• Moobythegoldensock@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    104
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Summary: There is a normal percentage of theft compared to previous years, but because of inflation the estimated dollar amounts are “unprecedented.” Please don’t ask about the unprecedented profits.

    • Astroturfed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Clickbait headline articles need to be shocking sounding. Bonus points if they push the narrative that companies are good and us horrible peasant thieves stealing from them are bad.

  • BeefPiano@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    66
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It’s worth noting that when retail sales go up, as they did in 2022, shrink also tends to rise. The average shrink rate in the 2022 fiscal year was 1.6%, up from 1.4% the year before. The latest figure is in line with shrink rates from 2019 and 2020.

    In 2017 shrinkage accounted for $42 Billion, or 1.85%.. First off, that shows how crazy inflation is - $42 Billion was 1.85% then and $113 Billion is 1.6% now.

    The other thing is that in 2017, wage theft accounted for $50 Billion in losses from workers. I would like to see how 2022’s wage theft numbers stack up against the shrinkage numbers.

    Also a reminder that retail is using shoplifting as a propaganda piece with no actual basis in reality.

    • ares35@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      wages don't keep pace with inflation, so the difference won't be as dramatic.

    • SeaJ@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Just a correction: wage theft accounted for up to $50 billion in 2014 according to the EPI, not 2017. That would be roughly $65 billion today. Like you, I would also like to see more recent numbers.

  • treefrog@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I haven't shoplifted since I was a teenager.

    But seeing the price of some of my groceries jump 30-80% compared to pre-Covid makes it fucking tempting.

  • n3m37h@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    That's what should have been paid out to employees, then you wouldn't have this problem

  • vamp07@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’ll bet these companies throw everything under the sun into the theft bucket. That includes internal mishandling of inventory. They then exaggerate the costs for insurance claims. 

  • jmp242@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Maybe they can all go to an instacart model or something like Amazons auto checkout model. Or just have actual cashiers. Maybe everything is in vending machines. Idk, but the current experience in retail mostly is horrible and I want to avoid it if at all possible.

    • FigMcLargeHuge@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Apples and oranges. If you are a cashier and theft occurs you aren't paid enough to risk anything, including your life, to stop theft. Companies can hire more asset protection people.

      • girlfreddy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        In Canada off-duty cops do that job AND get those hours added onto their retirement fund … that we taxpayers pay for.

        #ACAB

        • bobman@unilem.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Sorry, I'm not reading any of that.

          Would you like to use your words and tell me what you want to say?

          • OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            He was giving you sources so you could understand his viewpoint and see if it holds merit outside of anecdotal experience.

            Do you think the way you responded fosters good faith conversation?

            • bobman@unilem.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Absolutely. Shoving a wall of text in someone's face that you didn't type and saying "read this" is not worth my time.

              If you want effort, put forth effort. I can also link to a plethora of stuff and say "read this," but I won't because it's a waste of time and you can find any information you want on the internet.

              Sorry this needs to be spelled out for you. You'll understand it as you get older.

              • OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Damn dude, do you gotta be a cunt on the internet for no reason or is it fun? They've been saying that same "you'll get it when you're older" since I was in school and that's been a minute. Normally it came from some small minded blowhards, but I'll give you benefit of the doubt.

                Their effort was to find the sources for you that purport their claim. It's not a big nuanced argument, they presented what they thought, you asked a question about what they meant, they linked you supporting information so you could be aware.

                It's not their job to dissect the sources for you, it's their job to present their argument and if you didn't get it then they link you the bits they used. If you still don't get it, stop engaging with the person who linked sources.

                When you were in school, did they teach you how to evaluate sources from multiple forms of media? Because the internet wasn't as massive as it is today when I was taking those classes, but they still taught how to go through a magazine, website, book, and video sources to identify the bias and reliability of the source.

                If the only conversations you're having a full text and no one is linking to a source when they're making a claim, you're having a conversation, not a discussion or debate. It's why people cite their sources for published pieces, gotta check for plagiarism and you have to identify where you got information you claim is factual, it's just part of having those kinds of communications.

                • bobman@unilem.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Look dude, I get it. You seem upset because I don't see the value in being linked a wall of text on the internet. It's because I've been there, many times, and it overwhelmingly is not worth taking seriously.

                  Like I said, you'll understand this when you have more experience. I'm tired of repeating myself, and taking your insults.

                  I'm gonna block you now. Goodbye.

  • bobman@unilem.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Stealing from corporations is always reclamation.

    Every profit they make is them getting extra for doing nothing extra.

    Fuck them.

    Also, all of these companies have theft insurance.