You understand the groceries still cost something right? Your acting like their giving them away for free. A public option doesn’t have to support billions in profit for the CEO, executives, and investors, so reducing price is much much easier if your only goal is to break even. The goal is no cost to the taxpayer, no profit for the city.
If a loaf of bread costs $5 at a for profit grocery store that had inflated executive salaries and profit for investors to worry about, that same loaf of bread costs less at a store that doesn’t need to show a huge profit. They can sell it at 3.50 and break even. Its not money “coming” from somewhere, its just product being sold at cost, instead of for profit.
If I had to wager a guess, this 30% off is just marketing. They probably realized their cost outlay is lower than they anticipated and they are passing those savings on to the consumer. Turns out cutting out greed saves consumers money.
Asking a question is not sealioning. I don’t even think you know what that word means. No one has answered the question. Yourself included.
You provided a flawed explanation, which I then explained to you. Instead of providing some sort of counterargument, you then go on the offensive and blame me for it. It seems like you’re just offended that anyone wouldn’t just accept what you say and not ask questions.
They probably realized their cost outlay is lower than they anticipated and they are passing those savings on to the consumer.
This is not an explanation, this is speculation, as denoted by the word “probably”.
Congrats on actually addressing an answer. I have hope for you. Maybe go back to the person you claimed never answered you, with your response to them as well.
Any answer any of us give is going to be speculation, we don’t have their financials in front of us. If you want more than speculation your best option is to research the topic yourself or go to New York and foia request the grocery store financials. No one on Lemmy is going to do that for you just because you asked a question. People are going to respond what they think while they take a shit and go about their day.
This is not an explanation, this is speculation, as denoted by the word “probably”.
A speculative explanation is still an explanation. We are not obligated to give an academic response to a half asses question to a person too mentally lazy to research their own question. If this is so important to you, that you will attempt to annoy dozens of commenters and readers on the internet, you could have used that time to try to answer that question yourself if you need a thorough accounting of their financial outlay. No one here will do that for you just because you are, “just asking questions”.
You can try to annoy me all you want though, I enjoy responding to people looking for pointless arguments.
Any answer any of us give is going to be speculation
Actually not correct at all. Someone did come and actually provide a factual answer. You could learn something from them.
No one on Lemmy is going to do that for you just because you asked a question.
They did though. Because that’s precisely what forums like this are for.
A speculative explanation is still an explanation.
Wrong again.
We are not obligated to give an academic response
You’re not obligated to give me anything. And yet here you are, making up answers that don’t even answer the question I asked. If you don’t have an answer, just keep scrolling.
I enjoy responding to people looking for pointless arguments.
You understand the groceries still cost something right? Your acting like their giving them away for free. A public option doesn’t have to support billions in profit for the CEO, executives, and investors, so reducing price is much much easier if your only goal is to break even. The goal is no cost to the taxpayer, no profit for the city.
Did you reply to the wrong person? That’s the exact opposite of what I’m doing.
How is this supposed to explain where the money is coming from? No one is talking about billions, I’m asking where did the 30% extra money come from?
If a loaf of bread costs $5 at a for profit grocery store that had inflated executive salaries and profit for investors to worry about, that same loaf of bread costs less at a store that doesn’t need to show a huge profit. They can sell it at 3.50 and break even. Its not money “coming” from somewhere, its just product being sold at cost, instead of for profit.
If I had to wager a guess, this 30% off is just marketing. They probably realized their cost outlay is lower than they anticipated and they are passing those savings on to the consumer. Turns out cutting out greed saves consumers money.
Sure, but we’re not talking about for-profit and not-for-profit. We’re talking about the same store.
Your reading comprehension through all of this has been abysmal, possible explanations have been given by me and others and you are still sea-lioning.
Others have suggested they are absorbing those discounts in non essential items.
You can disagree with these explanations, but you instead keep sidestepping them and choosing to pretend your question wasn’t answered.
Asking a question is not sealioning. I don’t even think you know what that word means. No one has answered the question. Yourself included.
You provided a flawed explanation, which I then explained to you. Instead of providing some sort of counterargument, you then go on the offensive and blame me for it. It seems like you’re just offended that anyone wouldn’t just accept what you say and not ask questions.
This is not an explanation, this is speculation, as denoted by the word “probably”.
Congrats on actually addressing an answer. I have hope for you. Maybe go back to the person you claimed never answered you, with your response to them as well.
Any answer any of us give is going to be speculation, we don’t have their financials in front of us. If you want more than speculation your best option is to research the topic yourself or go to New York and foia request the grocery store financials. No one on Lemmy is going to do that for you just because you asked a question. People are going to respond what they think while they take a shit and go about their day.
A speculative explanation is still an explanation. We are not obligated to give an academic response to a half asses question to a person too mentally lazy to research their own question. If this is so important to you, that you will attempt to annoy dozens of commenters and readers on the internet, you could have used that time to try to answer that question yourself if you need a thorough accounting of their financial outlay. No one here will do that for you just because you are, “just asking questions”.
You can try to annoy me all you want though, I enjoy responding to people looking for pointless arguments.
Actually not correct at all. Someone did come and actually provide a factual answer. You could learn something from them.
They did though. Because that’s precisely what forums like this are for.
Wrong again.
You’re not obligated to give me anything. And yet here you are, making up answers that don’t even answer the question I asked. If you don’t have an answer, just keep scrolling.
Sorry to disappoint. Will have to look elsewhere.