[HN Gopher] Analysis of Walgreens' stated reasoning for closing ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Analysis of Walgreens' stated reasoning for closing SF stores
        
       Author : benzible
       Score  : 26 points
       Date   : 2021-10-15 19:06 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.sfgate.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.sfgate.com)
        
       | leoh wrote:
       | Walgreen's is not in the business of morality. They are in the
       | business of making money. Walgreen's could say just about
       | anything they wanted about closing up shop in San Francisco and
       | it doesn't really make good business sense for them to say
       | something provocative. It seems to me they're telling the truth.
       | 
       | On the other hand, the San Francisco DA is acting in a highly
       | defensive manner. It's pretty offensive of them and it's pretty
       | clear they're doing a bad job.
       | 
       | Worse, the San Francisco DA is helping create a false dichotomy
       | between safety and compassion. I think both are possible; the SF
       | DA, however, does not seem competent enough to offer either.
        
         | taurath wrote:
         | Walgreens could easily respond by putting up historical store
         | revenues and profits that show year over year increasing tear
         | from each store they closed.
         | 
         | The DA put up numbers showing that in the past 2 years thefts
         | have gone down. I'll for now trust the one that puts up the
         | numbers.
        
           | elgernon wrote:
           | check the local daily news, man
        
           | mywittyname wrote:
           | It was also decided to not respond to shoplifting reports
           | under $950, which may be the cause of the 'reduction in
           | reported larceny'. People may have stopped reporting it.
        
           | finite_jest wrote:
           | Didn't they change the definition of what counts as "theft"
           | though? Also, wouldn't less people bother to report theft if
           | they know it probably won't be prosecuted?
        
       | GaryTang wrote:
       | > "They are saying that's the primary reason, but I also think
       | when a place is not generating revenue, and when they're
       | saturated -- S.F. has a lot of Walgreens locations all over the
       | city -- so I do think that there are other factors that come into
       | play," Mayor London Breed told reporters Wednesday.
       | 
       | https://youtu.be/2jrnhaLzCqA
       | 
       | There are dozens of videos of theft in SF Walgreens captured on
       | YouTube. Can someone explain to the mayor that your revenue is
       | going to decrease when criminals are walking out with garbage
       | bags full of merchandise?
       | 
       | Per typical, SF Democrats are trying to cover up their
       | underreporting of crimes.
        
         | just_steve_h wrote:
         | The plural of "anecdote" is not "data."
        
           | robbedpeter wrote:
           | So stores should just accept being stolen from, creating
           | highly unsafe situations for employees and customers, in the
           | middle of economic conditions already hurting profit and
           | supply chains?
           | 
           | Or maybe the stores should hire private security,
           | sufficiently armed to deter theft? That's probably a minimum
           | cost of $500k per year for wages and insurance and licensing.
           | 
           | I'm truly curious what the endgame is with this line of
           | bleeding heart absurdity.
        
             | taurath wrote:
             | A society where people don't need to steal to survive, if
             | you are truly asking.
             | 
             | A Walgreens takes money from a community and gives it to
             | their shareholders. They pay minimum wage. The desperation
             | people have across this country should be responded to with
             | policies that lessen desperation, rather than jailing
             | people like we have been for the last 60 years - 25% of the
             | prisoners in the world are in the USA which has 5% of the
             | population.
             | 
             | If you want people to not steal food, give them food. If
             | you want people to not be homeless, give them a home. If
             | you want people in prison, prevent the hungry from eating
             | and the homeless from finding a home. It costs a lot more
             | to hold a prisoner than providing food or shelter by other
             | means.
        
       | elgernon wrote:
       | the article is right, it's all about narrative, and these
       | "optics" make SF politicians look bad
        
       | SV_BubbleTime wrote:
       | > When comparing 2021 larceny theft figures to pre-pandemic 2019
       | figures, one will find that reports of theft are actually down.
       | From Jan. 1, 2021, to Oct. 10, 2021, there have been 21,842
       | reports of larceny theft, and there were 31,958 reports over the
       | same period in 2019, which is a 31.6% decrease.
       | 
       | Ok, but this might be very misleading. Wallgreen's chief
       | complaint is that the laws were changed and police no longer
       | respond to theft under $950. Encouraging small incidence but
       | relatively safe repeated thefts.
       | 
       | So wouldn't it make complete sense that larceny numbers where
       | police were called, an arrest was made, and a conviction secured
       | would drop if police were instructed to respond only to larger
       | crimes?
       | 
       | If anything I would expect a larger decrease if Walgreen's is
       | correct.
       | 
       | Not saying this was any plan to "decrease crime by under
       | reporting" or that I can prove the videos I've seen of carefree
       | shoplifters weren't happening previous to the law changes. Just
       | that this might not be the point they are intending to make.
        
         | mc32 wrote:
         | It would also be useful to know what the average haul of the
         | thefts pre-pandemic and now.
        
           | taurath wrote:
           | Walgreens has the data on this so they can choose to put it
           | up, if they care about people believing them.
        
           | gota wrote:
           | This, I think, is the core issue. The typical theft before
           | the changes could have been of trivially low values. As soon
           | as people know that the strongest negative incentives only
           | kick in after a total value (e.g. 1000 USD) they may start to
           | "optimize" for that.
           | 
           | I mean - if a person would shoplift item A; they may reason
           | that there is very little additional negative incentive to
           | not steal B, C...as well - to get closer to that threshold.
           | 
           | This makes sense even if you assume that thefts of total
           | value under the threshold are being always reported (as
           | commented elsewhere here). Lower numbers of instances, higher
           | value of theft.
           | 
           | Then again, maybe there are underlying mechanisms in the
           | motivations of shoplifting that make this completely wrong.
           | I'd accept and appreciate the input of someone with expertise
           | in this subject
        
         | jet_32951 wrote:
         | Walgreen's are not perceiving local support for their stores.
         | They are not alone. There is a Walgreen's in the Castro and it
         | is likely from my reading they share a lot of the complaints in
         | this article [0] which says law enforcement is no longer to be
         | counted on to help.
         | 
         | [0]https://www.ebar.com/news/latest_news/302626
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-10-15 23:04 UTC)