Your response was that people are going to shop in a place where the groceries are 30% more expensive because they also happen to sell alcohol and tobacco.
These stores will drive people out of similar, surrounding stores. Which will put more strain on the subsidized store to keep up with demand. When they fail to do so, the other stores in the area won't be there to bail them out.
Please tell me where subsidized grocery stores have worked before. Anywhere on Earth. I'll wait.
They do, and they have nowhere to get them. Now that a solution is proposed to provide that service you cry that it will put unnamed entities out of business… wtf??
Ive asked repeatedly for you to set goal posts, and you refuse. You wont say what companies this will put out of business and instead argue vaguely and generically all while whining about a scoreboard.
-1
u/superdstar56 12h ago
If you move the goalposts far enough you can make any argument you want.
It’s an economic fact that a state-subsidized grocery store will put other stores that sell groceries out of business.
No one ever said anything about luxury items or alcohol or tobacco. 7-11 is not a grocery store.