“The people that don’t have it so good are the poor, who live in food deserts.”
And whose fault is that? Retailers know that if they open up in those areas they will be robbed blind by shoplifters, not to mention armed robbery. Why should they put their profitability and their employees well being at stake to help losers who do not deserve or appreciate it?
A couple of of years ago Trader Joe’s was going to open a store in a poor area of Portland, OR. Local “community leaders” demanded that bribes be paid. TJ said “NO” and cancelled the project. Those Germans knew they were doing them a favor and were not going to put up with that in return.
Same story here in Pittsburgh. We had a “food desert” neighborhood basically because the crime there was so high.
But city leaders deemed it RAAAAAAACIST that there should not be a grocery store there (you can draw your own conclusions as to why) and so they determined that there WILL be one.
And to achieve that they offered MASSIVE taxpayer subsidies to grocery store operators to go in there.
One was about to take the bait, but got a clue and bailed out at the last minute. Another one took the deal. But after several years of massive shrink and shoplifting (plus constant headbutting with locals that they “weren’t doing enough for the community”) they closed-up shop and bailed as well.
No doubt the subsidies are being doubled in order to bribe the next victim.