Right here in America: "'food deserts' -- these are areas without a supermarket"

“The report demonstrates that Mrs. Obama’s depiction of American “food deserts” is fatuous at best.

Lower-income Americans live closer to supermarkets than higher-income Americans.”

Politics apart and with skepticism about statistics, there are food deserts in Philadelphia. Where our church meets there is not a single supermarket accessible to people without cars. There are a lot of reasons for that and I’m not saying Washington has the answer. But try taking a bus to buy groceries for a family. There is no question that a large number of people are forced to shop at convenience stores with limited selection and high prices. There is such a store near the corner where I live. I’ve been there once in a year and bought a gallon of milk that was $1.00 more than in the supermarket. But I have a car so I haven’t been back since. Many people have no choice. So, yeh maybe lower income Americans live closer to supermarkets than higher-income Americans but they can’t get there on foot.

Wal-Mart has tried to come into many city centers and have been driven away by unions who stir up fear that Wal-Mart will drive down wages.

I echo Jim’s comment. There will always be exceptions. When I was in college, I would drive through lots of small communities in WI that could not sustain even a small grocery store.

And to Jonathan’s point, I wonder if Walmart (or any of the super stores) is not a cause to some of this. They expect people to travel to their stores a certain distance. And within that distance, they expect to take a certain amount of shoppers from the local grocer, which I would assume makes it harder for a) grocers to startup in areas with a smaller clientele b) grocers to stay in business.

But, I would question whether people’s ability to get to or location to a grocer are the real issues. I highly doubt if people had a grocery store, even right next door, they would eat healthy if they are not already, especially when you consider obesity is not strictly a lack-of-ability-to-get-to-a-grocer profile issue. If anything, it will just open this profile of people up to more junk food. And this points to the real issue IMO, food and finance education.

In my particular zip code within the city of Grand Rapids, we have lost 3 neighborhood grocery stores over the past 15 years. They were a little cheaper than the neighborhood party stores and gas stations, yet they were quite a bit more expensive than the superstore chains such as Walmart and Meijers (large midwestern superstore/grocery chain) Two of them went out of business (the other, having owned its property for over 50 years, was bought out by the expanding hospital across the street from its location). One of the two that went out of business was located in a low traffic volume area, while the other just couldn’t compete. Its expensive to lease space in the city, taxes are more expensive in the city and then you compound that with shrinkage.

The problem with this article is that he won’t even admit it that there is a problem. I know of hundreds of poor people in our neighborhood that shop at neighborhood party stores and gas stations, rather than to shop at the Walmarts, Meijers, or discount grocery stores such as Save Alot and Aldis and this contributes to their poverty.

At the same time, when the government steps in to solve this problem, their good intentions often makes the problem even worse. If government incentives/supplements were used to leverage the private sector to open a neighborhood grocery store where the previous two stores in our zip code went out of business, most likely they would have to be supplemented by the government for a long time to stay in business. Just another example of how a government program can easily create dependency…..

Steve,

So again exactly how many households in Philly do not have access to a vehicle, at least once a month, to do a large grocery purchase? And exactly how is this a government problem? And exactly why do you accept the premise that this fractional portion of the population (I still would like a number) is something that is to be viewed with shame as if their vehicular access to a grocery store is a convenience or liberty to which they are entitled?

[Alex Guggenheim] Steve,

So again exactly how many households in Philly do not have access to a vehicle, at least once a month, to do a large grocery purchase? And exactly how is this a government problem? And exactly why do you accept the premise that this fractional portion of the population (I still would like a number) is something that is to be viewed with shame as if their vehicular access to a grocery store is a convenience or liberty to which they are entitled?

I can’t tell you households without looking at a demographics map but there are entire neighborhoods without access. Like I said there are many reasons for this that some other posts have addressed and as I also said I’m not sure Washington has the answers. I go back to Joel’s post and concur with it - “The problem with this article is that he won’t even admit it that there is a problem. I know of hundreds of poor people in our neighborhood that shop at neighborhood party stores and gas stations, rather than to shop at the Walmarts, Meijers, or discount grocery stores such as Save Alot and Aldis and this contributes to their poverty.”

The article seems more bent on Obama-bashing than anything. There’s plenty to bash but this guy comes off looking real to the right and real white. And I wonder where he lives and what he drives. I had to chuckle about your “access to a vehicle, at least once a month.” Where do you live anyway? Maybe you can shop once a month for all your groceries.

Depends on family size. We don’t do it anymore because we have grown accustomed to going a few times a week, but my wife and I used to shop once a month for groceries. It would generally fit all in our back seat of our Kia Rio5. :)

Not really to support either position, I have seen this lady walk to our local grocer (probably from our apt complex 1 mile away). No big deal until you drop it to 10 degrees and snow. That is not a joke, I have seen her do this. Couple bags of groceries each time.

In fact, our family does shop once a month for the substantial purchase of our groceries and buys locally to supplement during the rest of the month. But that isn’t the issue, the issue is your acceptance of the premise that somehow those who do not have access to a vehicle is something that other people should be ashamed of and remedy, without any consideration to the facts of how and why this perpetuates itself both as a community (if that be true) and as individuals.

But what I did find strange is your accusation about the person writing the article:

this guy comes off looking real to the right and real white.

How does questioning Michele Obama’s claim of food deserts come off as white?

For someone who has spoken strongly against stereotyping and its alleged negative affects on minorities in the church, you certainly don’t seem to be in short supply of this very method in reacting to and referencing the writer. That is disappointing.

Personally I believe you have, at some point, accepted the liberal narrative of the poor, the needy, minorities and such and brought this into your theology. I know far too many poor, needy and minorities who, themselves, have come to reject the view that it is those with power that are the main cause of poverty or disadvantage in this country (and it is this country we are talking about right now). They know that it is within themselves and that this country offers the necessary freedoms and opportunities that they cannot look back, possibly as one might have in the past, and said, “it is simply too one sided, I cannot progress”.

In fact, you would be rather surprised to meet my neighbors. Many of them do not look like me or my family. But somehow, they are living at the same standard as my family. The do not speak of obstacles, rather opportunities. My neighbor next door came from a very poor background and as a minority. Yet here he is, having worked hard, hard enough to have already retired. My neighbors have experienced just about the same amount of difficulties that I have experienced from talking to them, though each negative experience has been unique, these neighbors of mine do not talk about having made it in a place where opportunity did not exist in a broad way.

It is quite easy to find demons and villains where suffering occurs due to issues that are too uncomfortable to discuss because it requires a great deal of admission that the lacking is not due to some imagined Wall Street culprit or dispassionate Anglo American happy to be warmly tucked into his or her bed with their stomachs full, a blessing indeed from God, rather that their lacking comes in the form of self-infliction via both personal and cultural values and postures that simply have served to exacerbate their condition and perpetuate their isolation from the conveniences and advantage enjoyed by many.

Does this mean no one consider their plight? Of course not, but it certainly directs the proposals for remedy and to avoid or dismiss this is to engage in folly when talking about truly addressing the issue.

Here is an interesting article that might shed light on the issue from the Washington Post. It is called, “Poor? Pay Up.
Having Little Money Often Means No Car, No Washing Machine, No Checking Account And No Break From Fees and High Prices”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/17/AR20090…

And it is one of the reasons we spend time focusing on financial budgeting and financial literacy with those that we minister to…..

[Alex Guggenheim] In fact, our family does shop once a month for the substantial purchase of our groceries and buys locally to supplement during the rest of the month. But that isn’t the issue, the issue is your acceptance of the premise that somehow those who do not have access to a vehicle is something that other people should be ashamed of and remedy, without any consideration to the facts of how and why this perpetuates itself both as a community (if that be true) and as individuals.

But what I did find strange is your accusation about the person writing the article:

this guy comes off looking real to the right and real white.

How does questioning Michele Obama’s claim of food deserts come off as white?

For someone who has spoken strongly against stereotyping and its alleged negative affects on minorities in the church, you certainly don’t seem to be in short supply of this very method in reacting to and referencing the writer. That is disappointing.

Personally I believe you have, at some point, accepted the liberal narrative of the poor, the needy, minorities and such and brought this into your theology. I know far too many poor, needy and minorities who, themselves, have come to reject the view that it is those with power that are the main cause of poverty or disadvantage in this country (and it is this country we are talking about right now). They know that it is within themselves and that this country offers the necessary freedoms and opportunities that they cannot look back, possibly as one might have in the past, and said, “it is simply too one sided, I cannot progress”.

In fact, you would be rather surprised to meet my neighbors. Many of them do not look like me or my family. But somehow, they are living at the same standard as my family. The do not speak of obstacles, rather opportunities. My neighbor next door came from a very poor background and as a minority. Yet here he is, having worked hard, hard enough to have already retired. My neighbors have experienced just about the same amount of difficulties that I have experienced from talking to them, though each negative experience has been unique, these neighbors of mine do not talk about having made it in a place where opportunity did not exist in a broad way.

It is quite easy to find demons and villains where suffering occurs due to issues that are too uncomfortable to discuss because it requires a great deal of admission that the lacking is not due to some imagined Wall Street culprit or dispassionate Anglo American happy to be warmly tucked into his or her bed with their stomachs full, a blessing indeed from God, rather that their lacking comes in the form of self-infliction via both personal and cultural values and postures that simply have served to exacerbate their condition and perpetuate their isolation from the conveniences and advantage enjoyed by many.

Does this mean no one consider their plight? Of course not, but it certainly directs the proposals for remedy and to avoid or dismiss this is to engage in folly when talking about truly addressing the issue.

Wow. So much to answer and so little time.

1. No vehicle, no shame - just the facts when it comes to shopping
2. No stereotyping - he is right and white. Just happens that most of the “food deserts” seem to be in urban black neighborhoods. To call it a scam claims way too much
3. No liberal narrative - no conservative bandwagon either as if they just need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. Do you really believe the myth of “it is within themselves and that this country offers the necessary freedoms and opportunities?” And this – “their lacking comes in the form of self-infliction via both personal and cultural values and postures that simply have served to exacerbate their condition and perpetuate their isolation from the conveniences and advantage enjoyed by many.” Sounds like Darwinian economics.

Questions: Why all those empty lots? Why won’t an individual investor invest in developing a grocery store there? Answer … risk!

Jim, To a certain extent I do agree with you. Often crime causes poverty. A high crime-rate will drive businesses out of a neighborhood, those that stay will charge higher prices, property values fall, and etc…..

However, there were other social factors besides the riots. White flight, for instance. Later on in one of your articles, one of the people interviewed talked about how real estate agents played into the fears of people.

“I think there certainly were real estate agents that tried to capitalize on these difficult times,” he said. “(They) went around telling people, You’d better sell right now. The neighborhood is changing.’ “

By the way, I was old enough to remember white flight when I lived a couple years in Cleveland Ohio. I remember as a child in the 1970’s my parents discussing how many of their neighbors were panicking because a African-American family moved onto their street. Fears that more would come and drive their property values down. Soon we saw an onslaught of for sale signs on our street, which became a self-fulfilled prophesy when everyone was selling their house at the same time. Although once a blue-collar stable neighborhood, it became an unstable street of rental properties……….

[Steve Davis] Do you really believe the myth of “it is within themselves and that this country offers the necessary freedoms and opportunities?” And this – “their lacking comes in the form of self-infliction via both personal and cultural values and postures that simply have served to exacerbate their condition and perpetuate their isolation from the conveniences and advantage enjoyed by many.” Sounds like Darwinian economics.

So the claim that this country offers the necessary freedoms and opportunities for its citizens to progress in their placement in life is a myth to you? Steve, really? This seems like an assertion, not from the minimally left but a rather distant left. You base this claim in what? In spite of the overwhelming progress of individuals and groups since our country’s founding, you really believe this general principle to be a myth? I can understand if we were in Cuba, it is quite clear progress was ended as a general rule some 50 years ago. I am rather surprised you would use such a strong categorization.

As to the self-inflicted lacking stemming from personal and cultural values, yes I assert that due in large part this is the cause of lack for the majority in this country. Remedies for them must be personal rehabilitation and cultural rehabilitation first(if it is also a contributor and often is). As to calling it Darwinian Economics, that does not work since some forms of Darwinian Economics assume socialism to be the highest order, that which you propose to some degree.

Names or labels do not really concern me unless they serve as a good communicator, here I believe that when one examines the cause of their lacking, they must and should begin with self and group examinations, so Darwinian Economics would fail as an apt term, rather personal responsibility or self-attendance would describe this element of the both micro and macro-economics. The most powerful forces that influence their decision making which results in their lot or placement in life have to be treated primarily. And indisputably this is the individual person and those in their immediate periphery from who and with whom they form values. They must consider whether these factors are properly assisting them in gaining the need they lack and seek. This, I believe, is the general rule.

First of all, Jesus Christ said that the poor would always be with us. Poverty is an inevitable part of the human condition in all societies because of original sin. To deny this truth because of America’s merits is to reject Christianity for paganism. America’s positive attributes cannot overcome original sin, nor does it nullify Jesus Christ’s teachings. So, for the conservative to blame America’s poor for their plight rather than to have compassion on them just as Jesus Christ had compassion on the poor Jews of His time is every bit the rejection of Biblical truth as is the liberal who believes that it is possible to eliminate poverty. The only difference between liberals and conservatives is that liberals believe that poverty can be eliminated with socialism, and conservatives believe that it can be eliminated with capitalism and with “values.” The bottom line is that both of you believe that the effects of the fall, original sin, on humanity can be overcome by the awesome power of man’s greatness because - after all - man is the measure of all things, right? If we were all to just bow to the great virtue of western civilization, then problems like poverty and crime would just disappear, right? Malarky. Hogwash. It is the Tower of Babel, humanist thinking, and conservatives and liberals are fighting over which side gets to run the Tower. I don’t care which side wins that battle, and neither does Satan, because the truth is that both sides are going to spend eternity in the lake of fire, so there are no winners, only losers. Both capitalists and communists who reject the Bible in favor of the things of this world are going to burn in hell for eternity, and that was part of the message of the parable of the sower, and of the parable of the sheep and the goats. Look, I spent a lot of my life as a Democrat, a lot of my life as a Republican, and I can tell you that it is 6 of one and half a dozen of the other. Democrats and Republicans hire the same lawyers. They hire the same political consultants. They hang out with each other in the same country clubs. They belong to the same groups like the Council on Foreign Relations (which counts among its members Newt Gingrich, George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama) and who knows how many secret societies like the Skulls and Bones. In 2008, George Soros was a major contributor to BOTH Barack Obama AND John McCain, so it really didn’t matter WHO WON (and that merely scratches the iceberg when you consider how the same money men and powerbrokers control both parties AND many of our “political movements”). This stuff isn’t secret information, but in plain view before all. But the problem is that we would rather read HuffingtonPost or Townhall.com or listen to Rush Limbaugh or Jesse Jackson than acknowledge the truth.

Now I agree that Michele Obama’s little initiative is not the role of government. But neither was our invasion and occupation of Iraq, which first of all was illegal because it happened without the formal declaration of war that our own Constitution requires (don’t fall for the line that the congressional authorization for military force was adequate - or legal - it wasn’t), and second of which spent a ton more than $400 million dollars. Look, tens, possibly hundreds, of billions of dollars were funneled to cronies of Dick Cheney and similar in no-bid contracts for work that was either never done or was done shoddily, and no “conservative” ever raised a peep about it, so spending pennies by comparison to open a few grocery stores is supposed to be this constitutional outrage. Had those Iraq reconstruction contracts gone to affirmative action minority contractors under Barack Obama, conservatives would have held Tea Party demonstrations for years, but Bush and Cheney were able to ladle it out to their cronies for years and conservatives never raised a peep about it (other than Rush Limbaugh putting up a paragraph about it once on his website). Now the person who is silent about stuff like the criminal fraud and corruption in the “Iraq reconstruction” fiasco that cost hundreds of billions of dollars (and many lives) but objects to a much smaller proposal to feed the poor has real problems with his theology.

It is amazing how New Testament teaching has gotten turned on its head by both the right and the left in this country. But since these are conservative objections, I will focus on the right. Look, read the Book of James. It tells us to embrace the poor and the powerless, and not to trust the wealthy and powerful. Well, much of conservative Christianity in America does the opposite: exalting the wealthy and powerful, claiming that their wealth and power is evidence of their possessing some spiritual or moral virtue, and while viewing the poor with spite and derision.