The insanity of government run grocery stores:
- Thread starter T. A. Gardner
- Start date
City owns the building
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
Do you really believe that there isn't nepotism and insider favoritism going in in government hiring? Do you really think that unions aren't selectively allowing membership at least in part on the basis of knowing someone in the union?
DEI hires on the basis of race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. It puts competence a far third to checking the correct DEI boxes.
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
My reply is simply that cutting and pasting up some AI answer--particularly one that's poorly done by the AI--isn't generally worth commenting on. Grimmy takes all of say, 30 seconds to do that. An actual reasoned out and sourced rebuttal takes many times longer and won't accomplish anything since Grimmy really doesn't give a shit and is just trolling. If that weren't true, she wouldn't be letting AI do all of her posting for her which is what she's doing now amounts to.
Grim Reaper
Chief Exit Officer (CEO)
1) “There is nepotism and insider favoritism in government hiring”
✔ Factually supported (but not universal or systematic in the way implied)
- Nepotism and favoritism do occur in government hiring and contracting, especially:
- at local and municipal levels
- in political appointments (not civil service roles)
- in informal networks (“recommendations,” “connections”)
- However:
- Many government jobs (especially federal U.S. civil service roles) are governed by merit-based hiring rules
- There are anti-nepotism laws and ethics rules (e.g., federal anti-nepotism statute 5 U.S.C. § 3110)
Bottom line:
✔ True that nepotism exists in some cases
False to imply it is the dominant or formal hiring system across government2) “Unions selectively allow membership based on knowing someone”
⚠ Partly true in structure, but overstated in implication
- Many unions have eligibility requirements, such as:
- working in a covered job classification
- being hired by a unionized employer
- Some trades (construction, entertainment, etc.) may involve:
- apprenticeship pipelines
- waiting lists
- sponsorship systems
These can sometimes feel like “connections matter,” but:
- Unions generally cannot legally exclude people arbitrarily based on personal familiarity
- Membership is typically governed by contracts, seniority systems, or objective entry requirements
Bottom line:
✔ Access can be influenced by networks in practice
But unions are not generally “membership clubs based on knowing someone”3) “DEI hires prioritize race/gender/sexual orientation over competence”
This is not supported by how DEI hiring actually works in law or practice
What DEI policies actually do:
- DEI (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion) programs in U.S. institutions are:
- aimed at expanding applicant pools
- reducing bias in hiring processes
- ensuring compliance with anti-discrimination law
What is legally allowed (and not allowed):
- Quotas based on race/gender are illegal in most U.S. hiring contexts
- ✔ Employers cannot legally hire unqualified candidates over qualified ones based on protected traits
- ✔ They can consider diversity in outreach and recruitment, but not as a substitute for qualifications
What evidence shows:
- Large-scale studies in hiring (public and private sectors) consistently find:
- hiring remains heavily credential- and experience-based
- bias reduction efforts sometimes change who applies or is interviewed, not eliminate standards
Bottom line:
✔ DEI influences recruitment and evaluation processes in some contexts
There is no credible evidence that competence is “put third” or replaced by identity-based hiring as a general rule4) The underlying conclusion (“competence is deprioritized system-wide”)
Not supported
Across government, unions, and private employers:
- hiring is still overwhelmingly driven by:
- qualifications
- experience
- licensing/certification (where applicable)
- structured interviews/tests (in many roles)
There are real issues in all systems (bias, networking advantages, uneven access), but:
Overall bias check
This statement mixes:
- ✔ real phenomena (nepotism exists, networks matter)
- ⚠ partial truths (informal access advantages in some unions/jobs)
- unsupported generalization (system-wide replacement of merit with DEI identity selection)
The pattern is:
That’s the key distortion.
Bottom line
- ✔ Nepotism exists, but is not the standard hiring mechanism in government systems
- ✔ Networks can influence access in unions and trades, but not as open favoritism systems
- DEI does not legally or generally replace competence-based hiring
- The claim of widespread competence being deprioritized is not supported by evidence
Grim Reaper
Chief Exit Officer (CEO)
Ichabod Stain
Was it me?
no different than corporate layers of do-nothings.
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
Just more layers as government is unaccountable for the most part. In a corporation you have to produce at least some results.
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
You really shouldn't pull your hair out like that.
Ichabod Stain
Was it me?
not if you;re a government contractor.
you can sell 800 dollar toilet seats all day long.
you;re concept of government versus corporation is anachronistic considering the current levels of fascism.
Ichabod Stain
Was it me?
the government is actually a fabrication of oligarchic interests.
FastLane
Verified User
Bullshit there is a a Pamela Grocery Store (corner of 115th St. and Park Ave). This store is owned by Adan Food Center Corp. It is across the street.
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
I was talking about the internal mechanisms of corporations. Sure, as a corporate employee you can shake down customers for their last nickel and likely get promoted for doing so. What you can't do is sit on your ass and do nothing. In government you can. In fact, there are whole office buildings full of that.
Federal employees at NIH making $100k to do absolutely nothing | Sharyl Attkisson
Jaw-dropping accounts from the workers themselves This article was first published on SHARYL ATTKISSON‘s free Substack In watching the developments and controversies over downsizing the federal workforce, I’m reminded of a series of shocking but eyeopening stories I reported at […]
sharylattkisson.com
At Least $10 Billion Was Spent on Paying Federal Staff to Do Nothing in 2025
Trump’s Profligate Use of Paid Administrative Leave Violated Legal Limits
peer.org
The HHS Officials Being Paid Six Figures to Do Nothing
The Trump administration hasn’t fired them but won’t let them do their jobs.
www.theatlantic.com
Grim Reaper
Chief Exit Officer (CEO)
I was talking about the internal mechanisms of corporations. Sure, as a corporate employee you can shake down customers for their last nickel and likely get promoted for doing so. What you can't do is sit on your ass and do nothing. In government you can. In fact, there are whole office buildings full of that.
Federal employees at NIH making $100k to do absolutely nothing | Sharyl Attkisson
Jaw-dropping accounts from the workers themselves This article was first published on SHARYL ATTKISSON‘s free Substack In watching the developments and controversies over downsizing the federal workforce, I’m reminded of a series of shocking but eyeopening stories I reported at […]
At Least $10 Billion Was Spent on Paying Federal Staff to Do Nothing in 2025
Trump’s Profligate Use of Paid Administrative Leave Violated Legal Limits
The HHS Officials Being Paid Six Figures to Do Nothing
The Trump administration hasn’t fired them but won’t let them do their jobs.
1) “In corporations you can shake down customers for their last nickel and get promoted”
Misleading / exaggerated
- In most regulated corporate environments (especially in the U.S., EU, etc.), employees:
- must follow consumer protection laws
- are constrained by regulators (FTC, SEC, CFPB, etc.)
- face internal compliance and legal risk for abusive practices
- “Shaking down customers” (i.e., coercive or exploitative behavior) is:
- illegal in many contexts (fraud, deceptive practices, predatory billing)
- reputationally damaging
- often grounds for termination, not promotion
✔ Reality:
- Some firms may incentivize aggressive sales behavior
- But there are also strong legal and institutional constraints that limit outright abuse
So this is an overgeneralization based on worst-case perceptions of sales culture
2) “What you can't do is sit on your ass and do nothing. In government you can.”
Not supported as a general claim
This is a common stereotype, but it does not match how large organizations work:
In corporations:
- There are well-documented cases of:
- “dead weight” employees
- low-performance tolerance in some protected roles
- bureaucratic inefficiencies in large firms
- Studies of organizational behavior show:
- performance variation exists everywhere
- monitoring is imperfect in both sectors
In government:
- Government employment (especially civil service) typically includes:
- structured job classifications
- performance reviews
- disciplinary systems
- union protections in some roles
- Many roles are audited, regulated, or performance-tracked
- especially federal agencies, law enforcement, healthcare, and financial oversight
✔ Reality:
- Both sectors have high performers and low performers
- Neither allows widespread “do nothing with no consequence” as a structural norm
3) “In government there are whole office buildings full of that”
Unsupported generalization
This is:
- a rhetorical exaggeration
- not backed by empirical evidence or workforce studies
Actual findings in public administration research show:
- government productivity varies widely by agency and function
- many public-sector roles are understaffed, high-demand, and heavily regulated
- some administrative inefficiency exists (as in any large system), but not the caricature described here
4) Structural reality: government vs corporate incentives
A more accurate comparison looks like this:
Corporations:
- incentive: profit
- risk: market failure, lawsuits, competition
- accountability: shareholders, regulators, customers
Government:
- incentive: service delivery, legal compliance, political oversight
- risk: audits, elections, inspector generals, public scrutiny
- accountability: laws, courts, voters, watchdog agencies
Neither system is:
- uniformly efficient
- uniformly corrupt
- uniformly meritocratic
Both are large bureaucracies with mixed performance outcomes
5) Bias analysis
This statement reflects a common cognitive pattern:
1. Selection bias
- focusing on worst examples of each system
2. Asymmetry assumption
- assumes corporations enforce discipline strictly
- assumes government does not
3. Stereotype compression
- compresses millions of workers into one behavioral stereotype per sector
Bottom line
- Corporations do not generally reward “shaking down customers” — it is constrained by law and compliance systems
- Government is not broadly characterized by “doing nothing without consequence”
- ✔ Both systems contain inefficiency and variation in performance
- The sweeping contrast between disciplined corporations and idle government offices is not supported by evidence
Fee free to prove they blocked any grocery stores.This article shows some of the insanity of government run grocery stores.
Op-ed: They block grocery stores, then build their own at four times the cost
Four times, or more, the cost per square foot to build...
Using eminent domain to seize land to build them...
Endless taxpayer subsidies to operate...
Mamdani's first store is running $30 million to open and it's in direct competition with several smaller grocery and convenience stores within a few blocks of it.
Mamdani's Government-Run Grocery Store Plan Gets Even Worse
Zohran Mamdani's plan for NYC government-run grocery stores faces delays and criticism over costs and impact.townhall.com
So, this store, operating with a massive taxpayer subsidy will directly compete with several private businesses right next to it who aren't subsidized. Can you say "bankruptcy?"
This is the insanity of Socialism on full display. Slower, lousier, costlier...
Ichabod Stain
Was it me?
you were talking about governments.I was talking about the internal mechanisms of corporations. Sure, as a corporate employee you can shake down customers for their last nickel and likely get promoted for doing so. What you can't do is sit on your ass and do nothing. In government you can. In fact, there are whole office buildings full of that.
Federal employees at NIH making $100k to do absolutely nothing | Sharyl Attkisson
Jaw-dropping accounts from the workers themselves This article was first published on SHARYL ATTKISSON‘s free Substack In watching the developments and controversies over downsizing the federal workforce, I’m reminded of a series of shocking but eyeopening stories I reported at […]
At Least $10 Billion Was Spent on Paying Federal Staff to Do Nothing in 2025
Trump’s Profligate Use of Paid Administrative Leave Violated Legal Limits
The HHS Officials Being Paid Six Figures to Do Nothing
The Trump administration hasn’t fired them but won’t let them do their jobs.
corprorations are just as wasteful. and the government waste actually goes to corporations too.
croney capitalism aka fascism is our system in reality.
your false division is a propaganda technique.
With the minor caveat that the tRump *administration is doing their best to do away with many consumer protections I agree.
1) “In corporations you can shake down customers for their last nickel and get promoted”
- In most regulated corporate environments (especially in the U.S., EU, etc.), employees:
- must follow consumer protection laws
- are constrained by regulators (FTC, SEC, CFPB, etc.)
- face internal compliance and legal risk for abusive practices
- “Shaking down customers” (i.e., coercive or exploitative behavior) is:
- illegal in many contexts (fraud, deceptive practices, predatory billing)
- reputationally damaging
- often grounds for termination, not promotion
✔ Reality:
- Some firms may incentivize aggressive sales behavior
- But there are also strong legal and institutional constraints that limit outright abuse
So this is an overgeneralization based on worst-case perceptions of sales culture
2) “What you can't do is sit on your ass and do nothing. In government you can.”
This is a common stereotype, but it does not match how large organizations work:
In corporations:
- There are well-documented cases of:
- “dead weight” employees
- low-performance tolerance in some protected roles
- bureaucratic inefficiencies in large firms
- Studies of organizational behavior show:
- performance variation exists everywhere
- monitoring is imperfect in both sectors
In government:
- Government employment (especially civil service) typically includes:
- structured job classifications
- performance reviews
- disciplinary systems
- union protections in some roles
- Many roles are audited, regulated, or performance-tracked
- especially federal agencies, law enforcement, healthcare, and financial oversight
✔ Reality:
- Both sectors have high performers and low performers
- Neither allows widespread “do nothing with no consequence” as a structural norm
3) “In government there are whole office buildings full of that”
This is:
- a rhetorical exaggeration
- not backed by empirical evidence or workforce studies
Actual findings in public administration research show:
- government productivity varies widely by agency and function
- many public-sector roles are understaffed, high-demand, and heavily regulated
- some administrative inefficiency exists (as in any large system), but not the caricature described here
4) Structural reality: government vs corporate incentives
A more accurate comparison looks like this:
Corporations:
- incentive: profit
- risk: market failure, lawsuits, competition
- accountability: shareholders, regulators, customers
Government:
- incentive: service delivery, legal compliance, political oversight
- risk: audits, elections, inspector generals, public scrutiny
- accountability: laws, courts, voters, watchdog agencies
Neither system is:
- uniformly efficient
- uniformly corrupt
- uniformly meritocratic
Both are large bureaucracies with mixed performance outcomes
5) Bias analysis
This statement reflects a common cognitive pattern:
1. Selection bias
- focusing on worst examples of each system
2. Asymmetry assumption
- assumes corporations enforce discipline strictly
- assumes government does not
3. Stereotype compression
- compresses millions of workers into one behavioral stereotype per sector
Bottom line
- ✔ Both systems contain inefficiency and variation in performance
QP!
Verified User
Do you think a local grocery store in Harlem will be full of government related nepotism hires?
Do you think without unions that hiring is not done partially on who knows who?
You see one side while ignoring the other which is over 100 years of almost exclusively white euro men taking all the top management jobs because PoC and women were barred.
Once you establish that base that DID NOT earn their jobs via market competition and then all of the issues you raise exist there is no question who benefits more from the nepotism and other factors you mention and it's NOT the DEI group and IS the group who got their jobs for over 100 years wrongly.