Aggregator
What US states have seen flesh-eating bacteria cases this year?
The Mamdani Grocery Grift: NYC Mayor Sells Taxpayers A Bill Of Goods On City-Run Stores
Last week, Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s short stint as a faux president ended with an embarrassing acknowledgment that he could not, as promised during his campaign, arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
So, this week, Mamdani the Grocer made a reappearance, with details on the five city-run grocery stores that he will open.
But rather than deliver discount groceries, Mamdani is selling New Yorkers a bill of goods that will cost them millions.
What Mamdani described was a discount food bank dressed up as a grocery. Standing in front of blackboards saying “REDUCED 30%,” Mamdani sounded like a bodega hawker: “Once a month, our five city-run grocery stores will set prices for this core set of goods at 30% below typical retail prices. No exceptions, no gimmicks”
Here’s the most delicious part: the presser was a gimmick from beginning to end.
The mayor promised that “The savings will last for the entire month. That means no weekly fluctuations or sticker shock at the checkout line — not for our seniors living on fixed incomes, nor for the parents who rely on a regular supply of apple slices to keep toddler tantrums at bay.”
The Mamdani markets are new variations of an old New York grift: selling gold watches for $5.
The dupes want to believe that somehow this street vendor, surreptitiously displaying watches inside his overcoat, actually found a way to sell “solid gold watches” for just a few bucks.
The math simply does not add up for Mamdani.
Most groceries have an average profit margin between 1% and 3%, one of the smallest margins of any industry.
To promise a 30% discount below market rate that cannot be adjusted due to monthly market fluctuations is economically absurd.
It is not a description of a competitive grocery but a public charity. It is a quasi-food bank where taxpayers subsidize the cost.
As usual, Mamdani turns this into a class war, demonizing business owners. He suggests that real grocery stores are simply price gougers hoarding windfall profits from consumers. He ignores that they must pay rent, upkeep and fees — all things the city-run stores may simply write off.
He proclaimed, “May the most affordable grocery store win.”
Of course, the test is not which grocery is the most affordable, but which is the most sustainable. If you are willing to take a bath on sales, you can always offer the most affordable prices for as long as your excess cash holds out.
In Mamdani’s case, he has the credit of New York City to draw on to compete against Mom-and-Pop bodegas.
The subsidy, however, is only part of the costs. The average bodega owner must cover the fixed costs of renting a space, building the store, and complying with inspectors. Those are the fixed costs that must be internalized into the cost of produce to break even.
Real stores are competing in one of the tightest markets in the world and are grappling with a 33% nationwide increase in costs since 2019. Mamdani wants to use the stores to prove that socialism works as part of his effort to introduce New York to the “warmth of socialism.” We may never know the real costs of the Mamdani markets.
According to the New York Post, the city plans to open an East Harlem location as its first store, at a reported cost of $30 million.
However, that is not the full cost. The Post also reported that the city had already appropriated $25 million to improve the first site. The city will lose millions that could have been acquired through a sale of the land or through rents to private companies. Those costs are left on other ledgers and not likely counted in the true costs of the Mamdani markets.
The first store will not even open until 2027 despite the props behind Mamdani. The second Manhattan store will not open until 2029. That is three years and tens of millions of dollars for just the first two stores.
That is how Mamdani is promising New Yorkers savings of “$90 a month, or roughly $1,000 a year.” He is using the city to subsidize food under the guise of selling at low, but still profitable prices. Ironically, those who can take advantage of the subsidy at the first two stores in Manhattan will be anyone, including the privileged, wealthy New Yorkers whom Mamdani denounces for not paying their fair share. After all, everyone wants below-market-priced slices in the Big Apple.
The first city-run grocery, in East Harlem, will cost $30 million to build — and perhaps more. It will never need to pay this money back nor factor it into its prices. The “warmth of socialism” will cover it; that is, you.
In reality, Mamdani will be selling apples at a far greater cost than any competitor, but those true costs will be buried in the city budget and paid for by the taxpayers.
Indeed, the Mamdani markets are likely to prove the most expensive groceries in the city.
Mamdani, however, has never sweated the math or the means. He knows that the focus will be on the cash register price and not the true cost.
Of course, there is a big difference between the gold watch grift and the Mamdani grift: buying a knockoff watch only costs chumps a few bucks. The Mamdani con will cost New Yorkers millions, and most will thank him for it.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the New York Times best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
Tyler Durden Wed, 07/29/2026 - 14:40Fauci gave off ‘signals of deception’ during Senate hearing, body language expert says
Prince Harry hit with financial blow after devastating lawsuit loss
Prince Harry hit with financial blow after devastating lawsuit loss
Seattle’s viral critter Jimothy the raccoon inspires tattoo trend
Myth or miracle? We tried anti-microbial silver-infused sheets for allergies
California gas prices set to spike this summer — here’s the counties getting hit hardest
Niners quarterback Brock Purdy, wife Jenna announce they’re having second baby
Watch Live: Fed Chair Warsh Explains 'Hawkish' Hold
Having delivered the biggest "non-cut" surprise to markets in decades - by holding rates unchanged (markets were pricing a 35% chance of a hike) - and given Warsh’s distaste for forward guidance, he is unlikely to offer any clearer signals during the press conference.
Bear in mind that since 2015, traders have foreseen the Fed’s ultimate rate decision with an average error of 2.4 basis points the day before the central bank’s announcement, according to a note from Ian Lyngen, head of US rates strategy at BMO Capital Markets.
“The market is set up for a sharper kneejerk response to the FOMC announcement than is typically the case,” Lyngen said.
Jonathan Pingle, chief US economist at UBS, said he hadn’t felt this uncertain about an imminent Fed rate decision in 20 years, back when Ben Bernanke became Fed chair.
However, the three dissents in favor of a rate hike clearly show the direction of travel,and that may prove helpful to Warsh if he aims to tamp down inflation pressures.
While yields are down and gold up after the statement, the dissenters would suggest this decision leans hawkish (Goldman expected 2 dissents, so marginally hawkish).
Warsh will likely emphasize that all options remain open, and that future decisions will depend on the data.
Desks anticipate a continued emphasis on the inflation side of the dual mandate, without offering any type of commitment for future hikes, though he might also acknowledge the upside risks to inflation posed by the latest rise in oil prices.
He recently announced the leaders of the five Chairman’s Task Forces for Advancing Monetary Policy and might provide an update on the timeline for their work.
Watch the full press conference live here (due to start at 1430ET):
Tyler Durden Wed, 07/29/2026 - 14:25Shaun Cassidy breaks down decision to ditch performing for 40 years of ‘normal life’
Shaun Cassidy breaks down decision to ditch performing for 40 years of ‘normal life’
California’s billionaire playground on edge as new vacation scam steals tens of thousands from tourists
SoCal woman gives birth in Jack in the Box parking lot after hospital turns her away twice
Two-year-old ‘miracle baby’ of former college football star dies in tragic drowning accident
How the Late Glen Hansard Made ‘Once’ Among the Best 21st Century Movie Musicals
Fed holds interest rates steady as dissent mounts over whether to hike rates soon
No Rate-Change Sparks 3 Dissents As Warsh Fed Delivers Biggest 'Non-Cut' Surprise In Decades
Tl;dr: The Fed held rates unchanged, delivering the biggest surprise "non-cut" to the market in decades. Three dissenters wanted a rate-hike, clearly signaling the direction of travel and confirming this decision as a "hawkish hold" though arguably only marginally.
* * *
Since the last FOMC meeting on June 17th (Kevin Warsh's first as Fed Chair), a lot has happened, with the Iran war re-erupting driving oil prices and the dollar higher, while stocks (momo/semis meltdown), bonds, gold, and bitcoin are all lower...
Both growth and inflation macro data has surprised to the downside...
But, oil's resurgence has pushed rate-hike odds significantly higher...
But, this will still be one of the first Fed meetings in years where the market does not have at least 80% confidence in what the committee will do...
One way or another, this will be the largest "non-cut" surprise in decades.
If the Fed hikes today, it will be almost as big of a surprise as Powell's 50bps cut in Sept '24 meant to give the election to Kamala. pic.twitter.com/5tQyfvye1H
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) July 29, 2026As we detailed earlier, since 2015, traders have foreseen the Fed’s ultimate rate decision with an average error of 2.4 basis points the day before the central bank’s announcement, according to a note from Ian Lyngen, head of US rates strategy at BMO Capital Markets.
“The market is set up for a sharper kneejerk response to the FOMC announcement than is typically the case,” Lyngen said.
Jonathan Pingle, chief US economist at UBS, said he hasn’t felt this uncertain about an imminent Fed rate decision in 20 years, back when Ben Bernanke became Fed chair.
A lack of a track record by Warsh and recent divisions among Fed officials are further clouding the outlook, he said, not ruling out a scenario where Warsh is the one who casts the deciding vote.
“Given the fact that he can push around sort of the median of the committee at the moment, he’s going to decide policy for the next few meetings, and we really have no idea how Kevin Warsh thinks about monetary policy.”
Remember, there are/were 9 members of the committee that saw hikes this year...
Most pundits and sell-side analysts see the central bank leaving rates on hold - especially since last month's inflation reports came well below expectations, and there are no dots or forecasts to update this month.
So, with the market pricing a one-third chance of a hike today, what did The Fed decide?
-
*FED VOTES 9-3 TO HOLD BENCHMARK RATE IN 3.5%-3.75% RANGE
-
*FED: HAMMACK, KASHKARI AND LOGAN DISSENT IN FAVOR OF RATE HIKE
-
*FED REPEATS ECONOMIC ACTIVITY IS EXPANDING AT A SOLID PACE
-
*FED REPEATS COMMITTEE WILL DELIVER PRICE STABILITY
-
*FED REPEATS JOB GAINS HAVE KEPT PACE WITH WORKFORCE
The three dissents in favor of a rate hike clearly show the direction of travel.
And that may prove helpful to Warsh if he aims to tamp down inflation pressures.
Read the redline below (not much changed)...
Tyler Durden Wed, 07/29/2026 - 14:00