Shawn Sharp

@JoyfullyJessica @wolf_vukovic @JamesSurowiecki They have lower profits cause of costs like investors, having to buy a building, taxes. Many things the city can give or wave or not pursing like investor paybacks or ceo cost or bonuses. Your thinkjng in profit model and not out and no one has any idea what that is on this one

@ShawnWSharp @wolf_vukovic @JamesSurowiecki Grocery store profits are a tiny fraction of that 30% discount proposed. It will absolutely require massive taxpayer subsidies to accomplish.

Here’s an economics law: If a grocery store wants to sell food 30% cheaper, one of only four things *must* be true: 1. Its suppliers are accepting 30% lower prices. 2. Its workers are accepting 30% lower wages. 3. Taxpayers are covering the difference through subsidies. 4. The store is operating at a loss, and will soon be out of business. Prices aren't actually 30% lower - they've just been shifted somewhere else in the system. Something that people have a very hard time understanding is that prices don't disappear. They allocate scarce resources. You can move costs around, hide them, or delay them, but you can't make them vanish. Having said that, let them do this experiment. They will destroy small grocers and produce food shortages. Perhaps people will learn a lesson then. Perhaps this failed enterprise will represent another nail in the coffin for bad ideas that never work? Yeah, right! 😂

@bitmaelstrom @wolf_vukovic @JamesSurowiecki Never said they make a 30% profit but margins which is markup. Thats ate up by costs and many the city could wave for their store like taxes, building they own so dont have to buy, investors to pay. Your still thinking in profit making logic not outside that.

@ShawnWSharp @wolf_vukovic @JamesSurowiecki lol Mr. "Sharp" thinks supermarkets make 30% profit.

@Kooterrific @wolf_vukovic @JamesSurowiecki Thats worked into cost already. Your just trying to make an panic over something you dont even know any of the financial structure for. Yout like the guy with s sign saying wotlf ending on a street corner. Have fun.

@ShawnWSharp @wolf_vukovic @JamesSurowiecki Does this store not have employees? Stockers, cashiers, janitors, etc? Rent and utilities? They certainly have to make a living wage to live in NYC, right? So they should be making no less than $35/hour plus benefits I assume? This will be a colossal failure.

@DEXoverCEX @wolf_vukovic @JamesSurowiecki Depends on how run they could just pointing out if your not trying for profit it is possivle and not cost taxpayer a dime. Its just making up a panic that doesnt exist as no one knows how its structured.

@ShawnWSharp @wolf_vukovic @JamesSurowiecki lol you think they are going to break even? lol

@wolf_vukovic @JamesSurowiecki Your missing a city store not trying to make a profit. So the 30% reduction costs tax payers nothing. It will hurt other stores but your costing shifting is not existent.

Aldi and Trade Joe's are cheaper, but not 30% cheaper. They exploit a better supply chain which enables them to be competitive on price. Plus private labels, fewer employees per sq ft, lower rents, etc. Also, 30% compared to whom is the next question? WholeFoods or Target or Aldi? Not the same 30%, surely. The main points still stand. Markets work because profit and loss are information. Profits tell firms they're creating value with scarce resources. Losses tell them to change or go out of business. A government-owned grocery store weakens that feedback loop. If losses are covered by taxpayers rather than investors, the incentive to innovate, cut costs, or allocate resources efficiently is reduced. Until you run out of money. It's nothing to do with competence of employees or management, it's about incentives.

@spencerpratt You realize most grocery stores markups are in the 30 to 40% range over cost so if profit is not a goal you can do it and not cost tax payers anything.

Remember, the government cannot *discount* anything, nor provide “free” stuff. YOU are paying for that with your tax dollars. This is just communist money laundering and will collapse in spectacular fashion, decimating local businesses in the process.

@sinn_summer @_brinxinx Lol. So much contradiction. Its been amusing but but you stuck with a fantasy version of leading and what providing means and how you initial that kinda life. Have the day you earn.

@ShawnWSharp @_brinxinx I’m actually not scared in my fantasy world, I work and my man works but he likes to pay majority of the bills. All my exes took on that role too because their real providers. My mom used to be a house wife because my dad worked hard and was a provider too. It’s the man that lead

I took a girl on a date She said: “I don’t fuck on the first date, because I don’t want this relationship to be based on sex. I have a lot going and I’d hate to give myself to you and never hear from you.” Then ordered $150 worth of drinks and food and i only had mozzarella sticks and 2 beers. When the bill came i told her i only had $40 for my portion. She was so UPSET So i added:….

@sinn_summer @_brinxinx Your missing the point Saying hi has almost no point of rejection and just saying hi doesnt equate to interest in dating you have many assumptions in your thought process

@ShawnWSharp @_brinxinx You missed my point. A man should hold that energy of being a provider and stay in his masculine energy. Therefore pursue a lady and I actually don’t fear rejection, I said hi to my man first then he asked me out. I don’t need to ask any man out if I’m interested, They ask me🤷🏾‍♀️

@sinn_summer @_brinxinx Your not in reality. Sure men used to support women with one job but that hasn't been so since the 70s. And few started businesses. Stay scared in your fantasy world.

@ShawnWSharp @_brinxinx Idk men used to work hard and would be busy creating business and a life for their future self and family. Now men just go on the internet and complain about women not paying for dates likeee that should be the least worries of a real provider man. A real man has shit to do🤷🏾‍♀️

@sinn_summer @_brinxinx And few households only has one person working and providing. Your ignoring reality for a ideal that doesnt exist in the modern times.

@ShawnWSharp @_brinxinx Why would a woman need to ask a man out? Men are supposed to lead and provide . Women are supposed to be pursued and stay in their feminine energy. Back in the day and still today, men should take on that role to be the one to lead and direct for your lady.

@sinn_summer @_brinxinx Tradition is always good. Both have listed why it fails on both sides. And it has failed from those points since rhe tradtion founded. People communicating exceptions instead of assuming them the better approach

@ShawnWSharp @_brinxinx Never said men are the bad guys, I think there is a huge difference between traditional men and men in 2026 who discuss who’s paying for what on the first date. 🤷🏾‍♀️

@sinn_summer @_brinxinx Yes but the point is genuine interest is not happening on both sides. And 99.9% of women won't ask a man out. Your answer just ignores there problen and isnt working on a solution.

@ShawnWSharp @_brinxinx 🤷🏾‍♀️i never disagreed a date should be a show of genuine interest. That’s why it’s called a date and don’t matter if the man or the woman asks whoever out, I still think the person who invites the other person out on a date, should plan and pay for that date and get to know them.

@sinn_summer @_brinxinx It is a gamble. But a date should be a show of genuine interst. Since its been abused on both sides what's the problem with Dutch so its less a gamble?

@ShawnWSharp @_brinxinx Dating is a gamble. On both men and women. At the end of the day you truly never know who is interested or not. It is what it is

@Dame_Nemo @TheDamaniFelder Fed doesnt control corporations and I work with and see cost and price increases. There has been no cost inflation to match price increases and your ignoring ceo of companies telling why they did. Ignoring reality for what a textbook says.

@ShawnWSharp @TheDamaniFelder Never has anyone ever been so wrong so emphatically. Learn about monetary policy.

The UFC paid for this, not you. You paid for benefits for illegal immigrants and Somalian learing centers. And that's largely why your groceries are expensive. Hope this helps.

@sinn_summer @_brinxinx Going Dutch eliminates the problem on both sides and shows interest in seeing if there something from both sides without creating the situation that either side expects something.

@ShawnWSharp @_brinxinx This just sounds like men either aren’t picking the women who actually likes them or hoping that for a free meal they will get something in return.

@sinn_summer @_brinxinx Only in us and woman have abused that for a long time. Cant count the number of ladies saying they only excepted a date to get a meal not wanting to see if there any match or know there is none. Most countries go Dutch and to eliminate both sides complaints we should also

@ShawnWSharp @_brinxinx I agree if you don’t like the person then don’t go, but if the person asks you out on a date then that person should pick whatever date it is and handle whatever bill it is. You invited the person out on a date. Is anybody forgetting that’s how men used to court women ??😂

@MajorFoe @mindoverweaknes You did see her stop. She wasnt even trying. They just baiting you into a narrative

@mindoverweaknes Notice he had to CARRY his ladder & set it up while she’s freehand & had her ladder already in place but she couldn’t climb more than 2 rungs 💀

@sinn_summer @_brinxinx Both are pursuing as both agreed to go on the date. If you have not interest you shouldn't agree to go.

@_brinxinx I believe the person who asks the other out on a date, should pay for the date, If you’re pursuing that person.