afraid of it so they end up having to dump a bunch of salt and preservatives into food to make them last because people here in the states don't seem to have an issue with tons of salt and chemicals while they have a fit if you say GMO or irradiating.

      Finally I'd add most of the dollar stores? About a hell of a lot more than food. I shop at the local Dollar Tree all the time, am I buying food there? Hell no, I like to be able to taste something other than salt, but for things like aspirin,spare batteries for the remote,pens and paper and a ton of other assorted little things? Dollar stores are great for those. And you can't even claim anybody is buying at ours for lack of choice as both locations in my town are literally across the street from Walmart supercenters where you can get all the fruits and veggies that you want so anybody buying food there means they just like that stuff, its their money so who am I to judge?

      Look at the end of the day getting rid of a Dollar store isn't gonna magically make people eat any better, any more than making booze illegal stopped people from drinking or the drug war stopped people from getting high, hell my local Walmart Market has tons of fresh produce and you still see people walking right past those for the frozen pizzas and the cookies. Folks are gonna buy what they want to buy and if there is a market for fresh goods in those areas? Someone will take that business, but my guess is there isn't any there because there are too few eating healthy and a bunch that love everything drowned in sugar and salt.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    30. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is the stupidest thing. What does choice have to do with it? You think the poor have choices? You think being poor, they could get out of it if only they weren't lazy and made bad choices? If only they were smart rugged individualists like yourself? Spoke better English maybe? Made up somehow for their brown skin? Go ahead, keep blaming others for your own sad meaningless little life. And that MAGA thing at the end of your post, is that, like a **zi salute you bros do nowadays? Like a stopper to keep your brain from thinking through what you are actually saying?

    31. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You're partly right about the Boots theory, in that poor people buy less quality items and thus pay more often for it. They'll spend as much on a buy-here, pay-here car as they might for a new car, because they have terrible credit too. They do really stupid shit with their money more often than the media would like to report. It's less sensational to admit that people are idiots, rather than "disadvantaged" and "economically oppressed".

      I worked for a bank for four years and talked to over 50,000 people in that time about their finances and financial situations. I would see people fail to manage their money and habitually overdrawing their bank accounts. This would cost another $35 per transaction. These 'poor' people would talk about how hard it was to support their families, but then you'd see what kind of habits they had and it was laughable. Very few people were actually afflicted by unforeseen circumstances or uncontrollable events that would financially set them back. Most of those people rebounded relatively soon after, but they had a period of hardship.

      If you're actually broke, you shouldn't be using a $1000 iPhone, Uber, or ordering food deliveries. You shouldn't put the daily pack of cigarettes over your children's welfare. If you're too broke to afford gas to get to work, why are you going into a liquor store or buying lottery tickets? I'm all about personal freedom, but if you're going to try to gain my sympathy for your stupid, shit choices, I have none for you.

      One guy tried to tell me that he was trying to get his sick daughter medication, but the rejected transactions on his card were from the Seminole Indian casino ATM. From his account, I'm sure he had a gambling addiction, but whether he had a daughter, I can't be sure. He just seemed like a piece of shit with impulse control issues, to me. These are the kinds of people that cry poor and expect the rest of us to care.

    32. Re:Why fight them? by religionofpeas · · Score: 2

      $40, and the much more robust boots, especially waterproof boots, as at least $130. A 4 to 1 ratio of their durability is not unexpected

      It's also not impossible for cheap stuff to outlast expensive things. I carry around a $25 Nokia cellphone that has lasted me longer than most iPhones last. In general, it's hard to make good things cheap, but it's easy to make shitty things expensive.

    33. Re:Why fight them? by rl117 · · Score: 1

      Yes, it's largely fantasy with a lot of comedy, but there's a lot more in them than just that. Pratchett was a very well read fellow, and his books are stuffed full of little bits like this which are a wry and insightful take on situations in the real world. If you're poor, you can end up spending more on all sorts of items, from utilities like gas and electricity to clothing and food. And largely because a lack of up front captital limits your choices. His point is quite insightful, and the way he intersperses them and wraps them up within the comedy is genius.

      What about Going Postal? The whole thing is an allegory about idealistic open source developers and the free software foundation going up against the cruel and callous system, wrapped up in a fantasy world and storyline with a suitably comic villain. But it's much deeper than that. It even has a G-N-U in it.

    34. Re:Why fight them? by tquasar · · Score: 1

      My sister has a summer house in a rural area, 8 miles from a small town. People did buy many items that were a good value but the thing I saw most was lower grade beers like Natural Ice from Anhauser-Busch. A lot of 30 Packs of cheap beer being purchased..

    35. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The elites will decide where the poor folk should shop. After all, they know what's best.

    36. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've also known people of wealthy parents who were alcoholics for the 1st 35 years of their lives and stopped drinking. As soon as they stopped everything was coming up roses because they were not poor. Even as alcoholics they were not living bad. The difference here is the offspring of the poor have to make ALL the right choices from birth to achieve some measure of wealth. And even then luck plays a role.

    37. Re:Why fight them? by dfghjk · · Score: 1

      It's not their choice if poverty prevents that choice. You may have missed this part: "are not just a response to poverty -- but a cause."

      It would appear, AC, that you believe that "America" stands for f*cking the poor.

    38. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We're talking about Dollar Stores. They make money by purchasing overstock inventory, liquidation inventory, and close to expiration date inventory. Much of it comes from the very same "name brand" retail stores this article is sobbing about. Without the cheap discount stores, they'd simply be throwing away that inventory instead of at least recouping some of their costs.

    39. Re:Why fight them? by dfghjk · · Score: 1

      "The reason why people fail is because they cannot hold savings long enough to buy the expensive but durable goods. Instead, they'll spend their savings on something they don't need (as much)."

      Like food for their children.

    40. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently what a community wants is all that matters to you and the rights of the individual be damned. Bring back the whites only communities because so long as 51% of you are racist that makes it the individuals problem and damn them and their rights.

    41. Re:Why fight them? by Entrope · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Probably everyone has experienced cheaply made goods not lasting as long as more expensive goods, but the ratio in durability is less than the ratio in price. You can find cheap jeans for $10 to $20 at a big-box, low-end store. They will seldom last as long as $220 (or much more) jeans from a high-end store, but they will last a lot more than 1/11th as long at 1/11th the price. That is why the Sam Vimes argument is bunkum.

    42. Re:Why fight them? by Entrope · · Score: 1

      How much of The Lord of the Rings do you take as true? Having a well-read (or otherwise expert) author does not make fiction accurate. It's fiction.

    43. Re:Why fight them? by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      Nope. You're just being facetious because you're lacking real arguments, I suppose.

      I've met quite a few poor people (even some in my family), and not a single one wasn't making bad choices with their money.

    44. Re:Why fight them? by colin_young · · Score: 1

      Actual data:

      • $30 Gap jeans (2 pairs) - 6 weeks = $5/week
      • $90 Banana Republic jeans (also 2 pairs - I hate shopping for jeans) - 3 years (so far) = $0.57/week

      That's what? An order of magnitude difference? Pretty close to the 1/11th you claim is bunkum.

      The best comedy is based on uncomfortable truths.

      And yes, I'm aware Banana Republic and Gap are the same company.

    45. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, the more interesting point you nearly make is that if a community were going to truly attempt to combat the causes of poverty, attacking credit card debt would be much more effective than targeting dollar stores. You might ask why local communities don't offer their own credit cards with low interest to help the poor? Then they can buy better boots that last longer and save money over the long haul. And don't the poor save money shopping at the dollar store instead of more expensive stores? If identical items are on sale at both, that would be preferred? Or are they targeting dollar stores because of intense lobbying by supermarket chains hoping to squelch rivals?

    46. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not really. I bought $15 jeans at Walmart over a decade ago. They're still going strong. I wear them every day.

      Shoes are more interesting. Walmart shoes, $20, last for slightly under a year. Good hiking shoes from Dicks last for over 5 years, but cost $80. The real difference is my feet: I get corns from the Walmart shoes but not the Dicks hiking boots.

    47. Re:Why fight them? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I thought this was America, where people have choice and freedom to choose what they want to eat. If they are choosing unhealthy shit, that's their choice.

      Indeed. It's also my choice to walk to mars. The fact that I am unable to do it apparently isn't a consideration for your argument.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      There will still be some supermarket if there is a demand.

      And you just failed economics. ... And failed to read the summary.

    48. Re:Why fight them? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      And Entrope wrote nothing but ad hominem attacks, deliberately not addressing the point which was made but instead choosing to dismiss the point based entirely on the person who made it.

      Shame on your for disgracing your low UID with such anti-intellectualism. Give that account to a real nerd.

    49. Re:Why fight them? by Entrope · · Score: 1

      A single anecdote is not actual data. In your case, it's not even a cool story, bro. I have also bought $30 and $90 pairs of jeans, and have not seen even a 2x difference in durability.

    50. Re:Why fight them? by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 5, Insightful

      First, I think you should consider that your sample space is pretty skewed. I don't think that you live in poverty, so your exposure to that population is quite low.

      Second, the working poor is a surpassingly large segment of the population. Real wages haven’t increased with inflation for years, and while things like TVs and electronics have gone down in price relative to inflation, essential goods haven't.

      There's some location dependency as well. Consider a worker in San Francisco that drives a bus or works at contracted janitorial staff. Many of them have to live far outside the city and spend enormous amounts of time commuting. It leaves very little time to do anything that might get them into a better job, and they’re spending every penny they have on rent and survival; many have low or non-existent credit (though that may be a blessing in disguise, because you're not wrong about the dangers of credit or how businesses extending credit are predatory nightmares).

      Poverty isn't just a matter of how hard you work. There are a lot of circumstances that go into how it plays out, and once you're poor, the options for getting out become more and more limited. Social mobility is getting lower by the year.

      Lastly, there are "frivolous" purchases that poor people make that bring them just a bit of joy or relief, and while it's easy to say that they shouldn't be smoking or eating a bag of chips, life is hard enough without letting yourself just have something small for yourself.

      The working poor are just that, and it can be nearly impossible for them to break out of the cycles of poverty once they're in them. Plenty of them are perfectly willing to work to get out of the mess they're in but circumstances don't always allow for it.

    51. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      spot on. in other countries, there's what's called sachet economy, shampoo, coffee, cooking oil are packed in small sachet, it's very expensive compared to buying a quart of cooking oil, BUT, if you only have so much money, what do you do? all these sjw snowflakes need to get out of their cushy homes and taste reality

    52. Re:Why fight them? by rl117 · · Score: 1

      Fiction can have truths within it.

      As for Lord of the Rings, it has quite a lot of lore adapted from other sources, from the Bible to Norse legends, Old English mythology and others. From the lore to the morality plays, it's not purely fictitious and completely divorced from our own world. Though it is, of course, a set of fantasy novels.

    53. Re:Why fight them? by Entrope · · Score: 1

      We can see who isn't smart enough to read to the end of a short comment. I pointed out exactly which parts of that fiction make it unlike the real world.

    54. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sheesh you're a tool. 10 seconds of Google searching would have revealed that the Boots theory of economics *actually occurs in real life and has been studied by economists*:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_economy

    55. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the heck you doing to your jeans? I don't think I have any jeans newer than 2 years old. And the pair I'm wearing right now are 6 years old (from old navy no less).

    56. Re:Why fight them? by Entrope · · Score: 1

      Lore, and especially morality plays, are fiction. They are intentionally exaggerated in order to make a point. In the case of Sam Vimes's theory of boots, the point (that you can get a more durable good by paying more for it) is exaggerated to the point that it fails to describe the real world; Pratchett did not favor jokes about how often the only thing people pay 5x or 10x the price for is the different label sewn into a garment at the end of a factory line.

      It is okay to like the story as a joke, but it is not an accurate description of 21st century economics.

    57. Re:Why fight them? by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Dollar Tree should be distinguished from Dollar General and Family Dollar. Dollar Tree sells everything for a dollar (except greeting cards for 50 cents) and many things are less expensive than supermarkets. (Dollar Tree is getting squeezed by inflation; something's going to have to change within a few years.) Dollar General is usually more expensive than a supermarket.

      Sure, there's a lot of low quality stuff at dollar stores, but often low quality is all a person needs. It's not a scam, it's a market segment that some people would be worse off without.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    58. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you for demonstrating the problem with Universal Healthcare. Once the gov't pays for your healthcare that opens the doors for the gov't to then control/curtail your freedom in every other area.

      Freedom means the choice to make bad, stupid and unhealthy decisions. It's none of your business what I choose to eat.

    59. Re: Why fight them? by reanjr · · Score: 1, Insightful

      My neighborhood (downtown San Diego neighborhood) built a Safeway. Then Safeway started allowing homeless people to park overnight. Then charities arrived to feed the homeless in the parking lot. Then the homeless from the surrounding area started migrating into the neighborhood, leading to overcrowding. Then a homeless serial killer started going around killing other homeless with gas fires. Then the state banned plastic bags, which the homeless used for cleaning up after taking a shit. Then the hepatities epidemic began, leading to dozens of people dead.

      Don't let Safeway into your neighborhood unless you live in a shithole already, cause you will be living in a shithole soon.

      And liberals could spend some more time thinking about the consequences of all the strategies they use to deal with their white guilt.

    60. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a great citation... if you want to show that the Vimes boots theory is garbage. There are a lot of hypothetical cases on that page. The single story based in fact is about a Prussian king who fed his kids cheap cabbage, directly rebutting the Vimes theory.

    61. Re: Why fight them? by illiac_1962 · · Score: 1

      Not thier choice if I have to pay for thier million dollar Healthcare bill because they wanted to eat one pound steaks, twinkies, and soda every day.

    62. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For example at some point up the socio-economic tree it becomes financially viable for a person to establish a presence in a tax haven in order to reduce/eliminate a tax burden. (Double Irish with a Dutch sandwich anyone?) Such options are out of the reach of people with lesser means.

      It's a good thing then that the poor do not pay income taxes.

    63. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Let's roll with another example: laundry detergent.

      Go to your store of choice. Look at the per-unit price of large and small containers. Is the smaller container more expensive per-unit?

      If a person only has the money to buy the smaller container, they end up paying more money for the same unit of product.

      Being poor is expensive, no matter how much you writhe your hands over 2nd grade math.

    64. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah! That's why unhealthy food is banned in the UK.

      No Sir, you may not order the full English while NHS exists.

      But get some mod points by pointlessly bashing the US and nearly half of all voters without any positive contribution to the problem. Congrats on the low hanging fruit jackass.

    65. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >You have to realize that you just need capital to leverage more fiscal power
      No shit sherlock. Power begets power. Have your daddy send his next $100,000 loan to someone who will otherwise never finish school, so they can rake in a six-figure without paying off millions in stuscam debt.

    66. Re:Why fight them? by freeze128 · · Score: 1

      The Dollar stores also sell adequate quality things cheaply. Do you need to buy a $12 tape dispenser at Staples, or will the $1 one at Dollar Tree be adequate?

    67. Re:Why fight them? by emaname · · Score: 2

      Well said, Mr D.

      There's are three more components in this issue; social connections, revenue, and jobs.

      Re social connections... Locally owned businesses can have a more positive impact on a local community. There is a stronger sense of community or of a social connection. I experienced this myself while working at a small grocery store when I was in high school.

      Re revenue... There have been studies that support the idea that locally owned businesses keep more of the money earned by that business within the community. Corporate owned businesses (like Dollar Store) remove from the local community a large portion of the money earned by that operation.

      Re jobs... Here again, the impact is more localized. Since the owner of the store is most likely from within the community, the positions are more likely to be filled from within the same community. The owner has a vested interest in the community in order for the business to be a success.

      You can see the trend in the country today. More and more communities are sourcing their produce locally instead of from some remote mega-corp. Some communities have garden plots set up right within their neighborhoods by using empty lots. Others are seeing more farmers' markets appearing. Still others are seeing cooperatives developing.

      In our town we have several big-box stores standing empty; some for over 10 years. We've lost Sears, K-Mart, Penny's, Boston Store, and soon we'll lose Shopko. These all represent lost tax revenues and job opportunities. When communities depend on corporate operations they leave themselves vulnerable to the market performance of those corporations. Just this one detail alone is justification for that Tulsa community to respond the way they are responding. But they need to include with it a strategy to encourage and develop locally-owned businesses to fill the void. It's certainly not an easy challenge, but they will find they are better off when they do.

      --
      An effective "democracy" creates the illusion the people have a say in their government.
    68. Re:Why fight them? by Howitzer86 · · Score: 1

      A libertarian would not agree to that. For him, the line should be were he is. Market "principles" override democracy and the only legitimate choice a voter can make is for further deregulation. Eventually it'll be a utopia and you won't need to vote anymore. Any problems the community or country faces will have to be resolved on an atomized individual level - and you know how good we are at that.

    69. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently communities and groups of individuals have zero rights according to you. Just the single individual.

      Yup. Exactly.

      Go read the Declaration of Independence. The government's sole job is to protect the rights of the individual. It's the smallest minority there is.

      And when they stop protecting the rights of the individual, it's the duty of the people to alter or abolish it. Get out your pitchforks.

    70. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit. You can get last year's good boots at half the price. Even this year's if you know how to defer gratification and shop around a little. There is less and less quality difference between cheap and expensive items. You pay for the label and the shortness of your attention span.

    71. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe your Nokia lasts longer because it's old, and not designed to be part of a short-cycle upgrade treadmill.

    72. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      $5 Autozone filter wrench: Reliably bends the first time you try to use it due to flimsy materials and shoddy construction.
      $15 filter wrench: Works fine for thousands of oil changes.

      Then there's WalMart - infamous for having manufacturers create shoddier variants of their products. Their grills have material that's half as thick, and as a result corrode away after a single summer of use. The non-walmart variants from the same manufacturers last for multiple years.

      Also, the Black Friday special variants of products which are made to be sold at a lower price point but share very similar model numbers with established products. These are cheaper, but prone to defects and fail quickly.

    73. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At the grocery store I usually use, the store-brand laundry detergent is $2 for 50 fl. oz. (supposedly 32 loads), or $5 for 150 fl. oz. That price difference works out to 25 minutes of work at minimum wage, or about half a cup of coffee at one of those popular chains. Are you suggesting that it is that hard to find a one-time $3 budget shift to buy a larger size of laundry detergent?

    74. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pratchett wrote comedic fantasy, not economic research. He made things up, including Sam Vimes, the relative costs of boots, and especially their durability.

      Unlike Ayn Rand?

    75. Re:Why fight them? by mad7777 · · Score: 2

      In what sense are you a Libertarian? Please, enlighten us. You seem to believe that the government's proper role is to dictate what can and cannot be sold to consumers, and at what price, and yet you call yourself Libertarian? No sir, it is you who are the embarrassment here. Please, go change your party affiliation to one of those two well known ones that never miss an opportunity to insert their politics between buyer and seller.

      --
      Might makes right irrelevant.
    76. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Allowing a known under-cutting low-quality 90% imported China crap plastic shop to operate without paying for externalities like a real productive local establishment is a market++ principle, you're just too dumb to accept that.

    77. Re:Why fight them? by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      Fortunately there are very few pure Libertarians out there. I'm not sure why people keep fretting over them.

    78. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      That is a travesty. From what you describe it's a problem caused by letting those filthy bums live anywhere at all. The only person amongst them worth helping was the one setting the rest on fire.

    79. Re:Why fight them? by eth1 · · Score: 2

      Even though the story about the boots is fictional, there's a way out of that trap. You have to realize that you only need to buy a single pair of the good leather boots, to solve that particular problem for the rest of your life. After you get your first pair, you slowly save up the $50 for the next pair over the next 10 years. And then with the net money saved, you can get out of other traps.

      The reason why people fail is because they cannot hold savings long enough to buy the expensive but durable goods. Instead, they'll spend their savings on something they don't need (as much).

      The problem with this is that it only really works for non-essentials. Most people MUST have housing, transportation, clothes, etc.
      Someone that can afford to put 20% down on a house can get a better interest rate, not pay PMI, and build equity, vs. someone who has to rent or pay more in interest to buy the same house (potentially tens of thousands over the life of the mortgage).
      Someone that can afford a car payment AND to still save for the next car can put themselves in a better position for the next purchase, but you can't if you can just barely pay for transportation to get to your job.

    80. Re:Why fight them? by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      The hell do you do to destroy your jeans in 6 weeks? I buy $15 jeans off amazon and they always last years.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    81. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "...freedom to choose..."

      The freedom to choose is limited to the rich and well-connected. They choose not to have to compete with the dollar stores and the people who use those stores can get f-ed.

    82. Re:Why fight them? by Powercntrl · · Score: 1

      If you're poor, you can end up spending more on all sorts of items, from utilities like gas and electricity to clothing and food. And largely because a lack of up front captital limits your choices.

      Yup, too many people here missing the point that it's an analogy.

      Since people seem to be far more familiar with car analogies, there's already a perfect one for this. Go to any buy-here-pay-here car dealer and it will become immediately obvious how much the poor overpay for absolute garbage.

      --

      ---
      DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
    83. Re:Why fight them? by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      Should communities have the 'right' to limit shopping choices for individuals in the community, some or many of who may want to shop at dollar stores?

      Of course they do! After all, where would the "company store" be without the ability to limit the shopping choices of individuals?

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    84. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Welcome to capitalism. Free market and all that.

    85. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not how dollar stores work.

      You are thinking places like Aldis that sell discounted items because they are near expiration or the box is messed up. Dollar stores don't work that way.

    86. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And actual economist who study the issue everyday disagree with you. Go look it up, they have verified it.

    87. Re: Why fight them? by Rujiel · · Score: 1

      "So the communities of people who fight for municipal broadband are all wrong." Municipal broadband is great but that topic is completely unrelated! I'm a socialist and I agree with who you quoted, it's not the fault of dollar stores that a lot of basic goods are overpriced. Have the state interfere to provide more options if you need to, but your mentality is punishing the wrong party.

    88. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rich white kids.

      That's why.

      Rich white kids love cheap beer cuz it fucks them up and it's cheap. A 30 pack of natty nice is enough beef for 2 hours of beer pong.

    89. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wahhhhh. I'd rather give a coproation 10 years of tax breaks and subsidies than give a poor person 1 cent.

      You are what's wrong with America. You support the people who don't support you. While holding down the rest of your kind because the man told ya so. Fucking pathetic.

    90. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're on the losing team libfag. Get over it.

    91. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They scream really loud.

    92. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, I see. The problem isn't poverty, it's poor people.

      STOP BEING POOR, you assholes!!

    93. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If that's the case, then fix it at the source: end the farm subsidies.

      (Of course, it isn't really the case. If it were, people would be advocating for ending the farm subsidies, rather than for legislation against dollar stores.)

    94. Re:Why fight them? by philmarcracken · · Score: 1

      Fast food lacks a bit of fiber. Its not unhealthy. Even suppose it was; people drink a lot of alcohol and smoke. Both are known to be incredibly unhealthy, even in small amounts. So nobody gives a fuck about their health.

    95. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So your solution to the bootstrap cash problem is... To have cash in the first place?
      You have X dollars, your boots dissolved in rain, waterproof boots cost 5X and dying of ringworm is free.

      Your solution is magically obtain another 4X in cash to buy good hours, or an assumption that the person should walk barefoot to work until 4X can be saved... Which assumes they can go to work without boots, without getting a foot infection, etc.

      Ijit.

    96. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The man should not save $4/mo. He should save $100,000/month instead. That way after a year he will have a million dollars and can live off the interest.

      If you want to disagree with me qualitatively, feel free to do so. Quantative arguments are just nitpicking.

    97. Re: Why fight them? by kenh · · Score: 1

      "Company Stores" existed mainly in communities where the workers were paid in 'company script', which could only be spent at the company store.

      --
      Ken
    98. Re: Why fight them? by kenh · · Score: 1

      One of the most jaw-dropping moments I ever saw on television was then-Senator Chris Dodd excoriating bank executives because, and I quote, his 'research' turned up the startling 'fact' that the vast majority of 'insufficient funds/overdraft' fees were being paid by - can you guess - poor/low income people!?!? He demanded that this be changed!

      Apparently this "Friend of Angelo" failed to understand that people with money don't overdraw their bank accounts nearly as often as poor/low-income people because, well, they aren't poor/low-income?

      --
      Ken
    99. Re: Why fight them? by kenh · · Score: 1

      The summary for this article clearly states dollar stores undercut supermarkets, you are completely wrong - you just have an axe to grind unrelated to the story here.

      --
      Ken
    100. Re: Why fight them? by kenh · · Score: 1

      They shop at Whole Foods and probably feel it would be best for all concerned if those with SNAP benefits went to a neighborhood grocery store - you know, because the prices are lower there. Also, it would free up parking spaces closer to the store.

      --
      Ken
    101. Re: Why fight them? by kenh · · Score: 1

      A produce stand would have to accept SNAP benefits to survive, and even then, I don't think the demand exists, it's the outside SJW looking for a solution to a problem only they perceive. Prove to me there's a demand, and dollar stores will expand to offer produce, until then let the market work.

      --
      Ken
    102. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You answered that yourself. Unless you think adding the word "should" changes the answer.

      Should political decision-making bodies use their constitutionally granted authority to limit shopping choices? That's something they can debate about, and presumably they have.

    103. Re: Why fight them? by kenh · · Score: 1

      Open a produce stand then. Driving out the dollar store won't bring back the grocery store. The investment in a supermarket is immense, and unsupportable in many/most poor/low-income neighborhoods.

      --
      Ken
    104. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have another anecdote: My checking account has a $2 monthly fee. The fee is waived if you have at least $300 in a savings account.

      I put $300 into a savings account, because I could. It didn't make much interest - after about ten years, I think it's worth $300.12 or something - but it's $300 I still have. If I had not put that money in there because I needed it to fix the car, pay the rent, &c., then over ten years at $2 a month - I'd be out $240 because I didn't have $300 then.

      So yes - being poor can be expensive. AC

      PS - don't get me started on the difference in car insurance rates on cars registered in 'nice' [expensive] neighborhoods and the car insurance rate for 'bad' [poor] neighborhoods. Look up the differences sometime on your own.

    105. Re: Why fight them? by kenh · · Score: 1

      Amazon got a 10% discount on projected taxes - paying $27BN in taxes instead of $30BN, but the Economics major from Long Island, Notorious A.O.C. Didn't understand that, and thought the state was paying Amazon $3BN, rather than Amazon paying $27BN over the next ten years.

      AOC now has Democrats railing against good-paying jobs, tens of thousands of them. Next thing you know she'll be arguing to give plants Brawndo!

      --
      Ken
    106. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      while it's easy to say that they shouldn't be smoking

      Thank you for bringing this up. In many places cigarettes are taxed to hell and back in the name of reducing smoking, but these taxes are overwhelmingly paid by the poor.

    107. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here here, good post.

      In addition to what you wrote, I find it interesting that a lot of US culture celebrates hard working individuals that work 2 or 3 jobs.

      However, the reality is that they shouldn't have to work 2 or 3 jobs: 1 job should be enough.

    108. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So it's bad for a community to collectively group together and ban a store like this? Are you a retard?

    109. Re:Why fight them? by dasunt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The reason why people fail is because they cannot hold savings long enough to buy the expensive but durable goods. Instead, they'll spend their savings on something they don't need (as much).

      Grew up poor, am doing well right now.

      My success is due to a few things. Hard work helps. Being in the right field helps. Having a partner helps.

      But so does luck. Luck in my gender, my height, even my name all have been shown to increase the chance of financial success in life. Luck in where I was born, and in what state, gave my poor family the ability to have state programs that were pretty good, and a local school that was also pretty damn good. Luck in my family, especially my mother, who didn't sabotage my life or my siblings. Luck I didn't make any irreversible mistakes in my teens and young adult hood that would have nailed me with a felony, huge debt, or a kid to support. Luck in my health, which is pretty good.

      When we criticize the poor for being poor, we do two things:

      The first is to feel better about ourselves - by believing that poverty is within our control, it shields us from it - we won't become poor because we won't make the wrong mistakes.

      The second is that we hold the poor up to a standard that we don't require of the middle class. The middle class makes a slew of financial mistakes to screw over their lives, and we don't hold them accountable for it. Why is it that we require the poor to be saints with their meager incomes, while we don't hold the middle class to the same standard. The middle class is burdened with avoidable debt, consuming a ton of crap, underfunding their retirements, and often without an emergency fund. Yet we don't criticize them for buying things they don't need, even if they are making bad financial decisions. We'll even empathize with the middle class for not having enough money to go around.

      But buy something nice for yourself as a poor person, and everyone will judge. Even own something nice as a poor person, and people will make assumptions.

      It's a double standard, and an unfair one at that.

    110. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The issue is that we all pay for them eating that cheap, unhealthy shit.

      Whether the unhealthy shithead pays for insurance or not in immaterial. We all pay for it.

      numbnuts

    111. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Market "principles" are all made-up bullshit and it is still the community at large paying for their unhealthy stupidity.

      numbnuts

    112. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fast food is very unhealthy. Even salads at these shit holes have 800 mostly empty calories.

      numbnuts

    113. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WTF are you doing that you wore out a pair of jeans in 6 weeks?!

      I wore Gap jeans on a fucking FARM, doing hard labor every damn day, and they lasted until I outgrew them - years. Are you wrestling with alligators or something?

    114. Re:Why fight them? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Why are you showing sympathy for the deplorables? You realize this puts you on their side? The side of racism, fascism, and hate?

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    115. Re:Why fight them? by denzacar · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Spoken like a man who never had problems affording or purchasing a good pair of boots.
      If you can't grasp a metaphor, maybe an anecdote (or two) will help?

      I'm a kinda guy who destroys footwear. High instep plus an old ankle injury... I have a funny step.
      I've worn out three pairs of army boots during less than a year of service - and I was in personnel.
      And you can bet your ass I was maintaining those boots, being a lowly conscript surrounded by officers and NCOs all day.

      Important caveat - I'm a Bosnian. But rules of the market still apply.
      Anyway... for years I would buy a pair of boots around November... wear them until the spring... then start wearing them in September-October while looking for a new pair.
      Tried out civilian versions of army boots (no worse or better than the actual thing issued to recruits), various hiking shoes/boots, supposedly fancier (2-3 times the price of the army kind) boots... all the same crap.
      One pair of hiking shoes literally fell apart as I was cleaning them for the next season - soles fell off.

      Granted... none of those boots were ever more than maybe $75 (the fancy kind). But they were all crap, regardless of price.
      Now... I could maybe shell out much more than that for a fancy pair of hiking boots... those look robust...
      But who's to say those won't fall apart in a year? They are sold in the same boutique.

      Then... I discovered work boots. Not "work boots" sold at boutiques - the real deal. Steel toecaps, heavy, hard and ugly.
      And actually cheaper than most boots cause they tend to be "ugly" and a single boot will weigh as much as a pair of fancy boots. A decent pair would be $20-30.
      Then I found the REALLY good ones.
      Italian manufacturer, high shaft, laces and zippers, all the regular trimmings, ten-year warranty...
      Sure... at around $60 a bit pricier, for that kind of footwear, but still cheaper than what I used to pay shopping for "civilian" boots.
      And I even got to test that warranty - cause thanks to my "magic feet" the leather started tearing.
      Yes, you can technically use that quick-access zipper to put them on quickly... but that may not be such a great idea.
      But hey... they were under warranty, so I replaced them, wore those for 3 seasons... and as they were starting to show quite a bit of wear and tear (still not leaking though) - I went to the same shop to buy another pair.
      They are no more.

      Thing is, those were some REALLY good boots.
      So good in fact that the manufacturer stopped making them. Thought of ordering some directly from the manufacturer - they don't make them anymore.
      You want all those features (it's the quick-release zipper) on a pair of work boots? Competition sells that for twice as much and in a wider color range.
      Clearly, not because it costs twice as much to make them or cause the manufacturer would be losing money.
      It's cause that's what "the market will bear" and the manufacturer would be losing "potential earnings".
      And to add insult to injury, I'm clearly so far out of "the market" that even should those other boots (with the same features) be worth the price, I'd have to take a 5-hour ride just to try them on.
      Ended up buying a pair of "similar but clearly not the same quality" Romanian-made boots for around $50.

      Similarly... We went shopping for a freezer a few months back.
      After digging around online, driving around local malls and shops, checking and comparing features, sizes, quality, price...
      Turns out you can either buy cheap crap, cheap crap that is too big, cheap crap which spends twice as much electricity as it should in that price-feature range - or you can buy large freezer-fridge combos, which are more expensive and for which we don't have room. And they might be crap too... didn't check.
      Buuuuut... if I check the manufacturer's website - they DO produce and sell better freezers.
      More isolation, use less electricity...
      They just don't sell them here.
      Cause they sell for about $60 more.
      Market won't bear such a high

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    116. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm... "choice" implies that there is a true *practical* choice - which in the case of those living in an urban "food desert," doesn't really exist, if they don't have reasonable access to fresh produce. This is an unfortunate reality for far too many urban poor.

      How about sponsoring urban community garden projects to simultaneously help solve this problem, and using that to educate urban youth about where their food comes from... thus empowering those youngsters in the basics of how to provide themselves and their families with good nutrition? Is this too idealistic a goal??

    117. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sad but true.

      Years ago I asked a woman, who was a self-professed liberal (and also on the lower rungs of the economic spectrum), why she favored Social Security over a private savings account for herself.

      I explained that at the time - the late 1990s - all money spent towards the Social Security trust fund was actually being sent out to pay benefits from those already drawing on the program. The trust fund itself was full of low-yield government bonds. Returns on Social Security payments were around 1-2%, and had been for awhile. She could average maybe 7% with a simple S&P 500 index fund, preferably something low-yield, assuming she held through market swings instead of panic-selling during crashes or trying to time the market during upswings.

      She countered that she did not trust herself to handle her own money in that fashion. She wanted the federal government to tax her (FICA) and set up her retirement (Social Security). Even with poor yields, 1-2% is better than the 0% she would get from not saving any of her own money. She knew she didn't have the discipline to do it on her own.

    118. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not farm subsidies that make it cheaper.

      Almost all capitalist models rely on all actors in the market being rational and INFORMED. That means you are aware that eating a burger increases your chance of a heart attack compared to your chia seed muffin or whatever. You are able to balance the change of health cost vs the monetary cost and act accordingly.

      Most people (myself included) are not aware of all the risks associated with my choices. That is why things like minimal health standards for restaurants are enforced - in a true capitalist model, you can eat in the rat infested place if you want because you can balance the risk of illness costs vs the monetary costs vs the taste benefits etc.

      This is also why taxing polluting companies is a good idea - we can't tell that our gewgaw is killing us because the production of it spews tons of toxic sludge out. The government does that on our behalf and charges the company on our behalf. We then rely on capitalism to pass that cost on to us at the end product. The cost was always there. (You may disagree with the valuation put on things like environmental impact, but that cost was ALWAYS there!)

    119. Re:Why fight them? by cwatts · · Score: 1

      Try Big 5 for great shoe prices. Yesterday's shoes are half price, or less.

      that is all!

      csw

      --
      chris watts íë¦ìS ì(TM)ì
    120. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People - rich and poor - do what they can as much as they can. Good and bad.Tat includes grocery shopping and eating habits.
      Why mix politics and convictions into the issue?
      I see majority of shoppers in top supermarkets loading carts with total, worthless crap. Poisonous drinks and "healthy" cereals and fats, worthless baked goods, etc - you get the drift. They do as they please.
      Then I see evermore shoppers including self in dollar stores saving tons of $$ on everyday items and not so much for processed canned food, which is universally higher priced than in supermarkets ( a can of beans for a buck vs 50 cents at the supermarket ) People are not stupid; they know where the deals are.
      I see well-to-do people's expensive cars in dollar stores' parking lots. They too like a better deal. So the way I see it, the US average supermarket, for my own needs, could easily be perhaps 1/10 or less of their typical size, which would be enough to stock everything minus the crap and overpriced everyday items which next-door dollar store sells.
      I believe this is about competition and feel no pity for former monopolistic retailers who suddenly feel the pain of being outdone and cry about it.
      It was a blessing, when the German chain Aldi came to my town years ago. My grocery bills went down by a third. The store is about 1/10 of the major sm nearby. The few items they do not carry I get elsewhere. They opened up a new location across the street from a major SM a while back, and I laugh as I see shoppers shop there first and only then cross over to their former #1 stop.
      But I also support my local farmers and mom and pop stores

    121. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >choosing unhealthy shit, that's their choice

      The fuck you smoking? If you can't afford good food you eat crap. if your wages can't pay your bills you do whatever you can.

      This idea that everyone is equally capable and can do everything and that anyone that isn't a millionaire is a lazy idiot is getting pretty tired.

    122. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >you slowly save up the $50 for the next pair over the next 10 years

      you missed the point:

      you can't save because your shitty boots need replacing constantly.

    123. Re:Why fight them? by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Did you just say, low interest credit cards was the answer?

      You do understand how bad of an idea that is right?

      The problem isn't the availability of cheap credit, but the use of credit for daily living expenses and people's attitude about what credit is for. I'm not one of those "no debt, ever" advocates but I do have TWO basic rules about debt. 1. Pay off unsecured debt AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. My goal is to pay EVERY credit card I have off at the end of the billing cycle and avoid any interest payments. If I find I cannot zero out every credit balance for some reason, my sole focus becomes retiring unsecured debt. NO discretionary spending, no eating out, no new toys. I refuse to live on credit, ever. 2. Debt is ONLY for buying "real" property like cars, houses and the like and then ONLY when the item that secures the debt could be sold for more than the debt. So I never buy a new car where I'm underwater, even after the depreciation hit taken when it gets titled and I never take loans out for longer than I plan to drive the car. So I put nearly 35% down on my home 20 years ago and now have over $200K in equity.

      Cheap credit isn't the answer, properly taught and executed handling of money and credit is the answer. Actually cheap credit is more of a gateway drug to financial problems, carrying the promise of instant gratification, buy now pay later. Successful financial thinking is save now, buy later, so when it comes time to buy that pair of boots, you can afford the ones that last because you did't blow the money on interest, toys or eating out. I think cheap credit would only add to the problem.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    124. Re:Why fight them? by bobbied · · Score: 2

      First, I think you should consider that your sample space is pretty skewed. I don't think that you live in poverty, so your exposure to that population is quite low.

      During my formative years, we where quite poor as a family so I knew a lot of very poor people. I will admit that my family wasn't destitute, we worked for a living and although we where poor we owned a small farm where we raised cattle, had a huge vegetable garden and even though the work was hard and long and we didn't have money for things like TVs and toys, we where not starving, cold or without housing.

      But I disagree. I've seen poverty, up close and far away. The kids I went to high school with where from the 2nd poorest county in the State of North Carolina. The schools where so bad that only the poorest of the poor when to the public schools. IF you had ANY money, you went to private schools. As a result, I was in a class of 250 and only about 7 of us where white and ALL of us where poor. My experiences may be unique to the county I grew up in, but I seriously doubt the attitudes I saw where that unique.

      You see, I was raised very differently from many of my peers. I was raised that hard work was how you got more. That you had to watch what you spent your money on. Many of my peers where raised to think money was what the government gave you, that it always comes like clock work and life was about maximizing that check. I swear, some of the brightest kids I knew, kids smarter than I was, kids that could have gone way beyond their poverty had they even tried, just didn't want to try. Out of my class of 250, only 4 of us when to college. Out of that 4 only 2 graduated with a 4 year degree (that I know of). But the most remembered kid from our class was a bright young man who played basketball for Duke, on a scholarship (one of the 4 of us who went to college) but flunked out of school. Does the school recognize me? HALF of the college graduates from that class who holds an BSEE from a very respected school, one of the educational success stories? Yea, right.

      But it's about the culture there. The culture I grew up in. They had many of the same opportunities i had, if not more at times, but many where not successful because of their choices, their attitudes, their wrong thinking about what working for a living was and their goals. Sure they started out at a disadvantage, but opportunity was there, still is for many of my classmates who come to the realization they can do better with effort.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    125. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      During college I was very poor. Being poor is expensive. I couldn't afford 6 months of car insurance upfront, so I had to pay $200 more over that time to go month by month. I couldn't afford to see a doctor, and went to the ER several times because of it. Many of my basic necessities went on sale periodically for bulk amounts, but I almost never had any free month at the exact short moment that the products were one sale. My wife and I couldn't afford a decent apartment and were not eligible for any government assistance, so we stayed in one of the cheapest apartments, which had black mold. We could have complained, but then we'd be homeless. While we could afford the place, my wife became chronically sick from the mold and eventfully stopped going to work.

      Being poor is very expensive.

    126. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what's wrong with white people having their own countries? I presume you believe that the Chinese aren't 'racist' for wanting and keeping their own country? Why?

    127. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is also America, where kids get shot in schools because Americans have the choice to be mentally ill and well armed.

    128. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People seem to prefer cheaper food over fresher food. If there is a market for the more expensive stores then they should be able to out compete dollar general or at least function along side to serve both markets.

      If you think dollar general is a sign of poverty, it isn't their fault and are obviously offering a service the people there want, or they would never get a foothold. Essentially they took the old walmart model of building stores in under-served rural areas so people don't have to drive an hour to buy basic stuff.

      The city planners don't like them just because it looks trashy, but would rather try to ban then rather than actually bring good jobs to their town.

    129. Re:Why fight them? by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      Are you saying that working poor do not have opportunities?

      How would you explain that Lorenz curve of AGI in 2016 looks like perfect exponential curve where each next strata earns X% more and is of Y% less size than the previous one (X and Y being fairly constant over 20 or so stratas)?

      Looks like Boltzmann distribution in the presence of constant force without any boundaries between layers: people who want, who work hard and have qualities make it through the layers. People who slack who do no not work hard enough.

      Source: my own calculations on 2016 data from IRS on AGI.

      PS. I watched myself on the example of first generation immigrants in my mosque how they manage to get better or worse depending on their attitude to life.

      Stop singing the old ballad of working poor.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    130. Re:Why fight them? by Joey+Vegetables · · Score: 1

      There is a lot of truth to this. Living paycheck to paycheck, whether voluntarily or not, precludes being able to reduce overall spending by spending on quality rather than crap.

      But there is another factor that people who didn't grow up in the 'hood rarely stop to consider.

      The $50 boots are way more likely to get stolen, and when they do, they cost the person who saved up for them many months, perhaps even years, of savings. In the U.S., safety and income are strongly correlated. People who can afford to live in safer communities do, leaving behind, in the crappier and more dangerous ones, only those who cannot.

      That's one reason why security is very high on my antipoverty wish list. Without security and safety, escape from poverty is vastly more difficult than it otherwise would be. No one will invest in better, and hence cheaper long-term, stuff, if the long term savings can never materialize because most things get ripped off in short order.

      It's also a reason why rational families (including my own) tend to defer all other capital investments until they can afford to live in a community safe enough that some of those investments might last long enough to recoup what was spend on them.

    131. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except they don't when there are no other options because of the centralization of business districts away from residential areas, often just across a municipal border because the county municipalities will always sellout hard to the corporations, the corporations use low wages, scale and low quality to force smaller businesses out till they are the only game left.

    132. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My neighborhood (downtown San Diego neighborhood) built a Safeway. Then Safeway started allowing homeless people to park overnight. Then charities arrived to feed the homeless in the parking lot. Then the homeless from the surrounding area started migrating into the neighborhood, leading to overcrowding. Then a homeless serial killer started going around killing other homeless with gas fires. Then the state banned plastic bags, which the homeless used for cleaning up after taking a shit. Then the hepatities epidemic began, leading to dozens of people dead.

      I've heard this story before!

    133. Re:Why fight them? by fropenn · · Score: 1

      It's only a choice if people have the means and access to purchase healthier foods. If all you have in your neighborhood is fast food, and if all you can afford is fast food, then, guess what? You're eating fast food.

      It becomes unfair when this burden rests heavily on the poor (and then makes them more poor by encouraging unhealthy behaviors, too).

    134. Re:Why fight them? by tsstahl · · Score: 1

      That was a fascinating glimpse in and between the lines of your local market. Being in a major metro US market, about 70% of the issues you cite are beyond consciousness for me.

      I have weird feet, too. Super wide, insanely high arch, one foot cocked due to falling off a bridge in childhood. A hard time for me to get the footwear I often need is visiting two local stores, or ordering online if they are out of stock in my size. When my boots need to be fixed, the wait is about a week at another local store.

      I will never complain about footwear again.

    135. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Debt? Car loans? Yeah...okay :)

    136. Re:Why fight them? by gwolf · · Score: 1

      If you are open to allowing market principles, communities are free to get together and decide not to buy from dollar stores which in the end results in their shutdown or lack of desire to expand in those communities. If enough individuals still shop there, the market will know. However, using legislation to determine who can sell in a community would not be market driven result.

      Now, if you live in an Open Market, there is quite a bit of incentive for Mr. Bigbucks to hire lawyers to push laws as he pleases. Now, if some of these laws end up closing the Open Market and converting the society slightly into a Regulated Market, was it the fault of the lawyers? Or were they just fulfilling their roles as pens-for-hire (and sues-for-hire) in the very same holy Open Market they are being paid to undermine?

    137. Re:Why fight them? by gwolf · · Score: 1

      .... And that's precisely where Libertarian Utopia meets Communist Utopia!

    138. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I used to get 15-20 dollar jeans from Old Navy. Once upon a time they lasted me a long time. In the last couple years of me getting them they would fall apart quickly, with strange wear patterns. One pair lasted only two wearings before the belt loop in the back ripped right off and left a gaping hole. I switched to Levi's (but only from Costco at 24 dollars a pair). They show no wear after a full year of having them, and they fit better.

    139. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfairness is not the correct word.

    140. Re:Why fight them? by colin_young · · Score: 1

      That's the point. I didn't do anything to them that I haven't done to the ones that I've had for 3 years and are still in good shape. And for the record, it was sitting in a office chair, sitting on a train seat, walking to the train, walking to the office... you get the idea. I wasn't using them as the bearing material for a ship's propeller or something like that.

    141. Re: Why fight them? by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      "Company Stores" existed mainly in communities where the workers were paid in 'company script', which could only be spent at the company store.

      Quite so.

      Nonetheless, when the government decides it has the right to specify that some stores (selling legal products) aren't allowed, you're setting things up for a whole new generation of "company stores".

      After all, how much in the way of bribes would it really cost to make sure that the only kind of grocery store in town belonged to one particular company, which, just by chance, was owned by the owner of the largest employer in town?

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    142. Re: Why fight them? by KlomDark · · Score: 1

      If you are what you eat, then shouldn't Twinkies make you live forever?

    143. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And naturally, your anecdotes completely destroy millions of studies on poverty, amirite?

      At least the tone of your post admits to being wrong, even if you can't stand to admit it.

    144. Re:Why fight them? by philmarcracken · · Score: 1

      No, its not. They have protein, fats and lots of essential minerals. The soda has kcal. The lack of fiber is the only cause for concern. If you point to people consuming the food in excess, thats not the retailers problem, its personal responsibility with your own TDEE.

    145. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Idiot.

      They have low quality protein, unhealthy fats and the minerals are not close to what you need. It is all cause for concern.

      Enjoy the beetus, stroke and heart attack in your future. Fast food is very unhealthy, you will learn it the hard way and you will deserve it.

      numbnuts

    146. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are a not insignificant number of non-Chinese working in China.

      numbnuts

    147. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Prove something is overpriced

      numbnuts

    148. Re: Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, Safeway sells real food unlike dollar stores.

      They also pay their employees a decent wage.

      numbnuts

    149. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If hard work had anything to do with it people working multiple jobs would be wealthy and the majority of the wealthy would be homeless

      numbnuts

    150. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends. Do you want one that will last? Cut tape cleanly? Not give you cancer?

      Better stay away from the dollar store. Especially "food", plastics and even more important anything that will touch skin or food. Sometimes, they might have a marginally decent major brand but on a ounce to ounce comparison the dollar store is more expensive.

      numbnuts

    151. Re:Why fight them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean, until you got fat?

      numbnuts

  2. related links == dupe? by SpzToid · · Score: 2, Funny

    The /. related links suggested the dupe to me. Seriously? https://news.slashdot.org/stor....

    --
    You can't be ahead of the curve, if you're stuck in a loop.
    1. Re:related links == dupe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol editors

    2. Re:related links == dupe? by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      Just because we're talking about the same topic does not make it a dupe. They are discussing different aspects of the same situation.

  3. Dollar store isn't a grocery store by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They may have one isle with some canned food, but they're basically miniature versions of Walmart/general store and sell mostly houseware.

    I don't know why anyone would *expect* them to have fruits or vegetables? Like, why don't they have a fish market or a bakery there too? How about a sushi bar?

    1. Re:Dollar store isn't a grocery store by hjf · · Score: 2

      I mean, Ikea sells pizza. I don't know why anyone would expect a furniture store to sell pizza but... here we are.

    2. Re:Dollar store isn't a grocery store by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why don't they have wine tasting, too?

      That's classist.

    3. Re:Dollar store isn't a grocery store by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I mean, Ikea sells pizza. I don't know why anyone would expect a furniture store to sell pizza but... here we are.

      The problem with IKEA’s pizza is the damn instructions for making it. By the time you figure out how to attach the cheese, the special pepperoni connectors, etc., you’ll have starved to death.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    4. Re:Dollar store isn't a grocery store by 50000BTU_barbecue · · Score: 5, Funny

      "They may have one isle with some canned food"

      That's a pretty big store. Where do you find decent parking near an isle?

      Here in Canada, our stores are not nearly as large as in the States apparently.

      Our stores simply use aisles.

      --
      Mostly random stuff.
    5. Re: Dollar store isn't a grocery store by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Directions unclear: have leftover pegs, screws and washers. Also, it sags to one side in the oven. (Just imagine if Ikea sold flat-pack ovens.)

    6. Re:Dollar store isn't a grocery store by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      The problem with IKEA's pizza is the damn instructions for making it. By the time you figure out how to attach the cheese, the special pepperoni connectors, etc., you'll have starved to death.

      Or do what everyone else does, the cheese goes on the bottom. The tomato is kind of spread around the edge and the toppings are carefully stacked in a pile in the middle.

      Techincally it's edible and you'll be so fed you that you'll eat it.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    7. Re:Dollar store isn't a grocery store by MiniMike · · Score: 2

      The problem with IKEA’s pizza is the damn instructions for making it. By the time you figure out how to attach the cheese, the special pepperoni connectors, etc., you’ll have starved to death.

      You can buy one pre-assembled ("Kommerkräkas"), but those all have lingonberry and pickled herring as the only toppings.

    8. Re:Dollar store isn't a grocery store by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      Over here they sell wine and beer too. For some families, going to Ikea is a bit of an outing: you shop for furniture, have a decent and inexpensive lunch there, so why not pop in their deli and buy some interesting and unusual food to take home as well? Their deli always seems busy enough. I'm in an Ikea on a regular basis (the curse of letting furnished appts) and I often grab some food if we're short on anything at home. They have some pretty good bread.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    9. Re:Dollar store isn't a grocery store by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      You joke, but IKEA sells beer, with a pop cap on the the top. Instructions indicate that you need to use a bottle opener but do you think you get one when get the bottle? noooooo.

    10. Re: Dollar store isn't a grocery store by illiac_1962 · · Score: 1

      The whole issue is classist. No one wants to see the steady stream of dollar store poor streaming in and out. You actually have to see poverty then. We can have it all distributed around and in our faces when it was nicely contained under the expensive facade of Wal mart before.

    11. Re:Dollar store isn't a grocery store by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      You're ignoring a critical fact here: if it's at IKEA then it's not even called 'pizza', it's some Nordic word with an umlaut and too many consonants that no one can pronounce.

    12. Re: Dollar store isn't a grocery store by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't point out homonyms and other common mistakes non native speakers make. It makes it easier to classify which politbureau the poster is paid through.

    13. Re:Dollar store isn't a grocery store by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

      And this or some situation very much like it is why I never go to Ikea without at least a Swiss army knife.

      --
      How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
    14. Re:Dollar store isn't a grocery store by mjwx · · Score: 1

      I mean, Ikea sells pizza. I don't know why anyone would expect a furniture store to sell pizza but... here we are.

      The problem with IKEA’s pizza is the damn instructions for making it. By the time you figure out how to attach the cheese, the special pepperoni connectors, etc., you’ll have starved to death.

      Also the naming... Imagine telling your coworkers you're having a Stefan for dinner tonight.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    15. Re:Dollar store isn't a grocery store by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      My house has an IKEA factor of over 90%. I sometimes genuinely wonder if people know that IKEA ships all their furniture with pozidrive screws and wonder why their philips head screwdriver never really properly works.

  4. Why stop at dollar stores? by SPopulisQR · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Article is just wonderful. Stores are the reason why they are poor.... right. No no, these stores are bad because they sell stuff too cheap! Undercut prices for toilet paper, soap, coca cola and doritos! Have they considered that America is a free country and if it was profitable to sell fresh food, somebody would be selling. Further, a quick google MAP search uncovers a plenty of grocery shops all over Tulsa, OK, including northern part. The hero in the article, the politician, is clear about her background: never lived outside of town.....

    1. Re:Why stop at dollar stores? by hjf · · Score: 3, Informative

      Did your analysis include historical "grocery store location", and compare the number of grocery stores over the last decade vs the number of dollar stores last decade?. Oh yeah, it didn't.

      McDonald's sells cheap food. This is the reason why, in America, "fresh food" is expensive. A "free country" where the "free market" has decided it has to be cheaper for a person to drive several miles to a mcdonald's every day and get their food is cheaper than having stuff in the pantry and cooking at home.

      Are you sure there are no "government subsidies" somewhere, skewing your "free market" theories? Because I'm all for free market, but the USA doesn't play fair with free trade. They offer you a "free trade agreement" with zero tariffs for your country. Except after the tariffs they have another layer of regulations that keep your product from being sold in the USA. For example, Argentina has been trying to sell lemons in the US. We can produce them cheaply. But we have quotas on how many we can sell and they need to be a certain size and color... I thought it was a free market and the market would solve it? Why so many regulations? Try selling corn to the USA and let me know how it goes. Ah yes, We have to subsidize these farmers, or they'll lose their jobs.

    2. Re:Why stop at dollar stores? by religionofpeas · · Score: 4, Insightful

      McDonald's sells cheap food. This is the reason why, in America, "fresh food" is expensive.

      I'm quite sure that people can cook a home meal for less than a McDonalds meal, especially if you have to drive there. Going to McDonalds is just less effort, and very tasty.

    3. Re:Why stop at dollar stores? by gtall · · Score: 0

      Yeah, 'cause the increased health costs due to poor, cheap nutrition are always accounted for in the free market. And you'll be happy to pay for those costs too because you are smart enough to pay for good nutrition and do not mind paying for the poor people's health costs just because they were free to get suckered into buying the cheap food.

    4. Re:Why stop at dollar stores? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where I live, it is possible to pass 5 Dollar Generals before getting to Walmart.
      There is a point of saturation.

      Maybe Save-a-lot needs to move into those areas?
      They sell fresh food.

    5. Re: Why stop at dollar stores? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I cant wait til we stop subsidizing and all farmers quit or go out of business. All of them. Then the people can grow their own shit. Live in a concrete jungle? Tough shit.

    6. Re:Why stop at dollar stores? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      McD is no longer cheap.
      $8 is not my definition of a cheap meal.
      I can get a whole frozen pizza for about $5.
      I can also get a buffet for $8.50.

      Cities are overpriced because they have to pay for expensive land as well as higher salaries. As a restaurant owner, would you rather pay for a $500,000 building on a $20,000 lot with 50 staff at $8/hr or a $750,000 building on a $1,500,000 lot, with 75 staff at $12/hour? The salary difference exceeds $1 million per year. 50 staff is about what it takes to run 3 shifts at a fast food restaurant and open from 6am-11pm. I've ran one in the distant past.

    7. Re:Why stop at dollar stores? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Btw, dollar stores don't sell cheaper than everyone else, especially nonbrandnames at costco or walmart. But they will sell smaller. Buying dollar store TP is cheaper upfront but vastly more expensive long-term. That's the trap.

      It's only a "trap" if you don't understand the concept of cash flow. Plenty of people don't have the cash to buy in larger quantities, but they still need the item. They can get enough to get through to the next time they get paid. Yes, it's hard to get out of that "just get through" cycle, but the alternative for them is "do without" completely. Do you really want people to have to do without toilet paper?

    8. Re: Why stop at dollar stores? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do the republicans were right. We should penalize people for not buying broccoli.

    9. Re:Why stop at dollar stores? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Actually, (this is just a suspicion - I don't know for sure) Dollar stores sell insurance goods as well.
      If a truck is involved in a recovery, it's contents aren't destroyed, but auctioned off by the insurer.
      While some of the product may be really damaged, most of it is not -- it's just easier for the insurance
      company to do this rather than the manual labour of sorting everything. Sometimes I see damaged
      cans that can't be explained by normal means. It also explains why there will be $3-4 dollar name-brand
      cereal in some stores' planogram's endcap (for a dollar).

      Dollar stores have a legitimate place in the economy and provide a value to the community as a whole.

      CAP === 'semester'

    10. Re:Why stop at dollar stores? by RalphSlate · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I can understand the sentiment a little bit. The one thing missing from the article's analysis is that when people "size up" a neighborhood, they look for certain visual cues. One of them is the type of retail present. When you drive through a neighborhood and see a dollar store, you classify that neighborhood as "poor". You dismiss it. And while that is most likely a realistic indicator, it harms the neighborhood's chance of becoming less poor, because it's like a scarlet letter on its chest.

      However, I would also point out that many of the people opposing dollar stores are the same people who reminisce about going to the "five and dime" when they were younger.

    11. Re: Why stop at dollar stores? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I buy the dollar store tictac mints specifically because you get 3 mini packages for $1. Also, they sometimes carry good powered milk packets that I add to certain recipes. There's a zillion instances where the dollar store is better, but like any store, it's not universally-better. Costco-Trader Joe's-Target-Grocery Outlet-Safeway-Dollar Tree covers most things that online cannot deliver. In other communities, such as parts of Texas, there will be 4-5 dollar stores within a mile of each other, and they are huge but they don't have fresh produce. Dollar stores need to encourage farmers markets, delis and butcher/seafood businesses near them to complement their offerings and silence this manufactured PR FUD campaign.

    12. Re:Why stop at dollar stores? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " do not mind paying for the poor people's health costs"

      I'm of the "pay your own costs" mindset. Someone eats like shit their whole life and gets sick without being able to pay for care, well their life may be shorter than average. Consequences, stop treating adults like children needing protection from their own choices.

    13. Re: Why stop at dollar stores? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm of the same mind. That's why rich bitcjes need to pay for my barely used organs, or they can't have them. There's no free lunch, no free healthcare and no free organs for you. Die young like poor people.

    14. Re:Why stop at dollar stores? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's kind of like seeing cold sores on your date's lips. It's a serious turnoff.

    15. Re:Why stop at dollar stores? by Kjella · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm quite sure that people can cook a home meal for less than a McDonalds meal, especially if you have to drive there. Going to McDonalds is just less effort, and very tasty.

      I'm pretty sure the difference is less than in Europe though, there's a lot of good things to say about our social democracy but it's anything but free. Here in Norway if I go to the store the staff cost is relatively small per unit sold and I pay only 15% VAT. If I go to McDonald's to eat it's a service and I pay 25% VAT, though takeaway is just 15%. But the store also have to pay employee taxes (normally 14.1%) + various employee rights, the worker has to pay social security taxes (normally 8.2%), general income tax (22%) and bracketed income tax (0-16.1%).

      The end result is that more than half my money disappears in taxes before the guy/girl on the other side of the counter gets a paycheck. For specialized services you don't really have a choice, but for something like cooking food we usually do it ourselves. Housecleaning is the same or on the black market, I have it done legit and it's near twice the price. We also bring way more packed lunches than what's normal in the rest of the world. Basically the tax burden is not very conductive to the exchange of services, it skews the market towards solving the things we can on our own.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    16. Re:Why stop at dollar stores? by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      Except after the tariffs they have another layer of regulations that keep your product from being sold in the USA.

      The EU does the same, mainly to protect the interests of French farmers. It's said EU farm policy does damage to Africa in an amount greater than all the monetary aid we send there. Not sure if that's true, and recent changes have improved things a little, but there's still an awful lot of protectionist regulations.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    17. Re:Why stop at dollar stores? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Going to McDonalds is just less effort, and very tasty.

      Taste bud deterioration. That's the reason cheap and horrible food is popular in America.

      McDonalds is a lot of things, but tasty is not one of them.

    18. Re:Why stop at dollar stores? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another factor to consider is time. Europe still has more traditional households where stay-at-home moms aren't looked down upon. In the US thanks to the women's lib movement few women today even know how to cook and spend as much time in the corporate rat-race as their male counterparts.

    19. Re: Why stop at dollar stores? by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Food is an enormous export category for the U.S. Farmers don't need subsidies to be profitable, unless they're incompetent. If subsidies and tariffs and bogus import requirements were removed you'd see readjustments as some prices went up and others down. You'd see some unproductive farmers go out of business, with their farms either abandoned sold off to more efficient farmers. You'd see a lot of bureaucrats forced to find honest jobs instead of interfering with productive people. The net would be an improvement.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    20. Re:Why stop at dollar stores? by hjf · · Score: 1

      Some african country now has a problem with onions, I think from the Netherlands. When small producers started to develop in that country, very industrialized european farming started dumping their onions on them.
      The problem with this is that it's just MONEY NOW. If you put all people out of work, no one can buy your product. It's silly to destroy economies for a couple seasons of produce. It's worse when those out of work, desperate people invade your country because they have no other recourse (it's either starve or join a militia. Or probably both).
      First world countries need to start working with poor countries in a way that would benefit both.
      The USA has a fantastic opportunity with Latin America as a workforce twice the size of the US, well educated, rich in resources. But they decide to mess with their economies (Condor Plan) to keep them from developing, and just serve as a strategic minerals reserve, and prefer to do business with the enemy (China). Weird people, these americans.

    21. Re:Why stop at dollar stores? by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      The dime stores where I grew up were substantially more varied than today's dollar stores. They'd have a lunch counter and sell fabrics by the yard, for instance. They were two stories, and at least 4 times the floor space of a dollar store.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    22. Re: Why stop at dollar stores? by illiac_1962 · · Score: 1

      I can slather sugar all over my food at home. McDonald's doesn't have a monopoly on that. I cant get a spinach and kale wrap with pickled onions that would blow your mind there though. Real food is only slightly cheaper than prepared foods, and you have to prepare it. There is no way to buy real whole food meals when out and about. Maybe panera but even those options are limited and pricey as hell.

    23. Re: Why stop at dollar stores? by illiac_1962 · · Score: 1

      Frozen pizzas and buffets offer the same level of body draining, sickness inducing, level of nutrition as McDonald's.

    24. Re:Why stop at dollar stores? by freeze128 · · Score: 1

      Try it. Find a grocery store that will sell you only 2 eggs. Try to buy a single slice of cheese, or sausage patty. Can you get only 3 hotcakes and a small amount of maple syrup for only one serving? Now, can you get all these things at ONE LOCATION? (Your mom's kitchen doesn't count!)

    25. Re:Why stop at dollar stores? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should buy yourself some taste buds.

    26. Re:Why stop at dollar stores? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm quite sure that people can cook a home meal for less than a McDonalds meal, especially if you have to drive there. Going to McDonalds is just less effort, and very tasty.

      $3.98 for 2lb of beef, $1 for hamburger buns, $1.50 for lettuce, $0.50 for tomatoes, $1.99 for cheese, $1.50 for mayo ~= 1.31/burger for 8 1/4 lb burgers plus left over lettuce and mayo; so, no need to be pretty sure that yea it's definitely cheaper to cook yourself. You also get a lot more control over the ingredients on exactly what sandwich to make and tend to have a lot of left overs to make more--so that lettuce, tomatoes, etc can be made into a salad too.

      Whenever I hear McDonalds is cheap, I wonder if the person actually lives somewhere rural. The same with people complaining about having to travel several miles to a store, given that most stores are almost always miles away. Even in cities near rural areas that have multiple grocery stories, the odds of being near the actual store you want to shop at is going to involve many miles. It sounds like people are really complaining that people with little money are lazy. Granted, I think a lot of people are like that. Personally, I try really hard to save money on most of my average purchases and then tend to waste it on technology.

    27. Re: Why stop at dollar stores? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be too sure of that. What if you live in a room with a tiny mini fridge and dont own a car? You can't buy a gallon of milk that way, nor can you go all the way to the supermarket to pick up a quart at thr reasonable priced location.

      If your economic model is assuming access to full size appliances and reliable personal auto transportation in a location with easily commutable value shopping venues, you are probably not at a locus of affordable rent and bad credit jobs.

      There are millions of people who are in a messed up situation. Some because of themselves, others their parents, some who just got unlucky and bankrupted by medical bills. If your proposed solution doesn't work for them, it is not addressing the actual problem.

    28. Re:Why stop at dollar stores? by hjf · · Score: 1

      Don't tell that to a communist around here, they put nordic countries as examples of successful socialism.

    29. Re:Why stop at dollar stores? by hjf · · Score: 1

      Well, I have this this thing called a "refrigerator". You should try it some day.

    30. Re:Why stop at dollar stores? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Don't tell that to a communist around here, they put nordic countries as examples of successful socialism.

      They're successful in their own way, but their success depends on exporting oil and/or weapons systems. One imagines from ignorance that they survive the cold by watching a fire burn, but in fact it's by watching the world burn.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    31. Re:Why stop at dollar stores? by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

      Basically the tax burden is not very conductive to the exchange of services, it skews the market towards solving the things we can on our own.

      You make that sound like a bad thing. You live in a region where being able to solve problems on your own can literally mean the difference between living and dying. Maybe staying in practice isn't such a bad idea.

      --
      How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
    32. Re:Why stop at dollar stores? by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

      By the time I encountered them, selling fabric by the yard was the primary purpose of five-and-dimes. That was what kept their doors open.

      --
      How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
    33. Re:Why stop at dollar stores? by narf0708 · · Score: 2

      McDonald's sells cheap food. This is the reason why, in America, "fresh food" is expensive.

      Okay, as a poor person myself, I am incredibly tired of this argument. After my other expenses, I have less than $40 a month left over for food, and so I have to pay very close attention to the price and nutritional content of my food. And the thing is, buying a mixture of raw ingredients(mostly flour, sugar, and eggs) and fresh seasonal produce(produce, meaning fruits and veggies. Any meat is expensive, and is well outside of my price range most of the time) is far cheaper than getting that non-nutritional garbage from fast food joints(believe me, I have looked, and if fast food was cheaper per nutrient, that's the only thing I would be eating because every dollar I can save really does matter in my situation).

      Of course raw ingredients and fresh produce do come with their own particular downside; it takes time and effort to prepare it, and it also takes time and effort to learn how to cook. Some poor people work multiple jobs or long hours, and when they come home at the end of the day, they're too tired to put in the required effort, or they don't have enough time left in the day to cook a proper meal. It's faster and easier to either buy some fast food, or to just heat up a frozen microwave dinner, despite it costing more. Maybe they value their free time more than they value the monetary savings. Or maybe they can't do math. Or maybe they're just lazy. Most likely, it's a combination of all of the above. But I don't know about other people, all I know is that when I come home after working for 10 or 12 hours, I'm really tired and don't want to put in the time and effort to cook a meal despite being quite hungry, but I cook anyway, because that's the sound financial decision.

      --
      "Violence is not the answer. Violence is the question. The answer is yes."
    34. Re:Why stop at dollar stores? by mjwx · · Score: 1

      McDonald's sells cheap food. This is the reason why, in America, "fresh food" is expensive.

      I'm quite sure that people can cook a home meal for less than a McDonalds meal, especially if you have to drive there. Going to McDonalds is just less effort, and very tasty.

      I've never done grocery shopping in the US... But your McDonalds is insanely cheap. US$5 will get you a nugget or big mac meal equivalent to a large in the ROTW. Here in the UK that is £6, which is about US$7.50... and it's not tax, food and drink for human consumption is zero rated (I think the drink is not VAT exempt for some reason though). I could easily make a meal that'll last for 3 sittings for that and I'm talking about something complex, not just beans and rice.

      The problem is two fold.
      1. It required me to cook the food. Now I don't mind cooking but sometimes I'm short on time and McDonalds is there.
      2. It requires people to know how to make meals.

      Fixing #1 is about time management, but fixing #2, well... if your parents were terrible cooks you're just going to have to learn yourself. Few people seem to care about changing this, as much as I dislike the Mockney Twat, Jamie Oliver produces some decent recipes that people can actually make in their own home with ingredients that are pretty handy unlike other celebrity chefs who assume everyone has some distilled tears of ophan lying about (right next to the eye of newt and Myrrh). He might be a total wanker, but he at least assumes his audience aren't hipsters.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  5. Basic Capitalism by mentil · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If produce stores can't be profitable without also selling sundries, then I guess people don't want produce bad enough.
    Near where I live, there's a produce store that is always jam-packed full of people. It's like Black Friday at Walmart, all day every day. So the "produce stores can't compete" argument is BS, they just need to make prices reasonable and aim for volume. Produce sections at other grocery stores I go to don't get much traffic, though, probably because the prices are ridiculous and apparently targeted at middle-class shoppers, even the non-organic stuff.

    --
    Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    1. Re:Basic Capitalism by JcMorin · · Score: 2

      Agree, lets stop whimper and start competing properly.

    2. Re:Basic Capitalism by The-Ixian · · Score: 1

      I agree with you. It seems like the next step after this is to ban ALDI stores because their efficiencies and cost cutting measures make regular grocery stores more expensive....

      There have been times in my life where dollar stores were very beneficial to me and allowed me to stretch my budget further than I would have normally.

      They fill a need and I really don't understand why government needs to be in the business of picking winners.

      Also, off on a tangent, the idea of municipal liquor stores really makes me angry!

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    3. Re:Basic Capitalism by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      Near where I live, there's a produce store that is always jam-packed full of people.

      Sounds like there's not enough produce stores in your area. I wonder if TFA is related to this.

    4. Re:Basic Capitalism by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      The thing is, for sake of human health, we don't want to encourage either markets or consumers to eschew produce and turn to things like pre-packaged, highly-processed foods; it's already a problem, and not one that should be ignored, it severely affects people's long-term health when they do that.

    5. Re:Basic Capitalism by scamper_22 · · Score: 2

      I'm in Canada, so maybe the situation really is that dire in the US. But here in Canada, we have people talking about food deserts and all this.

      I was talking to someone lately and they said there's food deserts in Toronto, like in our 'ghetto' at Jane and Finch. It puzzled the crap out of me, because i grew up around there. There were plenty of grocery stores. I thought maybe things changed, so I google mapped the area. Plenty of grocery stores, just like I remember.

      I'm really suspect of all these claims about food deserts and lack of grocery stores being the reason people eat McDonalds or what have you.

      I remember being poor and in Jane and Finch. I can definitely see reasons why the poor might choose not so healthy options. The main one being time. My parents worked crazy jobs at odd hours, and I could see how some families might fall into the trap of not cooking. We were Indian immigrants, at least in my experience, many of us were dirt poor... yet it is just in our culture, that we ate home food.

      It is just cheaper to eat from the grocery store. Do you know how cheap rice is? Seriously, you can get a 20kg bag of rice that will last you months for like 20 bucks. I've lived poor. I've cooked poor. It is not cheaper to eat out; even at mcdonalds. Rice people. You can't compete with that. Vegetables? A 1kg bag of frozen veggies (pretty healthy) is like 5-10 bucks. It will last you at least a week. Lentils, beans, paneer... dirt cheap for protein.

      Grocery stores are just there. We even had more problems as we were Muslim and we had to go to the 'halal' stores for meat. So even travelled further than a few blocks to get meat.

      Yes, grocery stores might not be closer than Mcdonalds, but again... a culture of home cookign and you shop once a week. You can take transit there. I'd be hardpressed to think you can't get to a grocery store in reasonable time once a week.

      Now again, there's parts of the US I don't know about. The real ghettos, that maybe it is an issue there. But I've been to some pretty shady parts of Detroit and Chicago and I've always seen grocery stores. Again, not down the road, but close enough for that once a week trip.

      Now do some people not have a culture of home cooking? Probably. Are some people too busy to shop and cook? Probably. And I'm not minimizing those issues. They're huge issues.

      I also don't think the focus on 'fresh' food is particularly interesting. Fresh fruits and veggies are definitely hard to keep, but frozen fruits and veggies are adequately nutritious. Heck, I have the money now and I mainly eat frozen veggies. There's no need for poorer people to act like whole food shoppers here.

      The problem is not McDonalds or fresh food prices. It is just isn't.

      I've seen other comments here in terms of high quality goods lasting longer and being more economic. Maybe, but I've shopped at what was then Biway and walmart. The stuff is not bad quality by any stretch of the imagination. I grew in Canada and we didn't get new boots every year. I used my brothers hand me down boots and what not. That stuff lasts for years taken care of. Clothing... same thing. Leather boots are nice. But that I don't nylon plastic crap is pretty tough man.

      Life as a poor person is hard. I know. Believe me. Time is probably the biggest problem. But the stuff companies offer... just not the problem.

    6. Re:Basic Capitalism by mentil · · Score: 1

      'Food desert' is code for 'only one Starbucks'.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    7. Re:Basic Capitalism by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      Well, the reason I don't buy fresh produce at most grocery stores, is because I have to rush it home and eat it before it rots. Seriously, Food Lion, if you have moulding tomatoes on your SHELVES you're doing it wrong.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
  6. Oh no! competition! run to the govt! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Dollar stores sell the very cheapest version of a very limited selection of products.
    The cheapest cheap shit made in china crap. The cheapest version of foods.

    If that runs ANY OTHER BUSINESS OUT OF THE AREA.

    That business sucked donkey dick and didn't deserve to survive.

    I like the dollar stores. They've my new stop for a whole 3 different items every week.
    They have better prices! They have better access!
      In and out. 5 minutes. no rewards cards. no coupons. no checkout lanes. no scan it yourself lanes. just one cashier to give money to.

    Don't like that? Compete! or fuck off.

    And if we WANTED fruits and vegetables and fresh. we'd get them.... WE DON'T.

    Signed USA.
    Land of mcdonalds.

  7. Get Govt Out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let Adam Smith's invisible hand adjust as needed.

  8. canned goods by religionofpeas · · Score: 2

    Looks like the dollar stores sell various kinds of canned goods. Nutrionally, there's not much difference between canned and fresh.

    1. Re:canned goods by Freischutz · · Score: 1

      Looks like the dollar stores sell various kinds of canned goods. Nutrionally, there's not much difference between canned and fresh.

      My brother in law bought some canned meat from a pound store once, even the dogs would not eat it.

    2. Re:canned goods by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your Chakras will disagree.

    3. Re:canned goods by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      Well, that settles it then.

    4. Re:canned goods by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a difference. Those can liners are contaminated.

    5. Re:canned goods by Freischutz · · Score: 1

      Well, that settles it then.

      To my mind yes, I've seen those three dogs eat all kinds of disgusting crap, including poop.

    6. Re:canned goods by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      I would not trust a poop eating dog to give me culinary or nutritional advice, but to each their own I guess.

    7. Re:canned goods by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would not trust a poop eating dog to give me culinary or nutritional advice, but to each their own I guess.

      If your dog i's willing to eat somebody else's poop but not dollar store beef, would you eat the beef?

    8. Re:canned goods by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's only vaguely true if you've been conned into believing that what the grocery store has is ripe, fresh food. Leafy greens aside, that isn't the case. Produce has to be picked under-ripe to even be shipped successfully, as supermarkets do it anyway. It's often gassed to force ripening (depending on product) and much of it lies around in cold storage for long periods before hitting store shelves. Most of this is a side effect of consumers demanding the same produce be on shelves all year, although some of it results from sourcing produce internationally.

      Then, as a sibling comment points out, there's the issue of toxic can liners. Cans are lined with either plastic or epoxy. Plastic liners are more resistant to breaking when cans are dented, but more likely to leach toxics into their contents. And the likelihood increases if the food involved is acidic, which it often is - even if it isn't naturally so like tomatoes, it's often made so in order to further increase shelf life.

      However, much of what they sell isn't canned at all, but it is preserved. And preserved foods are typically pounded full of sugar in order to extend their shelf life. The proliferation of HFCS isn't all involved in its use as a sweetener; processed food manufacturers use it to replace vegetable oil! It has a similar effect on food texture, but doesn't go rancid like oils do. They then cram it full of citric acid in order to cancel out the sweetness. Citric acid has health benefits in small quantities, but in large ones it threatens gut biota, both challenging digestion and also potentially contributing to a host of problems associated with poor digestive system function.

      There's plenty to object to in the limited selection of foodstuffs supplied by Dollar general and their ilk. If they successfully displace real markets, they can do real harm. And we're only talking about the food so far, and not the cheap plastic disposable bullshit that they sell, which only increases landfilling since it's such garbage.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    9. Re:canned goods by 50000BTU_barbecue · · Score: 1

      The reason dogs eat poop is because digestive systems aren't able to remove 100% of the nutrients the first time around.
      Ever wonder what sled dogs ate in the Great White North way back when?
      I did. Then I took an anthropology course.... I stopped wondering.
      The Innu eat an almost 100% meat diet and their poop is pretty nutritious the second time around.
      Those dogs know something.

      --
      Mostly random stuff.
    10. Re:canned goods by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      Did the friend check the expiration date on the beef? Canned food _can_ go bad, especially if it's been mishandled or kept warm. Canned meats can actually last 2 to 5 years if kept cool and the can is not punctured.

    11. Re:canned goods by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      It's much easier to get all the nutrition out of meat. It's the herbivores like gorillas and rabbits that have to eat their poop, because the bacteria that help with digesting cellulose are in the colon where it's too late for the intestines to extract all the nutrients.

      Meat is broken down and digested in small intestine. If you eat too much meat, the intestines can just go slower to give it more processing time. Slowing down is not an option for cellulose diets because energy density is too low.

    12. Re:canned goods by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the US canned goods cans are often tin-plated steel. That's banned in Europe. There's also some sort cans with a copper-colored plating that aren't. Plastic (epoxy is a plastic) lined cans leach "toxics" into the contents, you say. What are "toxics"?

    13. Re:canned goods by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      What are "toxics"?

      toxic
      noun
      plural noun: toxics

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  9. Ban Farmers Markets and sales altogether too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Lets ban all forms of sales. Farmers markets are fresh and generally cheaper than the stores.

    The chains they are trying to save will demand it or regulate them out of their cheap business. Use regulations to crush these guys.

  10. I think its a good thing myself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think Dollar stores provide a modern style general store of old selling a lot of staple items in places where people can get to them easily. Lot of people don't have cars, or have to use public transportation. I live in a town of 3000 and our Dollar General is much closer then the WalMart 20 miles away. Why would I travel 20 miles when the same items can be bought at a DG? Using their coupons and weekly saver items you can actually save money. Sadly were becoming a country where competition is bad, and that isn't a good thing for consumers.

  11. its a humen rights issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ppl shouldnt have 2 pay 4 things like food and medesine that u need 2 survive thats just wrong and greeddy

  12. More wishful communism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they ban the dollar stores they won't gave grocers move into their poor neighborhoods, they'll just have nothing. Last I checked there was another store that's worse and stalks low income places: the corner store. Maybe they can go back to those with their $5 milk. Surely, this will help the "poors" they claim to know so much about.

  13. Re: Used to call them Five & Dime stores by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Dollar stores sell so many things. A specialty store never gets negative attention. Dollar stores are low quality and if people need to cut costs dollar stores fill a role. Specialty stores can also fill the same role but more because they provide quality in one area cheaply.

  14. Blooming Nuts by JimSadler · · Score: 0

    Sadly there are people who exist only on dollar store foods. The US grocery system is a mess and unable to provide food at sand prices. On top of all of that, sadly the US economic system is based upon competition and here we have a situation in which competition is stood on its ear. Normally if you are sharp enough to put a competitor out of business you are doing a really good job. Now if we want a start in fixing things simply disallow all export of produce and meats from US businesses and that would push down grocery prices quite a bit. For example sea food is now so expensive that we no longer have staff in the sea food department at my local Publix. If one wants a seafood section product usually one has to ask someone from the butcher section to meet you in the seafood department. Sea food is so expensive that very few patrons will purchase it.

    1. Re:Blooming Nuts by markdavis · · Score: 4, Informative

      >"Now if we want a start in fixing things simply disallow all export of produce and meats from US businesses and that would push down grocery prices quite a bit."

      The economy is more complicated than that. If you cut all exports, there will be oversupply and prices will drop greatly. This is true. But THEN the free market will react and many agricultural businesses will not be able to survive on those lower prices. They will do a combination of shutting down production, raising prices, laying off workers, lowering quality, seek cheap replacement imports, etc... or go out of business. If you subsidize production more, then taxes go up and people have less money and their purchasing power goes down, which is similar to higher prices.

    2. Re:Blooming Nuts by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      If I may point out, cutting off all exports will also imperil imports of many critical imports, especially foreign produce during winter months and petroleum for fuel and fertilizer.

  15. Ignoring the real problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The real problem is not paying people enough to live off of. These problems are being laid bare over and over again. The shutdown was a big deal because workers couldn't cover a lost paycheck. They had no savings. Same for the wells Fargo fiasco with direct deposits not going in on time. Food has never been cheaper or easier to obtain as adjusted for inflation. And yet people are still food insecure or have trouble affording nutritious food. We as a nation have been fucked five ways past Friday by the big corporations. Sure, they helped make food cheap. They also drove out the local farmer who can't leverage the economy of scale to compete with the cheap food, closing opportunities for families and small local operations to build their wealth. So much of my local farmland has been sold to developers who crap out cheap mcmansion after cheap mcmansion (sold at absurd prices of course). It's the last way the farming family can make a buck but it is also the end of their career.

    So no, the problem isn't dollar stores or poor people leveraging their limited money to get the most calories. It's a systemic problem that has been going on for years.

  16. Prices aren't that good for real food by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here in Montreal Dollarama sells some groceries like canned fish and vegetable juices but they are either slightly more expensive than in a grocery store or sold in smaller containers made just for Dollarama.

  17. Profits by bobstreo · · Score: 1

    The canned food aisles in regular supermarkets are the least profitable part of the store.

    Supermarkets make up for it by selling meat, vegetables and fruit and other fresh items at a healthy markup.

    I buy some things at dollar stores because I can walk to the closest one, the closest supermarket is 3-4 miles away which is too much work in the winter.

    I usually make a planned trip every few months to the three local supermarkets each of which has different things I buy, with vastly differing prices. In the winter months I'll stock up on frozen and canned vegetables.

    During the growing season, I go to two local farm stores, prices there are usually a fraction of what produce is priced at local supermarkets. They don't have tropical fruit like oranges or bananas or kiwis, blackberries blueberries are available when they are ready.

    Instacart finally came to our area, so I can use them on occasion like when the snow is too deep to walk anywhere.

    I wish there was a local butcher store though.

    1. Re:Profits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whereabouts are you?

    2. Re:Profits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then the rents will adjust - as supermarkets are anchor stores.
      The top 10 items are fudged but coke, dogfood and toilet paper are in the top 10.
      Thus brandnames are at risk, as their ability to command a premium. Many studies prove the weekly shopping trolley price depends most on competition. Dollar stores benefit big supermarkets, by reducing their stock shrinkage. a win-win for everyone

    3. Re:Profits by bobstreo · · Score: 1

      Whereabouts are you?

      Over here, buried in snow. Where are you?

  18. Let Free Enterprise Work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If someone can create a business that serves the need, then more power to them. Maybe you can create a business that offers healthier choices at low prices, who knows. But you canâ(TM)t force the consumer. Remember government is FORCE. The only real tool it has is FORCE, and ultimately force comes at the end of the barrel of a gun. If you donâ(TM)t comply, ultimately someone will come break down your door. So I donâ(TM)t get how someone who is worried about the well being of people and society always gravitates towards government as the solution because that ultametly means the exact opposite.

  19. Red Spots by jmccue · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What a dumb article, it is like saying "Red Spots on your skin is the cause of measles, so do not get red spots"

    There are many causes of poverty, Dollar Stores are a symptom. No money is the cause of Poverty. Without a living wage how can one afford to shop elsewhere

    1. Re:Red Spots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have shopped at the same grocery store for over 40 years.
        Even when I was unemployed. I just ate less.
      2 dollar stores came to town. One is 1 block from my grocery store.
      I still will not buy food from the Dollar General. I am a dying breed.
      All I buy there is stuff no one else has.
      Why? Because Wallmart and all the others are 15 miles away.
      Hard to walk there.
      Main St is somewhat of a Ghost town. Has been for years Even Kmart and Fisher's Big Wheel,Kroger's,Loblaws ,Pelton's and list goes on.
      They all left right alone with industry that could not compete globally.
        And all but 2 grocers are gone. One even converted to Save-A-Lot's to survive.
       

  20. Entitled businessmen by Dunbal · · Score: 1

    There are some people who believe they have a right to profit. That doing what they did yesterday is going to work forever, and that they never need change anything at all. Those people don't deserve to stay in business.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    1. Re:Entitled businessmen by markdavis · · Score: 1

      >"There are some people who believe they have a right to profit."

      Profit is a requisition for business to exist. Without profit, a business cannot survive long. And without the expectation of profit, why would any business start in the first place. Profit is what allows capital to expand, savings for down-turns, attraction investment, incentive to develop, etc.

      >" That doing what they did yesterday is going to work forever, and that they never need change anything at all. Those people don't deserve to stay in business."

      Without profit, they won't. In a free market, other companies will come along who will innovate and can produce newer, better, different, and/or cheaper solutions and undercut the competition, forcing them to do the same or die.

    2. Re:Entitled businessmen by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      And without the expectation of profit

      I agree that profit is an expectation, and this supports everything you said. However it is not and should never be a right. Profit must be earned.

      In a free market

      Free markets exist only in Economics textbooks and classrooms. Regulation (which skews the barrier for entry against the less wealthy) and cronyism (which virtually slams it in the face for everyone else) ensure that markets are not free. And that's without even considering other little pitfalls like organized crime, etc.

      other companies will come along who will innovate and can produce newer, better, different, and/or cheaper solutions and undercut the competition, forcing them to do the same or die.

      Provided they survive not only the market and little details like massive advertising campaigns, predatory pricing practices (like a wealthy/more diversified competitor selling at a loss), cartels (where a bunch of previous business model owners do the same), etc, then yes, in theory... this would happen. So how come no one starts a new ISP and undercuts Comcast? How come Netflix can't broadcast "Friends" anymore? Etc. The world is not as cut and dry as Adam Smith and the rest would have us believe.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    3. Re:Entitled businessmen by markdavis · · Score: 2

      >"So how come no one starts a new ISP and undercuts Comcast?"

      Because of government intervention. Almost all ISP's operate in a monopoly granted or created by local or state governments. That is certainly the case here. Nobody can compete with Cox, because the local government gave one and only one company the "keys to the kingdom: way-back-when and then allowed them to provide any services they want on that physical line. Even if the market is supposedly free in that sector, no other company was given the incentives that X got on the onset... so nobody else can afford to enter the market.

      Now, the motive might have been good at the time, and Cox does cover 100% of the houses in all the cities involved, but the results are now high prices, less innovation, and mediocre service due to zero competition. Consumers have a choice of X or nothing.

    4. Re:Entitled businessmen by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The world is not as cut and dry

      Dried. Matching tenses.

      as Adam Smith and the rest would have us believe.

      If Adam Smith were alive right now, he'd be clawing at the inside of his coffin until he suffocated

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:Entitled businessmen by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      Almost all ISP's operate in a monopoly granted or created by local or state governments.

      Name ONE ISP that has been given a government monopoly.

      In days gone by (like twenty five years ago) a CABLE COMPANY could get an exclusive franchise (government-granted monopoly) to operate CABLE TV in an area. The federal government outlawed exclusive franchises twenty five years ago. But even so, that grant was for Comcast the Cable TV company, not Comcast the ISP. (Hint: cable is just one way of delivering internet service. Nobody ever said "Comcast, you have a monopoly in this region in internet service.")

      Telephone companies are still exclusive franchisees. They are a monopoly -- on wired telephone service. They don't have a monopoly on being an ISP. (Another hint: telephone wires are not the only way of providing internet service. Nobody ever told any telephone company that they have a monopoly in internet services.)

      Wireless licenses were issued originally to TWO companies for every market, specifically to avoid the monopoly issue.

      But ISPs -- never. There are simply too many of them to ever honestly say there is a monopoly.

      Even if the market is supposedly free in that sector, no other company was given the incentives that X got on the onset...

      Being an incumbent in ANY market is an advantage. But "incumbent" is not "monopoly".

      .. so nobody else can afford to enter the market.

      It's an economic monopoly if anything (and in most places it isn't even that), not a government-granted one.

    6. Re:Entitled businessmen by markdavis · · Score: 1

      >"But ISPs -- never. There are simply too many of them to ever honestly say there is a monopoly."

      Nonsense. Where I live, there is one and ONLY one option for ISP (where it is defined with usable speed/latency). This is actually the case for most Americans. Radio never materialized. Satellite is too slow and laggy. DSL is too slow, unreliable, and generally unavailable unless you are X feet from the CO. Cable companies use their cable right-of-way and infrastructure to pile Internet service on top in a way that works. And, again, in most areas, nobody else can use or replicate that infrastructure. I essentially have one and only one choice, which makes it a monopoly.

      >"Telephone companies are still exclusive franchisees. They are a monopoly -- on wired telephone service. "

      "Are they? I have at least two choices for land phone service- one from Verizon and one from Cox. So that actually isn't a monopoly at all. At least not in my city. But, in my State, Verizon was forced to allow third party phone services on Verizon lines! So there are actually several choices available to me. One I think was called "Cavalier" (my Mom actually used that).

      >"Being an incumbent in ANY market is an advantage. But "incumbent" is not "monopoly".

      If you are the only player in the market, by definition, you are a monopoly. It doesn't matter HOW it happened in the definition.

      >"It's an economic monopoly if anything (and in most places it isn't even that), not a government-granted one."

      When it came about because of government intervention in the first place... like it typically did with cable, does it matter? I am not saying there are any laws here PREVENTING competition. But their intervention caused the monopoly to exist. And that advantage they now have (and no requirement they share their lines) means the monopoly will continue to exist, as it has for many years.

      Perhaps if 5G services get robust enough, they can finally break the cable companies' stronghold on ISPs. I am not holding my breath, though...

    7. Re:Entitled businessmen by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      Nonsense. Where I live, there is one and ONLY one option for ISP (where it is defined with usable speed/latency).

      I can put limits on every "definition" of services such that there is only one providers that meets all my criteria. That doesn't create a monopoly, nor does it create a government-granted one.

      For example, there is only one cell provider that meets all my criteria, but trying to claim that T-Mobile is a monopoly because of that is just ridiculous.

      Cable companies use their cable right-of-way and infrastructure to pile Internet service on top in a way that works.

      Of course. On their system that lost government-monopoly status decades ago. And services where they've never been given a monopoly by any government.

      I essentially have one and only one choice, which makes it a monopoly.

      I choose to drink only Stoly vodka; someone should do something about that government-granted monopoly they have on the vodka market.

      Are they? I have at least two choices for land phone service- one from Verizon and one from Cox.

      Are you referring to Cox the cable company selling you VoIP telephone service, and somehow confusing that with landline wired telephones? Or does Cox actually have a franchise for wired telephone service? If so, my bad. It only proves my point even better -- landline telcos don't have exclusive franshise protections, or maybe your municipality didn't grant an exclusive for wired phone in the first place.

      If you are the only player in the market, by definition, you are a monopoly.

      Read what I wrote. "Incumbent" does not mean "only player", it means "existing". It also does not mean "monopoly". Yes, of course if only one provider actually exists then there is a monopoly, but being a "government-granted" monopoly actually requires a government grant of a monopoly. ISPs have NEVER had such protections; cable television services did twenty years ago, but no longer.

      When it came about because of government intervention in the first place... like it typically did with cable, does it matter?

      Of course. What ended twenty years ago ended twenty years ago. Yes, that's a Captain Obvious statement, but so was your "if you're the only provider you are a monopoly" one. Federal law solved the monopoly issue with cable television as far as it being a government-granted one. Now it is economic, and simply crying that there aren't enough competitors is about all you can do. You can't force a company to come compete with the incumbents. If there was a profit to be had, someone would be competing. And Google pretty much admitted they couldn't hack a profit from a sitting duck situation when they pulled out of fiber.

      And that advantage they now have (and no requirement they share their lines) means the monopoly will continue to exist, as it has for many years.

      Except that the monopoly they had was for cable TV, not as an ISP. There are too many competitors to call any ISP a monopoly. Nobody ever told Comcast they had a monopoly as an ISP, and nobody ever told any other company they couldn't be one.

      We went through this a year or so ago when the city in Colorado pronounced they had one one ISP in town and the city voted to create a municipal ISP. Except if you looked on the web you would find they had at least 8 residential and 8 commercial ISPs serving that area. Yes, some of them were the same company doing both, but some weren't.

  21. Another capitalism most by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

    This is your system. How many times have I heard that businesses deserve to profit no matter what? Gee a person has to travel for 30 minutes to get healthy food or they can walk out their front door and get junk, I wonder what's going to happen? Suck it up buttercup, or change the system that preys on people.

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    1. Re:Another capitalism most by tomhath · · Score: 0

      Panera tried to provide a system that seemed fair. Decide for yourself if it was a success.

    2. Re:Another capitalism most by fluffernutter · · Score: 2

      I want to nip this one in the bud this time. Yes it was tried before, people got corrupt and it failed. I think the challenge of the human race is to develop a system that prevents people from becoming corrupt. It can't happen if we shut the conversation down with "it always fails".

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    3. Re:Another capitalism most by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Let me add this. I don't believe with current sitting president anyone can argue that American politics is also failing, it just took longer. You're making the people who don't have health coverage sick with these dollar stores. What do you have left? Where does it stop?

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    4. Re:Another capitalism most by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      Where does it stop?

      It just gets gradually worse until people have so little to lose that they'll start a revolution. Revolution leads to chaos, ultimately stabilizes with a strong leader, and then you get a series of leaders until you get one that's benevolent enough to increase rights to citizens.

    5. Re:Another capitalism most by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's called capitalism and free enterprise. Always works where tried and maintains power with the individuals so corruption stays minimized and in check.

    6. Re:Another capitalism most by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Wow. Your president is surrounded with felons, the corporations are leading the government around by the nose and the only thing holding your society together are the laws and regulations that are quickly being eroded. Capitalism does NOT keep things in check. That's the problem. Wake up. I consider it pretty disgusting that you can make that comment with a straight face given today's political climate.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    7. Re:Another capitalism most by tomhath · · Score: 1

      It can't happen if we shut the conversation down with "it always fails".

      Nor can it happen if you shut down the conversation with "Suck it up buttercup, or change the system that preys on people."

      Capitalism has worked better than any other system that's been devised. The challenge is to find a way for everyone in society to benefit from it.

    8. Re:Another capitalism most by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The thing is any "pure" ideology is going to fail in practice because they rely on absolute premises that simply don't exist in a world of 7 billion people.

      Pure communism doesn't work because ultimately it depends on all people being angels and self policing.

      Pure capitalism doesn't work because ultimately it depends on all people being perfectly rational consumers.

      Pure libertarianism doesn't work because ultimately it depends on everyone being able to enforce equal and voluntary transactions on each other by themselves.

      The reality is that if any of these preconditions existed, then those would have been the natural outcome of life without anyone enforcing them.

      The reason government exists is because we have people that are selfish and we have people that are vulnerable.

    9. Re:Another capitalism most by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      So you're talking about changing the system... Which is the same thing that my words say that you have a problem with.

      The problem with capitalism is that any changes you make to it are government regulation and no longer pure capitalism. What is holding Americans back is the insistence that they should not stray further away from pure capitalism.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    10. Re:Another capitalism most by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      I remind everyone that complains about the people who take and don't work...... This a far cheaper an easier way than having them come take your stuff.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    11. Re:Another capitalism most by tomhath · · Score: 1

      The problem with capitalism is that any changes you make to it are government regulation and no longer pure capitalism.

      That is definitely *not* a problem with the capitalistic system we have in the US. Nor does anyone (other than a tiny lunatic fringe) support the idea of "pure capitalism". Our existing system is not "holding Americans back", the economy is doing great - employment is at an all time high.

    12. Re:Another capitalism most by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      You sure about that? Forbes says wages haven't gone up, so companies can't be that desperate to find people. Many people have given up and exited the workplace. Trump is cancelling raises. Seeing alot of "help wanted" signs doesn't mean the economy is doing well, it means that companies are unable to provide a good enough compensation to make it worth a person's while to come back into the workplace. For example, why would a single income family choose to be double income if it is more expensive to pay for child care than the second job will provide?

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    13. Re:Another capitalism most by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      The reason government exists is because we have people that are selfish and we have people that are vulnerable.

      Bingo. Yet Americans will happily complain about how they can't trust the government and how the government should stay out of their lives. This is exactly what the higher powers WANT.

      The only way out for America is to WAKE UP and DEMAND that they government works for them. This will take a massive change to your system that the powerful people will always fight adamantly with all their resources and the average American keeps losing ground to it.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    14. Re:Another capitalism most by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      I might add, I firmly believe if the government was doing the right things there would be no race division. It is the current state of the economy that exacerbates the division.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    15. Re:Another capitalism most by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "people got corrupt and it failed"

      No, people didn't "get" corrupt, humans are corrupt by their very nature. It's the survival instinct implanted in all of our DNA and the reason why socialism fails every time it's tried. Those who end up in control will always use their position to enrich or benefit themselves at the expense of everyone else. They'll even justify it by telling themselves that they're just too important to go without. This isn't theory, we see it every single time. The optimal system allows everyone the opportunity to control their own destiny.

    16. Re:Another capitalism most by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Forbes says wages haven't gone up, so companies can't be that desperate to find people. "

      Which is why unlimited immigration is such a real problem.

    17. Re:Another capitalism most by ChrisMaple · · Score: 0

      Trump is cancelling raises.

      The only wages Trump might control are federal government employees. For a few decades now, they've been paid more than equivalent employees in private industry, with less risk of losing their jobs. It's more than time to restore the balance, which means not paying federal employees more. Eventually that will result in higher wages and more competent people in the private sector.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    18. Re:Another capitalism most by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Pure capitalism doesn't work because ultimately it depends on all people being perfectly rational consumers.

      Ooh, a straw man. Almost as common as "capitalism requires perfect information."

      Capitalism is the protection of human rights - life and what a person needs to do to support his life - viewed from an economic standpoint. That requires laws to identify the rights, and people to enforce the laws. The system does not have zero friction; some overhead and maintenance is necessary.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    19. Re:Another capitalism most by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Trump controls all wages by controlling the economy. A hot economy with low unemployment means higher wages. Trump would be the first to take credit for the hot economy, though there is much that is debatable about his role in it.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    20. Re:Another capitalism most by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      I"m pretty sure Trump promised the little guy that the hot economy would help him, after all. If the little guy's wages aren't going up then they aren't being helped.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    21. Re:Another capitalism most by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since when does the President control the economy? That's ludicrous.

    22. Re:Another capitalism most by walllaby · · Score: 1

      the challenge of the human race is to develop a system that prevents people from becoming corrupt

      Exactly this! This is what I’ve been saying from the very beginning. Humans are corrupt, fallible beings. Much better to replace them with pliant, rational robots who make intelligent buying and governing decisions. Remove the cancer, and the patient (society) will survive.

    23. Re:Another capitalism most by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Technology definitely has a role to play.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  22. News for Nerds? by pz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How is this News for Nerds?

    Is it because dollar stores sell electronic parts?

    Or they have a wide selection of computer games?

    They sell the latest laptops?

    Or they have really advanced IT?

    They compute bitcoin hashes with your body heat when you walk through the door?

    Maybe it's me, but there doesn't seem to be any relevance whatsoever.

    --

    Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    1. Re:News for Nerds? by thegarbz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Maybe it's me, but there doesn't seem to be any relevance whatsoever.

      It's you. You're just not the same nerd as those of us interested in socio-economic patterns, especially those that affect my ability to be a food nerd.

    2. Re:News for Nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nerds also enjoy discussing economics.

    3. Re:News for Nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it because dollar stores sell electronic parts?

      Well, in my experience dollar stores are a great place to get HDMI cables and micro-usb cables - I've never had one fail.

    4. Re:News for Nerds? by Patent+Lover · · Score: 1

      Nerds eat tons of junk food if you haven't noticed.

    5. Re: News for Nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm poor, and a nerd. This story is extremely relevant to me.

    6. Re:News for Nerds? by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      Correct answer. Give this coward some points, mods, 'cause I am fresh out.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    7. Re:News for Nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FWIW Dollar Tree was ahead of most of the rest of the retail industry in Interactive Multimedia Instruction for employee training 10 or 15 years ago.

  23. Profit margin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've known people who worked in dollar stores, they watch every shopper that comes in the door and still have to constantly deal with theft; and that was in good neighborhoods.

    But how much does robbery, shoplifting and employee theft contribute to the lack of traditional grocery stores in not-so-good neighbor hoods?

  24. Re: Used to call them Five & Dime stores by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Id buy THAT for a dollar!

  25. A ban on ban employee cafeterias and now? by AHuxley · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What is it with controlling people and their food?
    People want a nice safe, clean employee cafeteria and the big gov says no.
    People have the freedom to shop for food they can afford and big gov says no.
    To protect a system that has more expensive food people can afford?
    People have a sent income, let them find the food they can afford, enjoy and want to eat.
    Freedom to buy products and services that are near them and at a price they can use everyday.
    Should big gov tell a person how to shop, where to shop and that they have to support more expensive "grocery stores"?

    Will the gov say what can be sold? What the lowest cost fresh produce, meats, fruit will be in a community?
    Food shopping is now gov tracked, gov approved and with gov set prices for set food quality?
    Who sets the price, food quality and what an approved grocery stores is?
    Will the cost of all that gov approval be passed on with a new fresh produce, meats and fruit tax?
    Let the free market set food prices, store locations and what to sell.
    No gov regulation needed.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    1. Re:A ban on ban employee cafeterias and now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Businesses shut down cafeterias because tax authorities came to the conclusion they were taxable benefits, and therefore required the compensation to be part of the W-2 statement, complete with all deductions. If they charged money they would have to open the cafeteria to the public at large under accommodation laws unless they created a co-op. It ended up being a complete hassle.

    2. Re:A ban on ban employee cafeterias and now? by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      People have the freedom to shop for food they can afford and big gov says no. ...snip...
      Will the gov say what can be sold?

      You don't understand the government at all do you? Big gov (not at all big gov) is preserving your choice in what you eat, not reducing it. All the while somehow it seems to have passed you that the government very much already says what can and can't be sold.

      Will the cost of all that gov approval be passed on with a new fresh produce, meats and fruit tax?

      That super expensive (not really) banana in your store already has that cost applied to it. Guess what, it wasn't significant.

    3. Re:A ban on ban employee cafeterias and now? by jtara · · Score: 2

      People have the freedom to shop for food they can afford and big gov says no.

      This isn't about "big government", thought. It's about LOCAL government having some say about the merchants in their community. It is about "small gov".

      Not that far removed from Long Island City's recent successful rejection of Amazon.

      You go, L.I. City! They did it without even having to have useless community "listening sessions" where nobody listens, and they just allow residents to vent, and then the developer gets their way.

      We've had some battles in some smaller San Diego Communities (notably Ocean Beach) trying to prevent e.g. Target and other large chains from coming in and changing the small-town local merchant ecosystem. In the case of OB, though, the people lost. Developers control San Diego real estate and land use, not the city. The city just kow-tows to them.

      I know that L.I. City/Amazon and Ocean Beach/big chain stores aren't quite the same issue but it is the same principal. Local governments have the right on behalf of the people to control land use and types of commerce.

      I do hope they are careful to NOT exclude real do-gooders in adjoining sectors, such as Grocery Outlet. I love GO! They do something similar to the original Trader Joe's concept - they buy overstock, changed packaging, discontinued, (and sometimes) expiring but not expired goods directly from the manufacturer. (NOT from other stores, like the Dollars).

      My nearly GO in downtown San Diego is shopped by downtown residents of all income groups, millennials shopping for a deal, and the homeless. It is one of the few stores that doesn't shoo them away (but they aren't allowed to loiter, either). It's nearly all high-quality merchandise. They are famous for their wine deals. The frozen section has amazing bargains - same upscale brands as Whole Foods at typically 1/3 to 1/2 the price. (Sadly, I see the lower-income patrons often making poor choices - Banquet over Amy's when Amy's might actually CHEAPER at their prices, and certainly healthier... They have been entrained.)

    4. Re:A ban on ban employee cafeterias and now? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      When a gov places demands on what is "healthier" and who can trade, when and where that's "big gov".
      Let the people select what they want to buy, when, where and at what cost.
      Poor people do not have extra hours to shop.
      They do not have extra money to spend on gov laws demanding they eat more expensive "healthier" food.
      Its their wage, their food and their time.
      They have the freedom to spend that wage on any product and services they want at any part of the city they want.
      A big gov should not set shopping times, new more distant locations, type of food and the cost of food.
      Once a gov places demands on what is high-quality merchandise, they will place other demands on what be be sold and why.
      People who are poor will then have to spend more time and money travelling further to try and find lower cost food.
      Time they may not have as they work long hours for low wages.
      Now they have to pay more and give up more hours to buy food as the gov has changed their food prices?

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    5. Re:A ban on ban employee cafeterias and now? by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1

      I like your analysis of GroceOut, especially comparing to earlier TJ. I really enjoy shopping there, and it is cool to help local farms get rid of produce dairy etc. keeping it from becoming part of the sad waste stream our culture generates. Shopping has become a bit depressing for me in general, so many stores have outrageous prices and depressing choices. I can afford to spend a lot on food, but I just can't deal with spending $7 on a head of cauliflower. I love how GroceOut always has cauliflower in the long California growing season, usually $2/head. Good local farms too! And it is fun how I always can find neat stuff to try - they had this delicious clam soup a type of which I had never encountered.

      --
      Man, you really need that seminar!
    6. Re:A ban on ban employee cafeterias and now? by walllaby · · Score: 1

      People want a nice safe, clean employee cafeteria and the big gov says no.

      What? Employee cafeterias are common in large companies where I live. What “discontent media” have you been watching lately?

    7. Re:A ban on ban employee cafeterias and now? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      The gov idea suggested around early 2018 was to ban employee cafeterias in areas like San Francisco.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  26. Traditional retail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Traditional retail is dead in the medium term.

  27. Failed economic and social policies to blame by guruevi · · Score: 3, Interesting

    These businesses are just capturing what the market wants or can carry. What has really failed, especially in inner cities are both economic and social policies. When it's better for tax reasons to have a single parent family, you're going to drive the poor to single families which long-term causes both economic and social instability of all sorts. When you give people thousands of dollars per month in overvalued coupons every month to buy 'food' (typically sponsored by or limited to Nestle, Kellogg's, Dole products etc) you're going to create a black market which corner shops and dollar stores are really good at fulfilling the demand for. When we were on food stamps a few years ago, the total value of the 'checks' was $2500/month but at the regular grocery stores, the products were about half the price of the value of the stamp.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  28. Slashdot is the new home for SJW topics by mpercy · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Haven't you been paying attention?

  29. CHEAP VEGETABLES = = IMMIGRANT LABOR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Sixty years ago - when I was in high school - it seemed like fresh fruits and produce were plentiful and at very reasonable prices.

    Things have changed, but Dollar Stores are NOT the cause.
    The overwhelming change has resulted from the distribution of wealth.
    The root of the problem is income inequality.

    I also remember paying my way through college with part time jobs.
    Today you need to live on ramen noodles and go $30,000 into debt.
    The middle class ain't what it used to be.
    Where did all that wealth end up?

    1. Re:CHEAP VEGETABLES = = IMMIGRANT LABOR by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      A large part of the increase in educational costs has been caused by government meddling, which resulted increased non-teaching staff, overpaid administrators, and the buildings to hold them. Cities grow up around the institutions, raising property value and taxes. There's a lot of demand for prestigious schools, and their capacity hasn't grown by a factor of 2 while the US population has. This causes supply-demand price hikes, which allow the schools to be wasteful, putting money into edifices, political causes, and administrators' pockets.

      There are small colleges that run a tight ship, where tuition is 1/10th that of ivy league schools.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    2. Re:CHEAP VEGETABLES = = IMMIGRANT LABOR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah. I remember growing up with a single black and white tv, no cable, a single wired telephone in the kitchen. 1 car. And no computer whatsoever. Middle class sure as hell ain't what it used to be.

    3. Re: CHEAP VEGETABLES = = IMMIGRANT LABOR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL. Nice strawmAn. If you can't figure out why your example is shit, then I don't know what else to say. Other than your example is the dumbest thing I've read.

    4. Re: CHEAP VEGETABLES = = IMMIGRANT LABOR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What kind of career can pay for that kind of lifestyle, that you can acquire and retain on that kind of lifestyle.

      I wouldn't even have a job without a smart phone and the internet. But I should be able to get by without a house, if it wasn't for having to have an internet hookup that isn't public wifi. That single car lack of redundancy stuff is kind of skating on thin ice. Almost lost my job when my car broke down and I couldn't afford to replace it.

    5. Re:CHEAP VEGETABLES = = IMMIGRANT LABOR by quintus_horatius · · Score: 1

      A large part of the increase in educational costs has been caused by government meddling, which resulted increased non-teaching staff, overpaid administrators, and the buildings to hold them.

      Bullshit. The largest single reason for "increasing" education costs is that education has not seen the same productivity gains as manufacturing. It seems more expensive, but it really isn't.

      It's like playing a symphony: It takes just as long, and just as many people, to play a symphony today as it did when it was written -- no matter how long ago. There's no increase in productivty. The typical college education took 16 years (12 primary + 4 secondary) years a hundred years ago, and takes that long today.

      Compare and contrast to a car over the same time frame, which took a week of solid labor on Ford's first assembly line, to less than 12 hours now.

      Education seems expensive now, compared to the cost of a car, but really it's the car that got cheaper -- and your wages went down -- over the years.

    6. Re: CHEAP VEGETABLES = = IMMIGRANT LABOR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? You almost lost your job because you couldn't buy a $500 piece of shit to get you around for 6 months while you find a big boy job so you can get a more reasonable car?

      numbnuts

  30. Rich people fucking over poor people for feels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let me get this straight. Poor people, who have barely a few dollars to buy ANYTHING, are getting something to eat, or clean their clothes, or brush their teeth with what they can afford.

    Rich people, and rich politicians are saying, IF ONLY THOSE LOSERS PAID MORE, they could get something better. We need to help them by driving out the one place they can get something. So, just starve a little bit, or smell a little bit, or just lose a few teeth and you can get some fruits and vegetables that we approve of and give us good feels.

    Anyone posting here is fucking rich in comparison. Screw you and your enlightened benevolence. I've been there scraping up change to maybe get a pack of ramen noodles or something else to eat. These places are a godsend if you have nothing. Now you want to take it away because it makes you feel better about yourselves. Shame on you. May you lose everything and have to scrape together a few dimes and then you will WISH you had a 5 and dime, or dollar store in your area.

    Fucking privileged assholes making up bullshit arguments to justify their self worth.

    Shitty food is better than no food, assholes.

  31. Sigh. by ledow · · Score: 1

    So...

    Are they selling the same products as the big stores, but at a cheaper price?

    Or are they selling something that big stores aren't selling?

    Because, either way, simple business analysis tells you that you have a problem if that's the case and it's hardly "their" fault that they are undercutting you and giving people things they want.

    I feel so sad for those multi-million dollar store chains that can't over-charge people for basic goods and services because of a dollar-store (or pound shop in my country) down the road.

    Compete, or get the fuck out of the market. Trying to shut down the opposition that's filling the niches you aren't - without even trying to fill those same niches - is just being arseholes.

    1. Re:Sigh. by tomhath · · Score: 1

      The implication is that traditional grocery stores have some kind of altruistic drive to sell fresh produce at no profit. They subsidize it with higher prices on canned goods. But these evil dollar stores don't sell the unprofitable stuff so the grocery stores can't fulfill their mission.

    2. Re:Sigh. by ledow · · Score: 1

      So, my first option.

      The problem with offering such subsidised-elsewhere products is that unless you have 100% exclusivity, someone else came come along and offer just the bit that you don't want them to.

      No different to any loss-leader product. The objective word there is "loss". Don't be surprised if someone works out how to cause you that loss and not actually give you the profitable part elsewhere (e.g. Cuecats).

  32. it could be a lot worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Be thankful that Hillary lost the election.

    1. Re:it could be a lot worse by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Like I always say, show me the evidence.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  33. My experience: Safeway is expensive. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 2

    Safeway grocery stores here are expensive. I doubt they are making only 3 percent.

    We go to WinCo

    Dollar Tree often has good items. Certainly it would not be healthy to buy a lot of food at Dollar Tree, however; food is often expensive at Dollar Tree. One dollar for 4 ounces is $4 per pound.

    1. Re:My experience: Safeway is expensive. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Safeway pays their employees more, hence the higher prices.

      numbnuts

  34. Yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Heaven forbid we address the mentality and lifestyles that drive people to those stores in the first place. This victim shit has reaalllyy passed its expiration date.

  35. greedy megacorps killing their competition by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

    Sigh. This is so obviously the bigger stores hiring lobbyists and bribing the government to get rid of their competition. Poor people do not have a choice. They can only buy what they can afford and they (we) can afford almost nothing at all. For those who don't understand go try to live on $20 for a whole week. Just one $20 bill. Then see how often you shop at Whole Foods and notice what you do buy if you are there. Hint, it won't be the salmon or the Manchego cheese. Rich people who lecture poor people about how their diet isn't healthy should be lined up against a wall and shot. End of problem. Or just kill all the poor. I think many of these corporations would be in favor of that.

    --
    Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  36. On one hand... by magusxxx · · Score: 1

    ...give $1 Million worth of tax breaks and incentives to a big box store.

    On the other hand... Give $1 Million worth of tax breaks and incentives to ten smaller local stores.

    Now that I think about it, that won't work. Because all the local cash will go to businesses with city hall connections that don't need it.

    You know, the same ones that don't want the dollar stores in their area either.

    --
    Care killed the cat, but satisfaction brought it back.
  37. Re: Used to call them Five & Dime stores by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    +1 I buy certain things at the dollar store or equivalent, and I never confuse it with the grocery store, or my local jewelry store

  38. Cities don't fight. by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

    Special interests in cities do. The motivations are right there in TFS: Margins are razor thin for grocery stores. That's who's fighting.

    Apparently, food is not coveted as much as the grocers assert. If food made money, there would be stores that sold food and no beer and cigarettes and sodas.

    "Yes, we have no toilet paper today -- just food."

    Poor people can't afford upscale food. Eliminating the Dollar Stores isn't going to raise their food budget.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  39. Myth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I remember reading an article, back in the 90's I think, that the grocery store 1 to 3 percent profit was a lie. If you do you grocery shopping at Walmart as I do and go into a regular grocery store, you will be amazed at how much higher the regular grocery store prices are. That proved to me that the 1 to 3 percent profit was a lie. I am surprised that people actually do their grocery shopping at any of our local regular grocery stores. I am much too frugal to knowingly throw away money.

  40. Re: Used to call them Five & Dime stores by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, this is just pure bs to save overpriced "grocery" stores that sell toothpaste and toilet paper for multiples of what it costs at a dollar store.

    Nice try playing the"health" card guys, but you're not price competitive on many items.

  41. Look at the Grocery vs Other Store Prices... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    9 years ago, my local grocery chain implemented "loyalty cards". I was always forgetting my card. But it used a Bar code, so I made a photocopy backup. One day my grocery store decided they would no longer accept photocopies. They sent me out, into a winter snowstorm, sick as a dog, I had stopped to buy cold medicine, into an unplowed parking lot, walking through 3+ inches of unplowed snow on the parking lot, with all 3 of my kids, the oldest had just started kindergarten a few months earlier, I was trying to get back in time to get him off to school on time, all for the original loyalty card from my glovebox.

    That's the American grocery store experience for you right there.

    I said FUCK THIS SHIT! Even with a loyalty card discount, Grocery store prices on a pack of chicken hot dogs was over $5. The same product at Walmart was under $2. So I started running the numbers on everything else. Everything was cheaper. How much grief do I want to suffer to pay over twice as much? And we're talking about the largest section of my budget! Beating out the Mortgage/Rent!

    Now folks knock Walmart. This is cannibalizing our other businesses. And the grocery store chain, they donate to all these wonderful charities. They have a nursery room for kids to play in while their parents shop. All these wonderful extras.

    On the other hand, by my calculations, by shopping at Walmart, I saved enough money to BUY A NEW CAR in a lot less than 9 years.

    It's your money. Where do you want it to go?

    As for Dollar Stores. Well driving to the grocery chain, that's how many miles? What's your gas mileage? How about insurance & maintenance? What's the IRS mileage rate these days? $0.545/mile? It doesn't take a lot of distance before the Dollar store becomes the better price. Don't both places sell foods like StarKist?

    And it's not just Dollar Stores. Drug stores, corner shops, everybody sells basic foodstuffs.

    This is the Grocery stores crying sour grapes because their extremely lucrative monopoly with enormous profit margins is going down the tubes. The Free Market Principle working as intended.

    1. Re:Look at the Grocery vs Other Store Prices... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you decided to go out, into a winter snowstorm, sick as a dog, into an unplowed parking lot, walking through 3+ inches of unplowed snow on the parking lot, with all 3 of my kids, the oldest had just started kindergarten a few months earlier, for the original loyalty card from my glovebox, even though you were trying to get back in time to get him off to school on time, instead of just paying for it right then and now?

    2. Re: Look at the Grocery vs Other Store Prices... by kenh · · Score: 1

      9 years ago, my local grocery chain implemented "loyalty cards". I was always forgetting my card. But it used a Bar code, so I made a photocopy backup. One day my grocery store decided they would no longer accept photocopies. They sent me out, into a winter snowstorm, sick as a dog, I had stopped to buy cold medicine, into an unplowed parking lot, walking through 3+ inches of unplowed snow on the parking lot, with all 3 of my kids, the oldest had just started kindergarten a few months earlier, I was trying to get back in time to get him off to school on time, all for the original loyalty card from my glovebox.
      That's the American grocery store experience for you right there

      No, there's a guy that puts 'loyalty points' ahead of health and personal safety. Did the store refuse to sell you the medicine without your loyalty card? Or were you he'll-bent I'm getting some loyalty points or savings? You are an idiot, and you deflect blame by finding fault in others for your stupid, selfish choice.

      --
      Ken
    3. Re: Look at the Grocery vs Other Store Prices... by registrations_suck · · Score: 1

      I am glad Wal-Mart exists. It keeps all the people that shop there from going to where I shop.

      I will gladly pay more to shop elsewhere.

  42. I know several which are MILES from by p51d007 · · Score: 1

    any other store. One, I pass in weekly travels, is 15 miles from anything that would have any "grocery" items. In that 15 miles, there must be 40-50 homes. It's a perfect location, so people don't have to travel 20-30 miles to get things they need. Maybe the "super stores" are overpriced?

    1. Re:I know several which are MILES from by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Well, no.

      People just don't actually understand value and quality.

      They will spend a dollar a week for a thing, instead of 20 dollars a year.

      The second thing is people can't afford cheaper higher quality.

      https://wiki.lspace.org/mediaw...

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  43. Re: Used to call them Five & Dime stores by reanjr · · Score: 1

    The issue is that those highly profitable items are subsidizing loss leaders like fresh produce. You take away the miscellaneous loss leading profits and food becomes more expensive until the grocery store can no longer compete and disappears, leaving you with cheap toothpaste and shitty food supplies.

  44. price and quality fallacy by WatchMaster · · Score: 1

    equating higher price with higher quality is also a fallacy. Some brands purposely charge more to create the impression of high quality. E.g. the entire perfume industry. The economics of quality goods are not so simple.

  45. Re: Used to call them Five & Dime stores by illiac_1962 · · Score: 1

    So change your business model. There, problem solved.

  46. Oh, also and... by Texmaize · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You are missing one key detail there, chief. Food deserts tend to occur in areas of high crime, which is different than poor. There are poor areas with low crime, and they have grocery stores. It turns out if treat others like shit, they don't open stores. weird.

    --
    "Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.
    1. Re: Oh, also and... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's ok. You can just say they don't build grocery stores in n-gger infested areas because they get robbed blind and can't even keep the losses at an acceptable level let alone turn a profit.

      Poor white towns have supermarkets. Non-white towns don't because non-whites can't stop killing and stealing even long enough to go get free food white people pay for, so the stores are a huge liability.

    2. Re:Oh, also and... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are dollar stores impervious to the criminal scourge that scared away real grocery stores?

      numbnuts

  47. What? by Jiro · · Score: 1

    Residents fear the stores deter other business, especially in neighborhoods without grocers or options for healthy food

    ...

    they undercut grocery stores on prices of everyday items, often pushing them out of business.

    Make up your mind. They drive grocery stores away, or they're especially bad because they're in neighborhoods that don't have grocery stores anyway? You can't drive away something that's already not there even without you.

    1. Re:What? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Residents fear the stores deter other business, especially in neighborhoods without grocers or options for healthy food

      You can't drive away something that's already not there even without you.

      deter
      verb: deter; 3rd person present: deters; past tense: deterred; past participle: deterred; gerund or present participle: deterring
      discourage (someone) from doing something by instilling doubt or fear of the consequences.

      HTH HAND

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  48. Local stores too expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We have a local store called "Hy-Vee" For what I can buy at Hy-Vee for $100 in SNAP (Food Stamps), I can get from even a Walmart for $30. And I'm in Nebraska, and Agriculture state. Even the generic at a lot of local grocers is too expensive, and when you look at the amount of Food Stamps they rely on, it doesn't make sense not to shop at dollar stores or cheaper discount places. My wife and I are currently spending $815 on rent because our rent market gone up, and we only get $1000 on disability between the two of us for everything including meds, fuel, gas, electricity, water, etc.. And SNAP only gives us $65/mo for both of us. We can't work due to physical injuries we sustained while working on the Job (my job violated OSHA and got me injured and then screwed me in a giant legal battle), and we are already sucking air to make ends meet. We don't have options because event though food should be cheap here, companies are paying worse wages (down to $9.50/hr when you need $11/hr just to pay rent alone), causing people to have less to spend. Even Hy-Vee posts record profits. They aren't operating on razer-thin profits, they are screwing people over with cereal boxes that cost $6 for a simple box of Corn Flakes. That's insane. I say screw'em, if they charge that for food, even basics (Eggs here are $3/dozen in Omaha, NE) then they deserve to die out. Dollar stores and discount places are the only way my wife and I can eat. I'd get a job, but I'm missing most of the discs in my vertebrae in my back and those don't grow back. I also walk hunched over. No way can I go back into my degree area (IT) and I don't even qualify for minimum wage jobs (can't stand for more than 5 minutes, can't lift over 10lbs). So yeah, Dollar stores will rule when they cut wages and raise rates.

  49. Ban it! Ban it! What? Everything. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apparently FB now wants to make it illegal to be an idiot.

  50. Re: Used to call them Five & Dime stores by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

    Dollar stores pay less taxes than big grocery stores.

    Cities want big grocery stores instead of dollar stores.

    Hmmmmm..

  51. Re: Used to call them Five & Dime stores by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    That's where I got my first six string. Played it till my fingers bled :)

  52. It's true by RubberDogBone · · Score: 1

    It's absolutely true. 'dollar' stores are always a sign that the neighborhood is either IN decline or has ALREADY declined.

    There are a very few exceptions, like dropping a Dollar Tree into an upscale shopping center, but those are done to cater to the complaints that regular people can't afford to shop in such places. Yes they can, here's a fucking Dollar Tree for you! Happy now?

    But usually, these stores come in and take over whatever cheap space they can. It's cheap because there is no demand, because the area won't support better stores of ANY kind.

    Family Dollar built a brand-new store two blocks from my house. The lot had been a working furniture shop for decades. They cleared the land and dropped in a new building. What happened? Well it was certainly popular because it was convenient. But it was also burglarized immediately and then again and again and again, literally every few days. The brand-new store sported plywood over shattered windows for months at a time. And still does every time somebody breaks in. The police were powerless.

    The store also brought a lot of trash. People don't care about using overflowing trash cans, which are overflowing because the store workers were too busy to keep up with it. But people are pigs and just throw everything anywhere. It wasn't just AT the store but trash dropped here and there along sidewalks in every direction, due to customers consuming stuff while they walked home.

       

    --
    Sig for hire.
  53. Re: Used to call them Five & Dime stores by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Next to the dollar store near me there is a grocery store that only sells meat, fresh produce, and a couple of different specialty food items. Thats all they stock.

  54. that is a wrong picture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A lot of people nowadays actually have to buy stuff or get credit because of 1) health reason (you gotta pay that hospital) 2) transportation (you can't afford a city central flat, so you gotta rent way outside which cost money) as the main factors. "frivolous" credits while there being some are not the main cause.

    1. Re:that is a wrong picture by bobbied · · Score: 1

      IF you find yourself in such a situation, the recovery from it is to lower your standard of living, retire your debt and stop paying interest.

      I know that emergencies happen and debt is sometimes hard to avoid. BUT if you don't DO something different in your financial life when you are on a bad road that leads to bankruptcy, how do you expect to not end up where the road leads?

      I know it's not popular, nor does it sound very understanding to say, but YOU are responsible for your finances and only you can fix it when things are going the wrong direction. So if you need a cheaper place to live, spend less on food and clothes, drive a cheaper car or otherwise spend less than you do now that's what you got to do. Maybe a 2nd or 3rd job? Maybe not having any more kids?

      Credit isn't the answer, it's just a tool. Credit though for a lot of folks is the killer and the interest being paid is only lowering their standard of living. Sometimes credit is a useful tool, but a dangerous tool that must be used wisely and with caution.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  55. Re: Used to call them Five & Dime stores by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Compete with who? The guy down the lane that has figured out a better business model? Charge more for the food you sell. If you are located conveniently, people will buy. If nothing works, maybe it is ok you go out of business. People need to eat, and therefore you generally have to do zero marketing for people to buy your product. Thatâ(TM)s one less worry than many companies.

  56. Re: Used to call them Five & Dime stores by postbigbang · · Score: 1

    Nope.

    For the past two decades, everyone has watched distribution models change dramatically. Dry/canned goods and no meat/produce/dairy means that this portion of sales can be done differently. The dry goods makers want market expansion just like other businesses, so not having any loyalty to grocers, they help fund the dollar stores with credit and not-as-fresh stock that the grocers demand (long shelf life).

    The grocers, wanting to become like Walmart (believing their shoppers want convenience, one-stop-shops, etc) become like Walmart, and put their strength in groceries behind, becoming behemoths like Sams, Costco, etc.

    At the bottom of the food chain, mom&pops get crushed by low-volume buys, inconvenient distribution, lack of credit/purchasing strength (remember A&P?) and go bust. The dollar stores need cheap overhead, and move in.

    Cities used to have C-stores, bodegas, delis, and lots of small operations, who suffer in the same ways as the mom&pops. Add in farmer's and "local-source" markets, rural co-op markets, and the common grocery model is all but dead. The BigStore and Amazon models have disrupted distribution infrastructure. Add in foreign foods, but then tariffs, NAFTA-reorganizations, and the dust hasn't settled yet. Urban delivery models don't work in the burbs or in rural locales.

    It's a massive re-org, and this is just one symptom that things are changing, and you haven't seen the finish of it; it may continue to evolve for decades and decades.

    --
    ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
  57. Simple solution: Buy them out by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

    If so-called 'big box supermarkets' are being threatened and undercut by 'dollar stores' on enough items to make them unprofitable when in the same neighborhood, then maybe the big-box supermarket chains should buy out the dollar stores, run them side-by-side, and not carry duplicate items of the dollar store in the big-box supermarket down the street. After all aren't they really two different sets of customers?

    It would be far from the first time some corporation had at least two different 'brands' they owned.

    Additionally, how many people do you really think do all of their regular shopping at only one grocery store? There are at least three I use: a 'discount' supermarket for the most common food items and things like bathroom-related items, an 'upscale' market for meat and produce (higher quality), and a specialty market for the one or two things I can't get at the other two and can't live without. Occasionally I'll go to some 'dollar store' for one or two things I know they'll have in abundance that'll be a fraction of the cost at any of the others. I suspect that if some family is in the 'working poor' category they'd use a version of the above combination but shifted down a notch to include the dollar-store category. It would make sense for a national discount market to buy up a dollar store chain and run them side-by-side.

    Of course there are potential 'monopoly' concerns to consider with an approach like this; would it further limit competition, resulting in giving in to the temptation to raise prices across the board, knowing people have no choice anymore?

    1. Re:Simple solution: Buy them out by geekoid · · Score: 1

      That's actually a crime. Plus., just new dollar stores will pop up.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:Simple solution: Buy them out by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      How is it a crime to buy out another business? Explain.

  58. Re: Used to call them Five & Dime stores by Scarletdown · · Score: 1

    Remember, these are the same cocksuckers who fought tooth and nail (and failed) to prevent National Guard and Reserve personnel from getting full Commissary access instead of 12 visits per year. Fuck, if I remember right, they fought the increase from 12 to 24 visits even.

    I have no sympathy for these fuckers.

    --
    This space unintentionally left blank.
  59. Spiraling down by geekoid · · Score: 1

    The result of decades of spiraling down.

    What did people expect when they just let corporation run roughshod of people and not pay reasonable taxes?

    What did people think the inevitable result in destroying unions would be?

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  60. Amazon propaganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So Jeff Bezos's official propaganda outlet, his own Washington Post, has an article demonizing dollar stores. Dollar stores could take sales away from Amazon therefore they are BAD.

  61. vegetables are more labor intensive than corn, etc by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Today's Americans are lazier than several decades ago. Farm mechanization has taken on more crops, including potatoes, grapes, peanuts, tomatoes, and more. Still, most vegetables have resisted mechanization. Industrial agriculture produces food for Americans at low prices, and pays Americans wages needed to induce them to work on the farm.

  62. Re: Used to call them Five & Dime stores by WastedMeat · · Score: 1

    It echoes an AC post, but I live in Tucson, and in the neighborhoods where you find dollar stores, you will almost certainly have a "carniceria" nearby for cheap perishables. Market forces already settle this. Plus, wanting to feed a large family efficiently with bulk goods, and wanting to purchase unprocessed healthier foods are not really disjoint pursuits.

  63. healthy vegetables are labor intensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Today's Americans are lazier than several decades ago. Americans would rather live in a tiny apartment in a city, working at an air conditioned McDonalds, with internet, friends, and nightclubs within twenty miles, instead of at a dairy farm a few hundred miles away from a real city. That's why they chase illegal aliens.

    In contrast, the unhealthy crap can be produced from crops, which can be mechanized. Most vegetables are labor intensive. The modern tomato, and harvesting machine, took a lot of r&d. There will only be a limited number of vegetables worth mechanizing. Use Genetic engineering to produce healthier tomatoes?

    1. Re: healthy vegetables are labor intensive by Monster_user · · Score: 1

      Lazy? That is honestly the claim that is thrown around, but I have no idea of the logistics of going "Green Acres".

      I wasn't raised a farm hand. Those who need me don't live out in the fields.

      I can't figure out how to support 20 people as a farm hand. Most rural communities have strong religious communities, and the Christian bible says in 1 Timothy 5:8, a man must provide for his own. These seem to be the same people against baking cakes for gays, so to live in a religious community with its insane rules, I have to make enough to feed, clothe, and shelter 20 people. Farm hand work just don't pay enough to do that.

      You figure out the logistics of moving to a lower wage area, competing with robotic automation, illegal immigrants, and seasoned farm hands, and not get ostracized and demonized for "falling short of the glory of God", and failing to provide for 20 odd family members.

      In the mean time I will play the hand I was dealt and do my best to fulfill the role I have been assigned on the team I am on.

  64. Let me guess by Rujiel · · Score: 2

    You actually think you're Christian, huh?

  65. Re: Used to call them Five & Dime stores by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ah, the solution without definition.

  66. NAZIS by gDLL · · Score: 1

    because lack of imagination. same as nazis, there are super few, but still you see them as all the bad guys in all the movies. Lack of imagination.

  67. Radar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dollar stores are the canary for the rise of brown skin neighborhoods.

    When middle-class neighborhoods age, they become more affordable for lower class people. That, in turn, increases the decline until everyone who could support the quality neighborhood grocer has left.

    Brown and black move in and the only stores willing to put up with the higher crime and theft rates are Dollar stores.

    Why do you think the stores getting looted during the recent hurricanes were Family Dollar (aka Fambily Dolla)?

  68. Re:Entitled ... I think Dunbal may mean this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "There has grown up in the minds of certain groups in this country the notion that because a man or corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years, the government and the courts are charged with the duty of guaranteeing such profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary public interest. This strange doctrine is not supported by statute nor common law. Neither individuals nor corporations have any right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped, or turned back..."

    Robert A. Heinlein
    "The Past Through Tomorrow" by Robert A. Heinlein, G. P. Putnam Inc., (p. 25), 1967.
    https://www.azquotes.com/quote/410042

  69. Food Stamps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I remember reading on Yahoo Finance a few years back about how "dollar" stores had become way more successful since they started accepting food stamps. Rather than forcing them out, just make the rules for stores accepting food stamps stricter and they'll disappear on their own.

  70. Re: Used to call them Five & Dime stores by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Exactly, those cheap bastards should join the full time military if they want tax paper subsidized stores. Damn reservists. Next thing, the Coast Guard will want to be treated like a real military branch and cops will be pretending they aren't civilians too.

  71. Amazing sentence by kenh · · Score: 1

    Dollar stores rarely sell fresh produce or meats, but they undercut grocery stores on prices of everyday items, often pushing them out of business...

    So Safeway, Acme, Wegmans, Kroger, etc can't compete with the dollar store? Of course they can, they choose not to.

    I've noticed Aldi opening grocery stores in lower-income areas, reduced selections, lots of house brand over name brand goods, and fresh friuit and vegetables - all at lower prices. Back in the day we called them 'grocery stores', as opposed to 'supermarkets' that carry every blessed food item imaginable.

    The reality is that if the vast majority of low income families really wanted the fresh fruits and vegetables these people claim, why doesn't someone take out an SBA loan and open up a produce stand? The rent is low, wages are low, and apparently the demand is great - according to people that live outside the community and shop at Whole Foods.

    --
    Ken
    1. Re:Amazing sentence by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The reality is that if the vast majority of low income families really wanted the fresh fruits and vegetables these people claim, why doesn't someone take out an SBA loan and open up a produce stand? The rent is low, wages are low, and apparently the demand is great -

      Economies of scale. If you want to provide produce in such a market you will end up spending more money to acquire stock because you have less purchasing power. That's why supermarket chains can afford to do it, but the person who lives on the corner can't.

      according to people that live outside the community and shop at Whole Foods.

      Those people shop at Whole Foods because they can afford to. What does that have to do with the price of tea in china, or the price of tomatoes in the ghetto?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Amazing sentence by chris+summers · · Score: 0

      Get a clue asshat. Where in the inner city are you going to find anywhere to grow the produce for a viable produce stand? You're talking about some of the most polluted and tainted soils anywhere in these areas. Of course slashdot trash like you wouldn't know anything about this since you don't know actually anything about inner city life.......

  72. Re: Used to call them Five & Dime stores by demonlapin · · Score: 1

    A fair point, but at the point you change your model, you have become a dollar store. And they’ve been doing it for longer than you have.

    The fundamental problem is “food deserts” isn’t that fresh food is especially hard to get, or overpriced compared to what you would pay elsewhere. It’s that the cultural knowledge of “how to cook” has been lost. Beans and rice is a pretty boring diet, but it is a staple of poor cultures all over the world for a reason: the ingredients are cheap and provide almost complete nutrition by themselves. But when you don’t cook, and your parent didn’t cook, and the same is true of all your friends, that processed junk is a lot quicker, and probably tastes better, and sure does keep a long time.

  73. Follow the money by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

    Cities get their money from...taxes.

    Dollar stores charge low prices, reducing tax income for cities.
    Pricier stores don't like competition, so they remind politicians of the tax implications, sometimes reinforced with kickbacks.

    Of course cities don't like dollar stores! They actually help poorer people more than they help city governments!

  74. Re: Used to call them Five & Dime stores by aybiss · · Score: 1

    That's the free market for you. As so many Americans on this site are fond of pointing out, if you touch that at all then it's communism. Like, it's literally the USSR.

    --
    It's OK Bender, there's no such thing as 2.
  75. Re:vegetables are more labor intensive than corn, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Strange you should say that. Big Ag has a many foreign nationals working the fields for below-American wages. Look at what fruit pickers are paid in the US. It's a pittance.

  76. No reason to fight anything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If a business is in an area and able to make enough profit to stay open, then it is being used by people within driving distance and will stay open and keep selling the same things.
    If another business is in an area and struggling, then it is not being used by enough people to be profitable, and it has to sell other things or close.

    This shows that regardless of what You think of the business, if its open then people are shopping there and if it closes then there was not enough business.

    There is absolutely nothing else going on but the above, and its patently simple to understand. The name of the business or what it sells changes nothing.

  77. Theories .vs. Realities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...but for things like aspirin,spare batteries for the remote,pens and paper and a ton of other assorted little things? Dollar stores are great for those.

    Emphasis mine.

    Sorry, but I'm not going to put a whole lot of confidence in anything stated by anyone who buys dollar store batteries by choice, because, as it so happens, I have purchased dollar store batteries.

    The charts linked below are consistent with my empirical observations. Never buy batteries at the dollar store.

    https://www.wired.com/images_b...
    https://www.wired.com/images_b...
    https://www.wired.com/images_b...

  78. Resident's fear? by Shotgun · · Score: 1

    No. If the "residents" feared the Dollar Stores taking over, the Dollar Stores would not have customers. What we most likely have is local merchants who can't compete making a lot of noise and looking for a little crony capitalism to help them out.

    --
    Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
    Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
  79. As a retail analyst by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Big box and brand name stores close down in low income neighborhoods because the store is expensive to operate and needs to sell large turnover of goods to be profitable let alone make a decent margin.

    Throw in high crime, vandalism and other problems which come with large number of lower educated single parent households, unsupervised teenagers and name retailers close up and move elsewhere.

    Dollar stores and third tier retailers take over with lower operating costs lower needed profit margins, .....

    Kroger, the USA largest grocer, needs to sell $30 million dollars per store annually. Low income areas even at 40% of take home pay couldn't buy that much product from a single Kroger store.

  80. I can give examples all day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do I really need to give you examples? Don't you intuitively know this about the world you live in?
    If I went out and bought a car on my amex card I could put the purchase on installment at a better rate than most low income people can get an actual loan, it would take less time and effort too.
    If I lose my job unemployment and food stamps would actually cover all my expenses because I live cheap. If a poor person was on unemployment they'd have to pull out of an emergency fund. An emergency fund that is probably in a bank account.
    My emergency fund has high interest savings requiring a 10k initial deposit (even though there's less than 10k in it now) , stocks, ETFs. I can pull out cash and liquidate assets that aren't likely to perform any time soon.
    I get between 1.5 and 5% back on everything I buy. Poor people reward cards pay like 1%. Plus I'm able to pay off the balance every month so I never eat interest.
    If I get a hospital bill I can just pay it. Poor people have to put it on an installment plan, there is usually at least a one time fee and it shows an active installment loan until it's paid off. Lowering their credit.
    When I think my stuff is outdated I'm going to wait until camelcamelcamel tells me something I want is selling unusually low and I'll just buy it cash. Poor people have to wait until things need to be replaced and then end up paying more. By the time normal prices matched what I paid for my 1080tv there were 4k tvs on the shelves in target.
    If a poor person even tries to invest outside of their 401k on a scale that suits them it's an uphill battle compared to a guy with money. If 500 is your discretionary budget for a month and you do great and turn it into 1000 in a year and cash out. Well get ready to pay $50 because you're buying the plus version of turbotax this year buddy!

  81. Re: Used to call them Five & Dime stores by Swave+An+deBwoner · · Score: 1

    In my area there are some small stores that sell pretty much nothing but fresh fruit and vegetables. And some larger stores that include packaged (jar, can, frozen, refrigerated) foods and bread in addition. They don't sell toothpaste or household goods or electronics. Yet they seem to be doing OK.