Dollar Tree is the latest retailer to say shoplifting is squeezing margins
marketwatch.com
marketwatch.com
This has a cascading effect where the law abiding will consciously avoid the locations where these thefts happen, causing even more of them relative to the legitimate customers entering the store. It’s a vicious cycle.
> I think the people who do it should be punished.
It’s really that simple.
And even then it was forced to admit that shoplifting is up even if one retailer's shrinkage numbers (which includes a lot more than just shoplifting) went down. Never mind their other interventions, like closing stores in problem areas or spending more on security.
You're right to believe your lying eyes here. There were a lot of statistical errors in the article and they all went in the same direction, working to downplay the kind of problems you witnessed first hand.
They play with stats a lot, comparing 2022 to 2023, instead of to prior to the problem, using national figures to hide a regional problem, ignoring interventions, etc.
I mean there is a point that a lot of crime is done by a few people, such as the 327 people in New York who were responsible for about 1/3rd of the shoplifting arrests. But I don't think the usual answer to this is going to be "it's okay to do crime, actually."
Maybe the answer should be to incapacitate those 327 people so they don't keep hurting people continually, since it sure looks doubtful that reform is even possible.
That's how they do it these days. They know you're stealing. They don't care about giving you a slap on the wrist. They want to put you in prison.
One, it's literally the closest store to my home with any inventory. It's around the corner in my backyard. So that's a plus.
Two, I was introduced to this mode of shopping when I told my friend I needed to purchase a greeting card. Of course, cards cost $4-5 retail and she protested, saying the Dollar Tree would have cards for $1 and under. I found this to be true; they have two-for-ones, and they even have packs of ten. So I pick up all my greeting cards there.
There are other items that are ideal to source from the Dollar Tree. When you want some tacky, simple holiday décor. When you want books full of glittery stickers or markers for a kids' project. Crystal Geyser spring water, or a simple sore-muscle cream that only contains capsaicin.
I don't think choosing where to shop is a question of being needy, but judicious about value vs. cost vs. effort. I do plenty of thrifting and big-box shopping as well. There are certain things where I simply insist on purchasing new/retail and you won't catch me pulling it off the shelf at a thrift.
>Or as he puts it: I suspect everybody has what they need at all times based off of the fact that I’ve never known anyone that is starving.
He's making fun of the guy in the original comment, who questioned whether anyone needs to shoplift, because his personal friend circle didn't include people who had to shoplift out of necessity.
For one thing, shopping at Dollar Tree is not an antisocial behavior that harms other people, so you do not need to justify it by saying you needed to do it. You are free to shop at Dollar Tree whether you "need" to or not if it pleases you to do so.
The equivalency you're trying to draw between shoplifting and shopping at Dollar Tree isn't there.
Clearly, anyone who believes “there is no ethical consumption under capitalism” would disagree. A fair number of the people who would readily acknowledge that there is ethical consumption under capitalism, and even those that see consumption under capitalism as presumptively-but-not-categorically-ethical would also disagree. [0]
[0] for some reasons they might, https://time.com/6273646/dollar-stores-osha-labor/
If you read an article about Dollar Tree and it makes you feel bad and you don’t want to shop there, that’s your prerogative.
For me, I’m not interested in being guilted into assuming ethical responsibility for the decisions of the Dollar Tree management. I presume they are adults of sound mind so the responsibility for their choices is theirs alone.
FWIW I can probably count on one hand the number of times in my life I’ve shopped at any dollar store so it’s a moot point.
I’m not arguing that starvation doesn’t exist. I’m arguing that most shoplifters aren’t starving. And if they were, they wouldn’t shoplift food from dollar tree as the food is all in small packages. People who starve don’t become stupid and would likely shoplift more expensive, nutrient dense items.
Starving people are just as rationale as the next person, there’s no reason to think they stop making decisions the same way a non-starving person would.
I made no logical statement about whether stealing indicates you’re starving or not. I said that starving people are less likely to steal from the dollar store.
Logically, these are very different things.
This makes sense, the answer is certainly not “the one that’s in front of them at a store that’s likely in the part of town that they live in.” The first thing a starving person does is sit down and do a SWOT analysis of various foodstuffs that factors in location, transportation, and nutrient value. After they finish their individual analyses they compare notes with other members of their criminal cohort and split up territory based off of who is hungry and who is saving up for a Lamborghini Urus.
I’m nothing thinking that shoplifters are Jean Valjean stealing bread.
If you’re starving, then there are many better ways to get food than stealing from a dollar tree.
So in the cast majority of cases, probably not.
Even if you have EBT though, not all stores accept it, and you can't put gas in your car using EBT, nor buy non-food items like booze.
So it's easy to understand why broke people would shoplift. Baby formula in particular is a hot item for shoplifters since it's so easy to turn into cash. (and also why it's locked up near the cigarettes in many stores)
With all of that, no, I don't believe that there are people who actually starve in here. There are extensive food bank networks, generous religious organizations (most of them not that pushy), and in general people in the US are kind, despite what media says. I saw plenty of videos of people from my country showing food they got from a food bank, and most of them highlight how generous it is.
Despite all the struggle, my family never stole. And poor people around me rarely stole as well. Thieves whenever caught were judged by people around, and there was always social pressure to keep everything orderly.
What surprised my in the US is how normalized the whole thing is. It's always "stores have an insurance", "they are just trying to survive", and other excuses from people who never lived in poverty and just want to feel better about themselves.
It’s not appropriate or accurate to think that because someone is hungry and can’t afford food that they would steal. That’s stereotyping poor people as criminals.
"{I, a loved one} is hungry; I will steal to feed {myself, them}"
is an amazing thing to me. I am so glad people exist who can't understand this thinking.
Not because of any moral idealism about "stealing is wrong", but the fact the person thinking this has obviously never been in a place where the options were "stealing" or "starvation".
Not to go Les Mis, but it is an easy choice for me if my wife was hungry, to go out and steal some bread.
It’s nice you have such certainty. If you were actually starving and wanted to get food for your wife, there are more efficient methods than stealing.
It’s funny that you assume that people don’t know starving or stealing. If it’s obvious to you then you need to rethink your reasoning as while you may find it obvious, you’re wrong as I certainly know both these things.
It’s not idealism to say “stealing is wrong.” That’s the law of the land.
Of course, this article isn’t about starving people stealing food. It’s about jerks stealing from the dollar store. Maybe they are all starving. Probably they aren’t.
If you want to say that it’s ok to steal if you’re starving, then say it.
I’m not sure where you live, but I’m fortunate enough that in my city, state, and country we help people who are hungry so they don’t need to steal. If anyone here steals food, I don’t think it’s due to starvation. Other areas may be different, but I’d like to hear people’s basis for thinking starvation is a significant factor for stealing.
I feel like you’re taking a hypothetical edge situation “starving people just steal and it’s ok for that” and applying it to a situation where criminals are stealing from the dollar store and increasing prices for people who shop there, who happen to be vulnerable populations including people who are hungry and perhaps even starving.
Please tell me this is a troll. Please....
* Eating it anyway when you learn how to cook.
* Buying anything on sale, because you can't buy anything else, and anything is better than nothing.
* Mom/dad don't bother saying "we'll buy it next paycheck"
* Clothing is something we only buy for the oldest.
If these things are foreign to you, I am very glad. No one should have to deal with these choices.
I will accept the idea that many (most? almost all? i don't care) shoplifters could have paid for the product. That still means the idea that "being poor enough to need to steal" is incomprehensible tells me that you either never experienced poverty, or forgot.
I've been lucky enough to not need to steal to provide for my family. If I was hungry, I'd might steal some food.
If my wife was hungry, I'd do a hell of a lot more than stealing food.
Anyway, if there are really criminal enterprises doing this it seems like it would take marginal investigative work to uncover and nail down.
They’re basically saying that criminal organizations can steal incredibly cheap trinkets and sell them below cost… apparently at volume. Seems ridiculously unlikely.
Retailers say organized retail crime has made their theft problems only worse. Crime gangs often look to steal products from stores that can easily and quickly be resold on online marketplaces such as Amazon and through other illicit markets.
“More products today are locked up because the problem has gotten so much bigger,” said Lisa LaBruno, the senior executive vice president of retail operations at the Retail Industry Leaders Association. “Criminal actors can steal high volumes of products and sell them with anonymity.”
Retailers have supported a bipartisan bill that would require online marketplaces to verify state-issued IDs for millions of high-volume third-party sellers. President Joe Biden supports such a measure and this week also called on Congress to impose liability on online marketplaces that sell stolen goods on their platforms.
Amazon said it does not allow third-party sellers to list stolen goods and works closely with law enforcement, retailers and other partners to stop bad actors.
“We regularly request invoices, purchase orders, or other proofs of sourcing when we have concerns about how a seller may have obtained particular products,” a spokesperson said.
https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/08/01/why-does-the-drugstor...
They did this with Colgate Toothpaste a while back. It was a minor scandal. It was real Colgate, but not the USA formula. It was not ADA approved and didn't have the same flouride content.
These guys said they loss $100 mil to shrinkage? Or, did I read that wrong?
They have about 8000 stores, so that's about $35 in shrinkage per store per day.
1. Intervene and prevent the loss
2. Prosecute perpetrators of theft as a deterrent
You think the government should be responsible for placing security guards in private businesses? Is that where you want your tax money to go?
I left California, so I really don't care.
If a suspect flees, resists, or gets violent, then different use-of-force policies will naturally apply.
As I asked another person in this subthread - what amount of force should the police be allowed to use against shoplifters?
That reflects the lost income potential from the shoplifting. Not just how much money it took to physically build an individual unit (and package and ship and stock it etc).
Now if they never sell at MSRP, then probably a slight discount from MSRP when reporting is fair. But definitely not just the BOM cost or similar…
Eg an Apple laptop has a cost to build (cost being money, materials, time). If Apple sold that laptop at $2k, I don’t think they would value the loss at six figures. Given how little Apple discounts things, they probably value the loss (fairly) around the MSRP or ~10% or that.
The accounting approach is driven by taxation, and governments strong preference for maximising their tax take.
A random google shows that it's highly sector dependent, but it's probably closer to 20%.
Having worked in consumer electronics, and knowing rough BOM cost of products that we made in the millions, I can say (at least for the companies I worked for), that there wasn't anywhere close to a 300% multiplier, even going from BOM cost to MSRP. Even extreme outliers like Apple (who supposedly have a raw BOM cost of $475 on an MSRP of $1099 for the 14 Pro Max) don't get to 300%. That markup goes directly to Apple; As a retailer, you might be making 10%.