Here’s an article from John McWhorter that makes my argument far more eloquently than I am capable.
I’m skeptical of the idea of food deserts as a widespread phenomenon. Why? Basic free market economics! If a large number of “food deserts” sprout up, they will eventually be noticed by businesses and/or entrepreneurs. Businesses, etc. will identify the need, sweep in, and try to corner the market in healthy neighborhood food before any grubby competitors arrive. The markets are not 100% efficient, I know. But they are efficient enough that there is a tendency toward an equilibrium, meaning that the tendency of the market will be to have fewer food deserts, which, after all, represent a untapped market of customers that want to spend their money but can’t.
Of course there’s demand. Depending on geography, much of the demand may come from passers-through going to other parts of the city, not just immediate residents.
But there are lots of other factors in why businesses locate where they do. Zoning, real estate pricing, start-up costs for different kinds of businesses, ease of access for distributors. (I can’t run an American-standard large general grocery store without a loading dock that can accommodate multiple big trucks.)
Because a dense ethnic neighborhood is a good business opportunity for an appropriate ethnic grocery, duh. They can be profitable in a relatively small retail space, not least because of the dearth of larger generalized groceries.
So what, exactly, do you think was going on last time I lived in a “transitional” neighborhood and was two miles from a grocery store (in a dense city where people rely on public transit)? Ghost grocery stores that I just couldn’t see?
I was there, I wanted healthy food. Did I not exist?
I agree. Doesn’t it stand to reason that if there was high demand for healthy food, somebody would be selling healthy food?
I agree. Doesn’t it stand to reason that the same economics would apply with native born poor, provided selling healthy food was a good business opportunity?
Two miles doesn’t seem like a substantial burden.
I didn’t say ALL. You might try reading what I wrote, instead of what you would have liked me to have written.
I wasn’t using that statement as a proof of food deserts, I was stating a stupidity of the current system in regards to frugality and savings. Again, try reading what I actually wrote.
When you have no means to pay for food it’s rather remarkable what you’ll do. You’ll cave even quicker if it’s your kids that are hungry.
Please provide a cite that that has actually happened, as opposed to, say, a rise of ethnic fast food (pita/kebab joints, cheap fatty Chinese take-out, etc.)
Would it be fair to say that your view is that most immigrant families have a dedicated homemaker? That’s also a canard.
I did read what you actually wrote, which is why I was confused. Why mention the stupidity of the current system if we’re talking about food deserts?
But if you have $2,000 in the bank and loose your benefits, you certainly have money to pay for food.
They are. Just not there, everywhere where they would be accessible to all people. Retailers locate according to forces of necessity and convenience (including those I mentioned in the last post), and by where they think they can make the best profits–not according to which communities need them most. If a new general grocery location is reckoned to be more practical and profitable as the third such player in an affluent neighborhood’s retail mix, rather than the first for a poorer one, that’s what happens.
No. An ethnic grocery in an ethnic neighborhood is not the same economics as a general grocery in an average neighborhood. For a neighborhood really dense with one ethnicity, an ethnic market has almost unbeatable drawing power. People go there for basic groceries (typically at higher prices than the general grocery’s), for specialty items, and as a community nexus.
I’m not suggesting retailers go where they think they’re most needed. They go where they can make money. If there was demand in a poor neighborhood such that they could make money, why would somebody not sell healthy food there.
Sixteen years ago, there were three Latino grocery stores in Indianapolis, according to Manuel Gonzalez, president of the Indiana State Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. Today, there are more than 40.
Of course it is. There’s enough demand in an ethnic neighborhood to support an ethnic grocer. If there was enough demand to support selling healthy food, there would be somebody selling healthy food.
I’d like to read your views of this article.
I found this interesting.
I already answered that: because they don’t need to; they can do as well or better elsewhere, and/or other factors direct their choice of locations. Immediate-neighborhood demand is never the only siting factor, and very often not the primary one.
Look, are there affluent residential neighborhoods with no liquor stores? Is there demand for alcohol there? If there is demand and money to be made, why aren’t liquor stores opening there?
He cites a neighborhood in New York that has good supermarkets and thinks that says… what? What am I supposed to be reacting to? I know food-desert neighborhoods exist because I have seen them, lived in some.
If a neighborhood could support a business, why wouldn’t that business be opened in that neighborhood? Liquor stores and check cashing places abound in poor neighborhoods. Why? Because people can make money running those businesses there.
Just because they can make money elsewhere doesn’t mean they’ll pass up the opportunity to make it in other places as well.
I’ve never been exposed to an affluent area that didn’t have ready access to alcohol. Often times there are high end liquor stores in the same bunch of retail that caters to the rich people.
There is demand for booze among rich people, and there are plenty of people ready to meet that need. If there were demand for healthy food in poor neighborhoods, there would be people ready to meet that need.
And this is just looking like willfull simplicity:
Look, if you’re a general grocer, or a “healthy food” grocer, you can look at lots of potential locations in a metro area, right? Demand is distributed all over, and your most-desirable customers are the ones least limited by your siting.
If you’re a Salvadoran tienda, you’re starting from a completely different place. Your demand is likely to be concentrated and limited. You have to be right there.
He’s citing evidence, and not just the one neighborhood in NY, that shows food deserts are a myth. That’s what you’re suppose to be reacting to.
You’ve lived in neighborhoods that didn’t abound with healthy food because there was adequate demand. That’s not the same as a food desert.
Why are we assuming there is only one grocer? If there is a high demand for healthy food in an area, some business person will satisfy that demand.
What possible reason would I have to not make money?
It all breaks down to demand. There’s demand for a Salvadoran tienda, so somebody opens one. If there’s demand for broccoli and chicken, somebody will sell it.
I have seen and lived in places where there was no grocery store at all, ethnic or otherwise, worthy of the name. By which I mean nothing better than a convenience store with a single aisle of expensive packaged items. No fresh produce or bulk staples whatsoever.
If that’s not what is meant by “food desert,” what is?