I’d beg to differ. The current system optimizes for large grocery trips for bulk items that require long shelf stability.

Most people would agree that produce should make up the bulk of ones diet, yet it’s pretty plain to see that the footprint of the produce section doesn’t scale with the size of the store.

Produce is something best shopped for frequently, and is something I’d personally be willing to pay a higher upfront cost for the convenience of closer smaller stores where I can get in and out quickly. Because while we may pay a lower sticker price, the elephant in the room with the massive hidden cost that we pay but rarely account for: food waste.

You're also likely someone with a higher than average income, and general closeness to potential store locations. If you were poorer, or had to drive farther it's less likely you'd use those as optimization points.

Also fresh food is great for the diet and health, but when some even occurs that interrupts things like distribution of fuel, food, or power just having it around may lead you to getting hungry really quickly. This is something you have to look at on both a personal and national level. Food security can quickly lead to destabilization.

Conversely buying in bulk implies having enough room in your house to store food items.

It’s not like the typical Costco shopper is low income. Our grocery system is optimized for moderately well to do suburbanites with SUVs and large houses. Low income people tend to live in “food deserts”.

Consider the experience of shopping for food in America if you’re dependent on public transit, which a much larger proportion of the low income population are. Requiring a car to get groceries is extremely expensive.

Oh come on.

Fresh food without preservatives lasts at least a week.

You realize that a lot of people shop less frequently than that right?