Why is there a shortage of grocery stores and fresh food options in Wards 7 and 8?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. The exhibit shined a light on the challenge and consequences, and also on individuals working to fix it. However, I did not walk away understanding why specific grocery stores left, or why an open air produce market (like, for example, Three Guys From Brooklyn), doesn’t exist there.

The museum is hosting a virtual panel on the topic on August 19, which I plan to attend to learn more. Thanks to all who shared your thoughts.

It’s terrible and I wish food deserts and groceries were not out of the reach of these wards. I would enjoy this exhibit.

Read about the Yes! Organic market that opened in Anacostia. No one bought the healthy food. It’s still all about the taki’s and hot Cheetos.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Didn't Safeway and Giant at one point have stores in those wards? I think the reason they left was because of theft. Hard to justify a store if more money walks out the doors than goes in the cash register.

Now a seasonal produce stand, I have no clue why there are none. Seems like some local farmer could set up a stand to sell their fruit and veggies. I guess the DC government would want their share, that's probably why there are none.

Yes, loss prevention. Stores cannot be forced to operate as charities..I always thought DC could do FAR more, like offering to open police substations in their entry ways, and other safety minded "partnerships" to encourage these stores to open. Instead, DC got very demandy with WalMart about employment and other perks the city wanted when they were thinking of locating in Washington. If it's simply market driven, no one will open in a demandy city in areas with rampant and tolerated theft. It's also very difficult to apprehend and prosecute for shoplifting, especially in our current world.

It’s fascinating to see a city grandfather in subsidized housing, like what’s happening at Res 13, to counter gentrification and ensure poverty can persist in a desirable neighborhood, so as not to “displace” local residents. As if the area should be preserved in amber for only certain protected classes of people. Most people have to move, but not some.

Anyway, it’s also fascinating to see people struggle to grasp that poor people straight up make bad decisions because they’re poor. They don’t want a damn Whole Foods. They can’t afford that sht. Generally, nor do they possess the wherewithal to understand how to eat mostly vegetables and less unhealthy processed sht. Stores have tried to make a go of it and sell healthy food around Anacostia and Benming and Langton carver and the only way that food takes off is if the area is sufficiently gentrified. Except it’s evil to gentrify, so it’s easier to look for a billion nonsense reasons why there are “food deserts”. It’s because of theft and bad choices. We need to just let areas change. We need to let the market work as it should even if people are priced out. No one has a right to be anywhere forever and it’s annoying to hear people complain about the sadness of poverty and being pushed out and blah blah. Let people move where they can afford to live and maybe that will encourage them to work harder and so forth. Instead of trying to grandfather in the same families to live in projects with subsidized rent for 50 years. I know this place is populated heavily by well intentioned housewives, but I live and grew up in the inner city in DC. It’s way better with gentrification.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Didn't Safeway and Giant at one point have stores in those wards? I think the reason they left was because of theft. Hard to justify a store if more money walks out the doors than goes in the cash register.

Now a seasonal produce stand, I have no clue why there are none. Seems like some local farmer could set up a stand to sell their fruit and veggies. I guess the DC government would want their share, that's probably why there are none.

Yes, loss prevention. Stores cannot be forced to operate as charities..I always thought DC could do FAR more, like offering to open police substations in their entry ways, and other safety minded "partnerships" to encourage these stores to open. Instead, DC got very demandy with WalMart about employment and other perks the city wanted when they were thinking of locating in Washington. If it's simply market driven, no one will open in a demandy city in areas with rampant and tolerated theft. It's also very difficult to apprehend and prosecute for shoplifting, especially in our current world.

It’s fascinating to see a city grandfather in subsidized housing, like what’s happening at Res 13, to counter gentrification and ensure poverty can persist in a desirable neighborhood, so as not to “displace” local residents. As if the area should be preserved in amber for only certain protected classes of people. Most people have to move, but not some.

Anyway, it’s also fascinating to see people struggle to grasp that poor people straight up make bad decisions because they’re poor. They don’t want a damn Whole Foods. They can’t afford that sht. Generally, nor do they possess the wherewithal to understand how to eat mostly vegetables and less unhealthy processed sht. Stores have tried to make a go of it and sell healthy food around Anacostia and Benming and Langton carver and the only way that food takes off is if the area is sufficiently gentrified. Except it’s evil to gentrify, so it’s easier to look for a billion nonsense reasons why there are “food deserts”. It’s because of theft and bad choices. We need to just let areas change. We need to let the market work as it should even if people are priced out. No one has a right to be anywhere forever and it’s annoying to hear people complain about the sadness of poverty and being pushed out and blah blah. Let people move where they can afford to live and maybe that will encourage them to work harder and so forth. Instead of trying to grandfather in the same families to live in projects with subsidized rent for 50 years. I know this place is populated heavily by well intentioned housewives, but I live and grew up in the inner city in DC. It’s way better with gentrification.

Ahh the typical poor people are stupid and lazy. Got it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Didn't Safeway and Giant at one point have stores in those wards? I think the reason they left was because of theft. Hard to justify a store if more money walks out the doors than goes in the cash register.

Now a seasonal produce stand, I have no clue why there are none. Seems like some local farmer could set up a stand to sell their fruit and veggies. I guess the DC government would want their share, that's probably why there are none.

Yes, loss prevention. Stores cannot be forced to operate as charities..I always thought DC could do FAR more, like offering to open police substations in their entry ways, and other safety minded "partnerships" to encourage these stores to open. Instead, DC got very demandy with WalMart about employment and other perks the city wanted when they were thinking of locating in Washington. If it's simply market driven, no one will open in a demandy city in areas with rampant and tolerated theft. It's also very difficult to apprehend and prosecute for shoplifting, especially in our current world.

It’s fascinating to see a city grandfather in subsidized housing, like what’s happening at Res 13, to counter gentrification and ensure poverty can persist in a desirable neighborhood, so as not to “displace” local residents. As if the area should be preserved in amber for only certain protected classes of people. Most people have to move, but not some.

Anyway, it’s also fascinating to see people struggle to grasp that poor people straight up make bad decisions because they’re poor. They don’t want a damn Whole Foods. They can’t afford that sht. Generally, nor do they possess the wherewithal to understand how to eat mostly vegetables and less unhealthy processed sht. Stores have tried to make a go of it and sell healthy food around Anacostia and Benming and Langton carver and the only way that food takes off is if the area is sufficiently gentrified. Except it’s evil to gentrify, so it’s easier to look for a billion nonsense reasons why there are “food deserts”. It’s because of theft and bad choices. We need to just let areas change. We need to let the market work as it should even if people are priced out. No one has a right to be anywhere forever and it’s annoying to hear people complain about the sadness of poverty and being pushed out and blah blah. Let people move where they can afford to live and maybe that will encourage them to work harder and so forth. Instead of trying to grandfather in the same families to live in projects with subsidized rent for 50 years. I know this place is populated heavily by well intentioned housewives, but I live and grew up in the inner city in DC. It’s way better with gentrification.

Ahh the typical poor people are stupid and lazy. Got it.

It's a factor, but not the full picture, yes.

[Anonymous]

There'd be no persistent poverty in wards 7 & 8 if it weren't subsidized. We pay people not to work, and then take the pay from them if they find a job. This is the appeal of Universal Basic Income - no disincentive to work.

Same story for subsidized housing: get a good job, lose your housing. It's a backdoor handout to the building owner. Same for restrictive zoning practices, protects building owners from competition.

Quite simply, we should have emergency food and shelter available for anyone who needs it, on top of Universal Basic Income and permissive zoning laws, but no housing or needs-based income subsidies.

Those who will work, will work. Those who won't will be priced out into the suburbs and beyond. No concentrated persistent poverty. If it's persistent, it will be diffuse, and will probably be in areas that have more resources.

[Anonymous]

Poor people don't have money.
For-profit businesses tend to go where the money is located.

All of this goes back to the economic and housing Redlining of the first half of the 20th century. We are literally still feeling the effects of that governmental policy 100 years later. Those decisions affect the quality of public schools, public services, the housing stock, and things as mundane as the location of banks and grocery stores.

Thank you for attending my Ted Talk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Persistent poverty

I think its a bit more complicated than that. OP you said you went to an exhibit about food justice I would think the exhibit would have answered your question.

Let's start with redlining of the those community which is the systematic process over decades of jamming people, black and brown people into an area with no investment. Grocery stores will then claim they can't make it work financially because of poverty, high rates of theft, etc. . So forget the chain grocery stores - new models of getting healthy food into those areas need to be created as well as creating pathways for increasing consumer demand for healthy foods in those communities. It's not just poverty at play. Not everyone needs a Whole Foods or Traders Joe's. If we are being honest there's lots of foods in both stores that are unhealthy. Farmers markets that allow purchases through WIC are successful, for example.

Some of this stuff is solvable but it takes some creative thinking and commitment.

You're overlooking the most important factor here: How will you "create consumer demand for healthy food" in these communities? That's been tried for YEARS and the obesity rates just keep climbing. I was a big fan of Michelle Obama's health food and Let's Move campaigns but anyone who tried to do that today would be called racist.

I actually work in public health and on childhood obesity in particular. Im.not being critical of Michelle Obamas work but it was more of a PR effort and gave the government cover to implement programs. Conduct studies and foundatations did their part as well. Obesity rates did decline in some jurisdictions like Philadelphia for example however rates remain high within certain segments. The problem is complicated because a big culprit is thr food system itself and the sheer amount of calories that are available for Americans to consume. One piece of Michelle Obamas effort that gets overlooked was the push to push food companies to reduce the number of calories they produce. So in otherwords chane ingredients and produce healthier food.

Regarding consumer demand, the work to change taste buds is complex. Its starts in utero with what mom eats. There isn't one answer and requires multiple levers. And other considerations come into play when you are talking about formerly redlined communities like Ward 7 and 8. The key is to create an environment so that its easy to opt-in to the healthy choice. For example I mentioned the push to allow consumers to use their food benefits in farmers markets, that HAS been successful.

I would argue that not enough has been done and that many studies bear this out.

[Anonymous]

Redeeming food benefits at farmers markets suggest that demand IS present. Also, the brisk business done by produce markets all over southern Brooklyn (particularly in lower income immigrant communities) tells me that being poor and opting for fresh produce is not at all mutually exclusive.

Interestingly, the produce there costs significantly less than in does in supermarkets here. I am wondering how those businesses can be successful and compete with grocery stores economies of scale, and what lessons can be applied here.

[Anonymous]

Yes Organic lasted only two years in Anacostia. Even though it received a nearly million-dollar grant from the DC government, it failed to turn a profit in any month it was open. Part of the reason was its location -- people driving west on Pennsylvania Ave had to u-turn to access the parking lot -- but the owner said he simply was not getting enough business at that location.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/capitalbusiness/yes-organic-market-pulls-out-of-southeast/2012/11/02/9ea3ea60-243d-11e2-ac85-e669876c6a24_story.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anyway, it’s also fascinating to see people struggle to grasp that poor people straight up make bad decisions because they’re poor. They don’t want a damn Whole Foods. They can’t afford that sht. Generally, nor do they possess the wherewithal to understand how to eat mostly vegetables and less unhealthy processed sht. Stores have tried to make a go of it and sell healthy food around Anacostia and Benming and Langton carver and the only way that food takes off is if the area is sufficiently gentrified. Except it’s evil to gentrify, so it’s easier to look for a billion nonsense reasons why there are “food deserts”. It’s because of theft and bad choices. We need to just let areas change. We need to let the market work as it should even if people are priced out. No one has a right to be anywhere forever and it’s annoying to hear people complain about the sadness of poverty and being pushed out and blah blah. Let people move where they can afford to live and maybe that will encourage them to work harder and so forth. Instead of trying to grandfather in the same families to live in projects with subsidized rent for 50 years. I know this place is populated heavily by well intentioned housewives, but I live and grew up in the inner city in DC. It’s way better with gentrification.

Many cities in the world are laid out this way: the rich live in the center and the poor are out on the fringes. I agree with you that poverty is the problem here, but shipping the poverty out to PG, Woodbridge, Manassas, Wheaton - is that really the best solution?

[Anonymous]

Food boxes have evolved. There is a lot more emphasis on produce and recipe cards. This trend should continue to retrain palates. Processed food is unhealthy and could explain a lot of health disparities that develop over a lifetime of poor diet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyway, it’s also fascinating to see people struggle to grasp that poor people straight up make bad decisions because they’re poor. They don’t want a damn Whole Foods. They can’t afford that sht. Generally, nor do they possess the wherewithal to understand how to eat mostly vegetables and less unhealthy processed sht. Stores have tried to make a go of it and sell healthy food around Anacostia and Benming and Langton carver and the only way that food takes off is if the area is sufficiently gentrified. Except it’s evil to gentrify, so it’s easier to look for a billion nonsense reasons why there are “food deserts”. It’s because of theft and bad choices. We need to just let areas change. We need to let the market work as it should even if people are priced out. No one has a right to be anywhere forever and it’s annoying to hear people complain about the sadness of poverty and being pushed out and blah blah. Let people move where they can afford to live and maybe that will encourage them to work harder and so forth. Instead of trying to grandfather in the same families to live in projects with subsidized rent for 50 years. I know this place is populated heavily by well intentioned housewives, but I live and grew up in the inner city in DC. It’s way better with gentrification.

Many cities in the world are laid out this way: the rich live in the center and the poor are out on the fringes. I agree with you that poverty is the problem here, but shipping the poverty out to PG, Woodbridge, Manassas, Wheaton - is that really the best solution?

Let’s just force the rich to live in the suburbs and socially engineer everything so we can achieve some type of amorphous fairness dictated by a group who can perfectly deliver a perfect solution for the greater good! It’ll totally work vs. just letting the cream rise to the top and letting the market work as it should! Even though, throughout history the rich generally live and end up the way things are presently reflected in major cities, we can change all this by forcing our will on it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Redeeming food benefits at farmers markets suggest that demand IS present. Also, the brisk business done by produce markets all over southern Brooklyn (particularly in lower income immigrant communities) tells me that being poor and opting for fresh produce is not at all mutually exclusive.

Interestingly, the produce there costs significantly less than in does in supermarkets here. I am wondering how those businesses can be successful and compete with grocery stores economies of scale, and what lessons can be applied here.

The businesses are successful because they deal only with produce (and maybe a few select items such as baked goods and candied fruit). A successful supermarket is one that does well in the meat and fish departments, where they have to be careful with highly perishable inventory. Theft is huge in the meat department, so the supermarket can suffer enormous losses there. Supermarkets also sell health and beauty items, which are easy to steal, especially cosmetics. Other problem areas are cheese and other small dairy products, as well as the candy and individual drink sections. The produce markets cover a much smaller area than a supermarket, too, so it is easier to monitor theft and item destruction.

The produce markets also do well because they sell produce at low prices, which in turn clears out inventory quickly and results in less waste. They focus on doing one thing very well - produce - and turn a good profit from it.

[Anonymous]

One thing I know from growing up in the inner city, owning real estate, and watching trends occur as time passes is that gentrification happens, things get nicer, some people complain, there are roadblocks thrown up out of anger, but gentrification continues and things just get nicer.

Also, I’ve seen DC go from a completely fked up bureaucratic nightmare where Mayor Barry gave out contracts and jobs like candy to his friends, many of whom were as grossly incompetent as he was. Now we still have a bureaucratic nightmare government that is capable at handing out parking tickets and raising revenue by speed camera and we have an Uber liberal city council intent on shoe horning in as much subsidized housing for the poor as possible, all whole ignoring rising crime and pushing on with policies to encourage early release.

I hope we don’t have another cycle into worse territory like we had in the 90’s, but like all things places go up and down. I see these bleating complaints about food deserts and just yawn. These same discussions were occurring in the 1950’s and 1960’s up until today. If people want to change their community they would do so. People need to take action for themselves sometimes. All the patronizing, soft bigotry of low expectations nonsense where handouts are expected at all times won’t work. The complaints will happen, but things will just keep rolling. Gentrification will keep rolling. What is past is prologue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Didn't Safeway and Giant at one point have stores in those wards? I think the reason they left was because of theft. Hard to justify a store if more money walks out the doors than goes in the cash register.

Now a seasonal produce stand, I have no clue why there are none. Seems like some local farmer could set up a stand to sell their fruit and veggies. I guess the DC government would want their share, that's probably why there are none.

Yes, loss prevention. Stores cannot be forced to operate as charities..I always thought DC could do FAR more, like offering to open police substations in their entry ways, and other safety minded "partnerships" to encourage these stores to open. Instead, DC got very demandy with WalMart about employment and other perks the city wanted when they were thinking of locating in Washington. If it's simply market driven, no one will open in a demandy city in areas with rampant and tolerated theft. It's also very difficult to apprehend and prosecute for shoplifting, especially in our current world.

It’s fascinating to see a city grandfather in subsidized housing, like what’s happening at Res 13, to counter gentrification and ensure poverty can persist in a desirable neighborhood, so as not to “displace” local residents. As if the area should be preserved in amber for only certain protected classes of people. Most people have to move, but not some.

Anyway, it’s also fascinating to see people struggle to grasp that poor people straight up make bad decisions because they’re poor. They don’t want a damn Whole Foods. They can’t afford that sht. Generally, nor do they possess the wherewithal to understand how to eat mostly vegetables and less unhealthy processed sht. Stores have tried to make a go of it and sell healthy food around Anacostia and Benming and Langton carver and the only way that food takes off is if the area is sufficiently gentrified. Except it’s evil to gentrify, so it’s easier to look for a billion nonsense reasons why there are “food deserts”. It’s because of theft and bad choices. We need to just let areas change. We need to let the market work as it should even if people are priced out. No one has a right to be anywhere forever and it’s annoying to hear people complain about the sadness of poverty and being pushed out and blah blah. Let people move where they can afford to live and maybe that will encourage them to work harder and so forth. Instead of trying to grandfather in the same families to live in projects with subsidized rent for 50 years. I know this place is populated heavily by well intentioned housewives, but I live and grew up in the inner city in DC. It’s way better with gentrification.

+1. Well said.