There is a more primary factor involved. 60 years ago, families opened small coffee shops, bars, "restaurants," corner stores,.. to provide jobs for the family. It was a way of life and a culture for many thousands of families and their neighborhood customers. "Service" was neighbor-to-neighbor, prices allowed the owner family to get by, choices were limited to what the neighborhood wanted and this built deep roots of home.
Then, investors discovered these consumer mass markets, gutted anti-trust and other regulations, and producers discovered the miracle of "new" or "improved" diversification of product lines and ways to limit distribution. This led to the spread of ever-larger supermarkets, formula (large) bars and restaurants, etc. offering lower prices and wider selections. "Service" was no longer a way of life between neighbors but impersonal, low wage workers hoping to move up by impressing investor bosses. This is what killed most of the small, family businesses that defined Manhattan, too, before before Brooklyn. The same for all US inner-cities including DC where I live.
The new "niche" obsession is much more a rejection of the impersonal mass retail markets than of the mostly long-ago closed family businesses and its neighborhood culture. Most family businesses that still survive have found a way to raise -- or not lower -- their prices to attract those affluent enough (and old enough) to appreciate personal service in cozy settings. The niche obsession is for those too young to have known what has been lost and/or for the rootless who, for whatever reason, believe it makes them superior. Support your local, family-run businesses!
It's more than just the expensive products. It's the underlying land and rent and regulation. You see the same thing in housing. If the cost of the lot, the septic system (rural areas like where I live) permits, power hook up, etc., as all these costs get higher, it starts making more economic sense to build a more expensive house on the lot.
When you drill all the way down, as the tangible assets get more expensive, largely because the financialization of everything means that these are now "investments' for wealthy people, and as the regulatory requirements get more expensive, once again a gate keeping function that makes real assets harder for regular people to utilize, the only way the contractor makes a good return building the house is when it is an expensive house.
Here's the simplest formulation of the problem I can come up with.
A democracy exists, self-evidently, for the benefit of the demos, the people.
When the people don't share in the increasing national wealth and prosperity, naturally they lose interest in democracy as a form of government. Everything doesn't have to be equal, but it has to be a hell of a lot fairer than it is in the US now.
Wealth concentrates in a capitalistic system.
Therefore you need a system of wealth transfers, whether it is direct or programs like free healthcare, GI Bill, whatever. Otherwise the capitalism eats the democracy.
Both capitalism and democracy need regulation. The Consitiution and the laws that follow from it, are regulations for our democracy.
Coincidentally, Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations, the founding script of capitalism, and American democracy, were both born in 1776. Had the founders understood how capitalism would develop, perhaps they would have written rules for that as well.
As it is, we live in a capitalistic democracy where the ideology of the "free market", which functions more or less like a religious ideology, complete with hypocrisies and special exceptions for certain groups of people, is the governing principle we apply to capitalism.
The founders, in their wisdom, saw how badly religious ideologies interact with governments and so they excluded religion from being involved with the state and left religious freedom for individuals.
Unfortunately, capitalism has produced what is, in effect, a new form of religion, benefitting a select group, and this ideology, which in some ways, since it is purely materialistic, is even more destructive than regular spiritual religion, is destroying our democracy.
This has been going on forever. Let's not forget the racism inherent in the years ago, pushing what people out so black people could move in, then pushing them out so rich white people could move in.
I live in Ft Collins, CO, a pretty white but reasonably priced place (we came following our daughter), and for so long, New York City has been unaffordable. It has become more white, more in place to be, and right now I am thinking of Brooklyn.
I lived in Port Washington, Long Island, and was privileged, earning money from the sale of a house when markets were good.
This could be part Jewish guilt, but I do feel some responsibility for what turned into MAGA, at least the disenchanted strata that were truly ignored by elites (I was an Italian major at Brooklyn College), that pretty much ignored others who could not afford the matchas that you are describing.
So it's racism, and classism, and caste. Truly, it is caste. I am ready to deal. Are the privileged people there, where you are, willing?
This has been happening as part of gentrification for the 45 years I have lived in my Brooklyn neighborhood. Even existing stores (eg Associated grocery stores) have moved to more expensive, exotic and organic products. Gentrification has gone in waves and small local business change seems yo follow both the interests of newer residents and commercial property turnover. There are fewer hardware stores, bodegas and children’s clothing stores, and more upscale boutiques, wine shops, and cafes. I have wondered about the relationship between increased commercial property mortgages and rent paid by small business tenants and, thus, the goods they sell to attract newer residents.
Someone recently said that if you live within walking distance of a Starbucks but the people who serve you live 2-3 hours away, you don't live in a neighborhood, you live in a theme park. That is exactly what is happening in New York City, particularly in the Gowanus Canal/4th Avenue area in Brooklyn. When we moved in decades ago, it was a blue-collar neighborhood with everyday businesses like a laundry and bodega. The neighborhood suffered during the crack epidemic but gradually improved to be safer, but that brought the real estate developers. Our leaders keep claiming that they want affordable housing, but what they get is luxury housing for the rich.
Now, the Gowanus Canal area is one luxury high-rise apartment building after another in a flood plain next to a Superfund Site. 4th Avenue is nothing but the same, monstrous, luxury, high rise apartment buildings for the rich with rents of $5,000-25,000/month with a few "affordable" units for those people making $150,000-210,000/year.
While replacing a crumbling warehouse with luxury housing might make sense, a first-time developer now plans to demolish some of the only historic houses on 4th Avenue that offer affordable rents to construct a 15-story, 85-unit, luxury apartment building. The other houses on the block will lose all sunshine, the existing 13 affordable apartments, the only laundry around, have to live with 24-hour noise, more sewage than the already over-burdened sewage system can handle, loss of 2 backyards that lessen the flooding on 4th Avenue, and more. Save Gowanus Living is trying to save the 4 buildings, but city officials just shrug and say that we will have to put up with the "inconvenience."
The new justification is that "rich people need somewhere to live."
In a far west extreme- Kauai Hawaii- same crazy- happy shacks turn in to a “why did you build this monstrosity “ and then leave us with your misplaced dreams..?
I believe that this is why so many sidewalk food carts have appeared.
They offer good food at reasonable prices.
When I am in midtown I see people lining up to buy lunch.
Since there are no coffee shops or affordable restaurants, these carts fill a void.
And I believe that there is now an award for the best food cart.
Apparently they have become an institution in NYC
There is a more primary factor involved. 60 years ago, families opened small coffee shops, bars, "restaurants," corner stores,.. to provide jobs for the family. It was a way of life and a culture for many thousands of families and their neighborhood customers. "Service" was neighbor-to-neighbor, prices allowed the owner family to get by, choices were limited to what the neighborhood wanted and this built deep roots of home.
Then, investors discovered these consumer mass markets, gutted anti-trust and other regulations, and producers discovered the miracle of "new" or "improved" diversification of product lines and ways to limit distribution. This led to the spread of ever-larger supermarkets, formula (large) bars and restaurants, etc. offering lower prices and wider selections. "Service" was no longer a way of life between neighbors but impersonal, low wage workers hoping to move up by impressing investor bosses. This is what killed most of the small, family businesses that defined Manhattan, too, before before Brooklyn. The same for all US inner-cities including DC where I live.
The new "niche" obsession is much more a rejection of the impersonal mass retail markets than of the mostly long-ago closed family businesses and its neighborhood culture. Most family businesses that still survive have found a way to raise -- or not lower -- their prices to attract those affluent enough (and old enough) to appreciate personal service in cozy settings. The niche obsession is for those too young to have known what has been lost and/or for the rootless who, for whatever reason, believe it makes them superior. Support your local, family-run businesses!
Much higher rents are also a factor (in addition to what you said)
It's more than just the expensive products. It's the underlying land and rent and regulation. You see the same thing in housing. If the cost of the lot, the septic system (rural areas like where I live) permits, power hook up, etc., as all these costs get higher, it starts making more economic sense to build a more expensive house on the lot.
When you drill all the way down, as the tangible assets get more expensive, largely because the financialization of everything means that these are now "investments' for wealthy people, and as the regulatory requirements get more expensive, once again a gate keeping function that makes real assets harder for regular people to utilize, the only way the contractor makes a good return building the house is when it is an expensive house.
And we aren't taxing the wealthy
Yeah, that's ultimately what has to happen. The money at the top has to flow back to the bottom. Hard to see how that happens though.
Here's the simplest formulation of the problem I can come up with.
A democracy exists, self-evidently, for the benefit of the demos, the people.
When the people don't share in the increasing national wealth and prosperity, naturally they lose interest in democracy as a form of government. Everything doesn't have to be equal, but it has to be a hell of a lot fairer than it is in the US now.
Wealth concentrates in a capitalistic system.
Therefore you need a system of wealth transfers, whether it is direct or programs like free healthcare, GI Bill, whatever. Otherwise the capitalism eats the democracy.
Both capitalism and democracy need regulation. The Consitiution and the laws that follow from it, are regulations for our democracy.
Coincidentally, Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations, the founding script of capitalism, and American democracy, were both born in 1776. Had the founders understood how capitalism would develop, perhaps they would have written rules for that as well.
As it is, we live in a capitalistic democracy where the ideology of the "free market", which functions more or less like a religious ideology, complete with hypocrisies and special exceptions for certain groups of people, is the governing principle we apply to capitalism.
The founders, in their wisdom, saw how badly religious ideologies interact with governments and so they excluded religion from being involved with the state and left religious freedom for individuals.
Unfortunately, capitalism has produced what is, in effect, a new form of religion, benefitting a select group, and this ideology, which in some ways, since it is purely materialistic, is even more destructive than regular spiritual religion, is destroying our democracy.
My imagination or is
Vance preparing to become President
Talk Radio beginning to leverage Trump out of office
Usha did her first First Lady interview w/ Kayleigh M a week ago
This has been going on forever. Let's not forget the racism inherent in the years ago, pushing what people out so black people could move in, then pushing them out so rich white people could move in.
I live in Ft Collins, CO, a pretty white but reasonably priced place (we came following our daughter), and for so long, New York City has been unaffordable. It has become more white, more in place to be, and right now I am thinking of Brooklyn.
I lived in Port Washington, Long Island, and was privileged, earning money from the sale of a house when markets were good.
This could be part Jewish guilt, but I do feel some responsibility for what turned into MAGA, at least the disenchanted strata that were truly ignored by elites (I was an Italian major at Brooklyn College), that pretty much ignored others who could not afford the matchas that you are describing.
So it's racism, and classism, and caste. Truly, it is caste. I am ready to deal. Are the privileged people there, where you are, willing?
Thanks for this. It's very important.
This has been happening as part of gentrification for the 45 years I have lived in my Brooklyn neighborhood. Even existing stores (eg Associated grocery stores) have moved to more expensive, exotic and organic products. Gentrification has gone in waves and small local business change seems yo follow both the interests of newer residents and commercial property turnover. There are fewer hardware stores, bodegas and children’s clothing stores, and more upscale boutiques, wine shops, and cafes. I have wondered about the relationship between increased commercial property mortgages and rent paid by small business tenants and, thus, the goods they sell to attract newer residents.
Someone recently said that if you live within walking distance of a Starbucks but the people who serve you live 2-3 hours away, you don't live in a neighborhood, you live in a theme park. That is exactly what is happening in New York City, particularly in the Gowanus Canal/4th Avenue area in Brooklyn. When we moved in decades ago, it was a blue-collar neighborhood with everyday businesses like a laundry and bodega. The neighborhood suffered during the crack epidemic but gradually improved to be safer, but that brought the real estate developers. Our leaders keep claiming that they want affordable housing, but what they get is luxury housing for the rich.
Now, the Gowanus Canal area is one luxury high-rise apartment building after another in a flood plain next to a Superfund Site. 4th Avenue is nothing but the same, monstrous, luxury, high rise apartment buildings for the rich with rents of $5,000-25,000/month with a few "affordable" units for those people making $150,000-210,000/year.
While replacing a crumbling warehouse with luxury housing might make sense, a first-time developer now plans to demolish some of the only historic houses on 4th Avenue that offer affordable rents to construct a 15-story, 85-unit, luxury apartment building. The other houses on the block will lose all sunshine, the existing 13 affordable apartments, the only laundry around, have to live with 24-hour noise, more sewage than the already over-burdened sewage system can handle, loss of 2 backyards that lessen the flooding on 4th Avenue, and more. Save Gowanus Living is trying to save the 4 buildings, but city officials just shrug and say that we will have to put up with the "inconvenience."
The new justification is that "rich people need somewhere to live."
In a far west extreme- Kauai Hawaii- same crazy- happy shacks turn in to a “why did you build this monstrosity “ and then leave us with your misplaced dreams..?
This insight speaks to what we need is not only profound structural change but rethinking of values altogether.