SF Whole Foods to Close Due to Increased Crime in Area
nationalreview.com
nationalreview.com
Which was flagged with 80+ upvotes and buried. Why an article about trade between Ancient Rome and India is front page worthy on Hacker News (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35516231), but the largest grocery store in the global hub of the tech industry closing because too many people are robbing it and doing drugs outside the front door, is a mystery to me. But I don't control the algorithms.
CNN may be a notorious partisan bullshit vendor, but there isn't anyone who is going to call them "right-wing" with a straight face.
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/04/11/business/san-francisco-wh...
Gotta be skeptical of this narrative. A lot of crime-hating HNers lap this up.
I have no expertise on the subject, but it takes none to figure out that with drug trade comes a ton of other issues that normal people rather not would like to be exposed to.
Of course they are scared. Because even if they are not in danger in a given moment, in another moment they could be if you are among people who act outside the norm.
https://startupdreams.substack.com/p/what-the-stats-about-cr...
You really think it’s reputation wasn’t earned?
Here's an NYT article on Walgreens admitting as much [1]:
"A Walgreens executive said this week that the company, which cited “organized” shoplifting as a reason to close five stores in San Francisco in October 2021, might have overstated the effect of theft on its business.
“Maybe we cried too much last year,” James Kehoe, the company’s chief financial officer, said during a Walgreens earnings call with investors.
Mr. Kehoe also said that the company had “probably” spent too much on security measures and that it might have mischaracterized how much theft took place in its stores...
The San Francisco Police Department’s data on shoplifting did not support Walgreen’s explanation for the store closings, according to an October 2021 analysis by The San Francisco Chronicle. The analysis said that while not all shoplifting incidents were reported to the police, one of the stores that closed had only seven reported shoplifting incidents in 2021 and a total of 23 since 2018."
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/06/business/walgreens-shopli...
First of all, what a dead stupid place to open a Whole Foods. Second, drug use isn't causing any problems. Actual crime, the kind with victims, is surely a huge problem. But ingesting drugs doesn't cause problems automatically. Forcing people to engage with the black market, and buy impure drugs, and do them on the street? Yeah, that can cause problems. But the simple act of getting intoxicated is not the problem that needs solving. That will always happen. Th problem is how mind-bogglingly stupid we are with how we deal with this fact.
What? For a retailer, having druggies standing around outside the store absolutely causes problems, of the form of lower sales.
In which place are you living in where shoppers don't mind engaging with drugged-out people just to get in the store?
As you point out, I don't care about druggies unless they're in my face. I also don't care about people having sex unless they're doing it at the entrance to a grocery store.
IOW, I'm okay with people doing whatever the hell they want to as long as I don't have to watch it. Most people feel this way; I'm not alone.
So what's your problem with that attitude? Why even respond?
Hey look, you can learn a lot from a dummy*:
HUMAN:
What's wrong with the following argument?
"People who complain about druggies who hang around store entrances and such have no empathy. They have no idea what druggies look like. In fact, druggies are everywhere that you don't even know about. Your neighbor, friend or relative could be a druggie. Therefore it's okay for people to sit on the ground doing drugs around store entrances, bus stops, park benches and other public places."
GPT4:
There are several issues with the argument presented:
- False equivalence: The argument equates people who complain about drug users hanging around store entrances with a lack of empathy. It is possible to have empathy for someone struggling with addiction while still being concerned about the impact of their behavior on public spaces.
- Stereotyping: The argument assumes that people who complain about drug users in public spaces have no idea what drug users look like. This is a sweeping generalization that may not be true for everyone who expresses concern about the issue.
- Red herring: The argument brings up the fact that drug users could be anyone, including a neighbor, friend, or relative. While this may be true, it doesn't address the main concern of people who complain about drug users in public spaces, which is typically related to safety, cleanliness, or public order.
- Non-sequitur: The conclusion that it's okay for people to use drugs in public spaces because drug users could be anyone is a non-sequitur. The fact that drug users can be anyone does not justify their behavior in public spaces or negate the concerns of people who complain about the issue.
The argument could be improved by acknowledging the concerns of those who are worried about drug users in public spaces and offering potential solutions or compromises, instead of dismissing their concerns as a lack of empathy.
--
* Famous line from the US DoT's 1980's TV campaign promoting the wearing of seat belts, featuring crash test dummies.
Tell that to those unfortunate WF employees who must clean out used needles and other paraphernalia from rest rooms.
So, sure, the Whole Foods opening could mean that some of the neighborhood’s crime was happening in the Whole Foods. But nothing about the neighborhood has changed recently that would have caused that.
Should also point out that DA Brooke Jenkins, who is far to the right of every elected official in the city and ran on giving the cops carte blanche to just throw everyone on the street in this neighborhood in jail, has not done anything to change it. And she’s been the DA since the Whole Foods opened. So, I don’t know what that tells you.