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

[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?

DP. Yes I think that’s the right solution. The rich will always get the most desirable homes in the most popular neighborhoods, the most sought-after cars, the most enviable vacations, etc. The reason is that those things cost money, and people with more money are more able to afford those things. That’s generally how our society works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

DP. Yes I think that’s the right solution. The rich will always get the most desirable homes in the most popular neighborhoods, the most sought-after cars, the most enviable vacations, etc. The reason is that those things cost money, and people with more money are more able to afford those things. That’s generally how our society works.

But is that the kid of society we want though? Moving poor people out to the fringes doesn't really solve the problem. We all pay for poverty/individuals' bad decisions. I mean look at our healthcare costs. Do we want to help people live healthier lives or are we ok with paying for high healthcare and other costs related to poverty? Maybe the really rich don't care about this but I do. I'd rather try to figure out how to get more people to be productive and healthy citizens so we all pay less.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

DP. Yes I think that’s the right solution. The rich will always get the most desirable homes in the most popular neighborhoods, the most sought-after cars, the most enviable vacations, etc. The reason is that those things cost money, and people with more money are more able to afford those things. That’s generally how our society works.

But is that the kid of society we want though? Moving poor people out to the fringes doesn't really solve the problem. We all pay for poverty/individuals' bad decisions. I mean look at our healthcare costs. Do we want to help people live healthier lives or are we ok with paying for high healthcare and other costs related to poverty? Maybe the really rich don't care about this but I do. I'd rather try to figure out how to get more people to be productive and healthy citizens so we all pay less.

Yes.

We'd pay less, or the poor would get better services, if the money spent on the poor wasn't going to ensure that they can live in high-rent districts. If they can't manage they're own diet, if we need to "help people live healthier lives" then they can do it with cheaper real estate. People move for jobs, there's nothing wrong with people moving for cheaper government housing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

DP. Yes I think that’s the right solution. The rich will always get the most desirable homes in the most popular neighborhoods, the most sought-after cars, the most enviable vacations, etc. The reason is that those things cost money, and people with more money are more able to afford those things. That’s generally how our society works.

But is that the kid of society we want though? Moving poor people out to the fringes doesn't really solve the problem. We all pay for poverty/individuals' bad decisions. I mean look at our healthcare costs. Do we want to help people live healthier lives or are we ok with paying for high healthcare and other costs related to poverty? Maybe the really rich don't care about this but I do. I'd rather try to figure out how to get more people to be productive and healthy citizens so we all pay less.

Yes.

We'd pay less, or the poor would get better services, if the money spent on the poor wasn't going to ensure that they can live in high-rent districts. If they can't manage they're own diet, if we need to "help people live healthier lives" then they can do it with cheaper real estate. People move for jobs, there's nothing wrong with people moving for cheaper government housing.

This place is populated by mothers with good hearts but little understanding of history. There have always been people who simply can’t hack it on their own. Subsidizing that in perpetuity only harms people looking for handouts.

[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.

If chains left due to theft, how would the local farmer survive?

People don't steal fresh fruit and veggies.

[Anonymous]

You can order groceries for delivery anywhere now. Maybe they don't need stores in the Ward.

[Anonymous]

Back in the day, there used to be farmer trucks that used to drive up and down the street (like an ice cream truck) and it would stop and sell the produce. Maybe Amazon needs to have a grocery truck on wheels.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Back in the day, there used to be farmer trucks that used to drive up and down the street (like an ice cream truck) and it would stop and sell the produce. Maybe Amazon needs to have a grocery truck on wheels.

These still exist in Baltimore. They are called "arrabers" and horse drawn carts have been distributing food and masks throughout COVID:
https://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2020/04/21/coronavirus-help-baltimore-arabbers-latest/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: thinking and commitment.

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.

Led to lousy school lunches that kids were throwing away, and taking away money from schools which saw their lunch programs become money losers.
But enjoy the quinoa.

[Anonymous]

Saw a convenience store that had bananas and some other fruit. I assumed they were getting a government subsidy as part of an effort to combat food deserts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: thinking and commitment.

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.

Led to lousy school lunches that kids were throwing away, and taking away money from schools which saw their lunch programs become money losers.
But enjoy the quinoa.

+1. Yes, there were a ton of videos circulating of kids throwing away Michelle’s food.

[Anonymous]

Similar problems and n Baltimore. The word on the street was that Target left the Mondawmin Mall location because theft was out of control. No one wants to open up shops for a money losing endeavor because uncontrollable losses due to theft. These days, you can't even stop thieves from string but simply have to let them walk. People are brazen with their shoplifting because there are no consequences.

[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.

If chains left due to theft, how would the local farmer survive?

People don't steal fresh fruit and veggies.

No, but they don't buy them either.

I live in Ward 7, within walking distance to the only grocery store in the Ward. I still drive to the Safeway on 14th st most of the time because the produce at the Ward 7 Safeway is godawful, and the produce is godawful because it sits and sits while nobody buys it.

I'm not making a judgement call on people who choose not to buy fresh produce, there are tons of factors why they might not. Preprepared and prepackaged food is often cheaper and faster than cooking from scratch, and less well off people may not have the time between working multiple jobs with odd schedules to cook full meals with fresh veggies as opposed to picking up a box of Kraft mac and cheese for 99 cents.

That doesn't change my observations at the store though, which is cart after cart of frozen meals, ramen, soda, canned and boxed food and rarely a fresh veggie in sight. Again, no judgement, people can buy what they want, but often times it really isn't about lack of access to fresh food, it's lack of interest.

[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.

“I know this place is populated heavily by well intentioned housewives ...”

Not true, unnecessary and reveals a certain bitterness on your end regardless.

[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.

Not the immigrant poor – just the cycle of poverty poor. But then again, most immigrant poor live in the cheaper suburbs and are busting their butt at three jobs and their kids go on to college in ome kind of stem or immediate job producing field.

— neighbor of these immigrants and listener to their stories