768
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] SCB@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I am telling you, there is zero mathematical/economic evidence that shoplifting even registers as a problem

Stores invest millions in anti-theft security, in technical, logistical, and physical ways. All of those things cost money.

Stores make money by selling things.

Literally THE ENTIRE point of being a massive chain is that random noise like shoplifting disappears into the overwhelming roar of economies of scale

That's not the entire point of it at all. Efficiency is.

Also: https://blog.gitnux.com/walmart-shrinkage-statistics/

[-] dumpsterlid@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Stores invest millions in anti-theft security, in technical, logistical, and physical ways. All of those things cost money.

You are making a clear logical fallacy by acting like this proves shoplifting must actually significantly impact their bottom line. Further there is abundant evidence that corporations invest massive amounts of money into things that don't actually help them economically. Don't tell me you also believe the narrative that markets are magically always rational??

You don't seem to be able to understand this isn't about numbers, it is about narratives.

[-] SCB@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You are making a clear logical fallacy by acting like this proves shoplifting m

If they invest the money, the money is spent, thus affecting the bottom line

Not sure why you're trying to argue this so hard, but there is no percent chance you will be correct here. Costs are indeed passed forward onto customers.

Further there is abundant evidence that corporations invest massive amounts of money into things that don’t actually help them economically.

The efficacy is completely irrelevant. What's relevant is the costs induced. You are correct that people are irrational. That doesn't change the fact that the irrationality costs them money, which they make back via pricing.

Also I assure you that Wal-Mart has a very large team whose only goal is to measure the cost/benefit analysis of decisions like these - and those teams also cost money. Even the concept existing at all raises prices.

[-] dumpsterlid@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

If they invest the money, the money is spent, thus affecting the bottom line

Not sure why you’re trying to argue this so hard, but there is no percent chance you will be correct here. Costs are indeed passed forward onto customers.

ahahahaha so now you are blaming me for the irrational economic behavior of corporations? I feel so powerful now, thank you.

[-] SCB@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Yes I am blaming the cause for the effect. You are correct.

Bro just say you're a thief and you don't give a shit. You don't need to do all the gymnastics. You can just be a thief.

[-] dumpsterlid@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Just admit you are an idiot conservative who doesn't actually care about facts, numbers or reality, all you care about is a good morality story.

[-] SCB@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Man you're stealing all the irony too lol

[-] dumpsterlid@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

“Companies say these incidents have led to a spike in merchandise losses, known as shrink. The metric incorporates inventory losses caused by external theft, including organized retail crime, employee theft, human errors, vendor fraud, damaged or mismarked items and other losses.

But the retail industry’s own figures on shrink cast doubt on their claim that the problem is ballooning. Researchers say retailers may be blaming theft for losses when they don’t actually know the cause.

Shrink is an “issue where you’ve got a problem, but there’s no way to know exactly where the losses are coming from,” said Richard Hollinger, a retired professor of sociology and criminology at the University of Florida, who studies retail losses and launched the retail industry’s first annual security survey in the early 1990s.

According to the National Retail Federation’s (NRF) annual survey of around 60 retail member companies, shrink is a “rapidly ballooning issue.” In 2021, retail shrink hit $94.5 billion, up only 4% from 2020 but a 53% jump from 2019.

But, in fact, the average shrink rate as a percentage of sales dropped to 1.4% in 2021 from 1.6% in 2020, according to the latest NRF survey. That number has hovered around 1.4% for more than a decade.“

Ok ok so the concern for shoplifting from Random’s doesn’t even warrant tracking as a separate stat (it is no more important than workers occasionally misplacing boxes in the supply chain??), we are talking about <1% of sales. Sorry not going to lose sleep over that?

How about those organized shoplifting sprees that we keep hearing about? What does the national Retail Foundation, the group that is going to be the most concerned about this out of any?

“The NRF estimates that organized retail crime costs companies an average of just 7 cents for every $100 in sales.”

sigh y’all are full of shit and I am tired of it

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/01/18/business/retail-shoplifting-shrink-walgreens/index.html

[-] SCB@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Man you're really passionate about trying to justify your stealing lol

this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2023
768 points (97.9% liked)

News

23627 readers
2791 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS