In Chicago, is the link between crime and lack of access to decent produce one way, or the other? Nobody wants to put grocery stores (or most stores) in high-crime areas.
I guess we might find out over the next few years.
The new DA in SF isn’t pursuing shrinkage/theft under $950 (due to Prop 47). Of stores shutter due to losses at least we can say it contributes to the desertification.
I don’t know but there’s actually a name for it: food desert [1]. But think about all that we just learning about gut health and mental health.. it kind of makes sense. I think the author does make an interesting point that modern development land-use leaves little for actual buildings, but I think for many cities they have been far more preoccupied with not letting big chains in because they don’t want the sprawl that it’s created a situation where chains end up in the suburban perimeter while the core becomes even more car centric to reach these retailers. In recent years smaller footprint stores like aldi, Walmart’s neighborhood market, and lidl have been able to come into these areas. It’s possible that more last mile delivery like Prime Now could help but I think we have a long way to go before the author’s utopian vision of an ideal city is realized.
Hard to say. Most people who I've seen speculate tend to conclude that both are dependent variables and the cause is something else. (generally something along the lines of poor people making bad choices - whatever bad choice means to the group speculating)
