Target’s decision to close nine of its stores in major cities, citing persistent large-scale theft at those locations, is the latest signal that retailers may be struggling in their battle to contain a growing and dangerous problem.
I’ve noticed the downvotes too and I suspect there’s a sizable number of lemmings here who are so anti-capitalist/anti-corporation that they think flash-thefts and smash-and-grab raids are good things, don’t understand how these crimes harm the communities they take place in way more than they harm the companies being burgled, and downvote anything that pokes a hole in their tiny worldview. It’s one of the shittier parts of the Lemmy community that I’ve been putting up with so far.
The article this thread is about is talking about Target losing 2% of their $27 billion annual PROFIT (as in the money the shareholders keep after they pay their employees) to theft. And here you are blaming poor people for the state of their communities.
“The fantastic journalists at Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) did an analysis and found that this single video spawned 309 separate articles about the Walgreens incident in the 28 days after it was posted. The researchers found that there was not a single article about a multi-million dollar wage theft settlement paid out by Walgreens to its California employees. (On January 5, 2023, after I wrote this essay, a Walgreens executive admitted publicly that the company had overblown their claims about retail theft.)”
And here you are blaming poor people for the state of their communities.
That was absolutely NOT what I was doing, but I get the impression you’re just here to start a fight, so I’m not going to bother with you further except to point out that
You are the lemming, buddy.
“Lemming” is a term used to refer to Lemmy users, which is how I meant it, not as an insult.
I don’t know, man. The comment that is getting downvoted proposes a narrative where people steal things from Target and then Target has no choice but to move out of the poor neighborhood to open up stores in a nice neighborhood, and therefore the people stealing are responsible for that harm to their communities. I’m downvoting that because it’s wrong in like a thousand ways, some evidence for which is illustrated by the quote and article I linked to.
My bad on the “lemming” thing. I’m reading this on kbin so that’s not in my vernacular, and the patronizing “tiny worldview” insult had me reading your comment in a certain tone.
Anybody who is not a simpleton with zero life experience is aware that being an “underdog in society” doesn’t mean somebody is inherently a good or bad as a person: plenty of powerless people out there when given a little power are revealed to be complete total shits.
It’s perfectly compatible to be anti-capitalist/anti-corporation (well, most corporations) whilst thinking theft without need is also morally wrong. Assuming the corporations involved are exploitative and use lobbying and other forms of political corruption to gain unfairly advantage positions and these people are not stealing due to need, that would just mean that what we have here is two wrongs, and those don’t make a right.
I’ve noticed the downvotes too and I suspect there’s a sizable number of lemmings here who are so anti-capitalist/anti-corporation that they think flash-thefts and smash-and-grab raids are good things, don’t understand how these crimes harm the communities they take place in way more than they harm the companies being burgled, and downvote anything that pokes a hole in their tiny worldview. It’s one of the shittier parts of the Lemmy community that I’ve been putting up with so far.
The article this thread is about is talking about Target losing 2% of their $27 billion annual PROFIT (as in the money the shareholders keep after they pay their employees) to theft. And here you are blaming poor people for the state of their communities.
“The fantastic journalists at Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) did an analysis and found that this single video spawned 309 separate articles about the Walgreens incident in the 28 days after it was posted. The researchers found that there was not a single article about a multi-million dollar wage theft settlement paid out by Walgreens to its California employees. (On January 5, 2023, after I wrote this essay, a Walgreens executive admitted publicly that the company had overblown their claims about retail theft.)”
https://equalityalec.substack.com/p/the-volume-of-news
You are the lemming, buddy.
That was absolutely NOT what I was doing, but I get the impression you’re just here to start a fight, so I’m not going to bother with you further except to point out that
“Lemming” is a term used to refer to Lemmy users, which is how I meant it, not as an insult.
I don’t know, man. The comment that is getting downvoted proposes a narrative where people steal things from Target and then Target has no choice but to move out of the poor neighborhood to open up stores in a nice neighborhood, and therefore the people stealing are responsible for that harm to their communities. I’m downvoting that because it’s wrong in like a thousand ways, some evidence for which is illustrated by the quote and article I linked to.
My bad on the “lemming” thing. I’m reading this on kbin so that’s not in my vernacular, and the patronizing “tiny worldview” insult had me reading your comment in a certain tone.
Anybody who is not a simpleton with zero life experience is aware that being an “underdog in society” doesn’t mean somebody is inherently a good or bad as a person: plenty of powerless people out there when given a little power are revealed to be complete total shits.
It’s perfectly compatible to be anti-capitalist/anti-corporation (well, most corporations) whilst thinking theft without need is also morally wrong. Assuming the corporations involved are exploitative and use lobbying and other forms of political corruption to gain unfairly advantage positions and these people are not stealing due to need, that would just mean that what we have here is two wrongs, and those don’t make a right.