6 ms·

If Walmart decided they wanted to run an open-air store with no walls, no staff, and self-checkout - would it seem reasonable for them to call the police for ev

If Walmart decided they wanted to run an open-air store with no walls, no staff, and self-checkout - would it seem reasonable for them to call the police for every person who walked away without paying for their items? The difference is only in degree. Obviously other stores have figured out how to avoid rampantly abusing community police resources, so Walmart should be expected to step up to the plate and do the same.

wang_li 10y ago
Walmart's sin here isn't lack of policy/procedure/strategy. It's serving poor customers. We're told frequently that poverty and crime go hand in hand, why should we be surprised that people who provide services to those in poverty are also subjected to increased crime victimization. And as they pay property and sales taxes, they're entitled to the same protections as anyone else.
- mgkimsal 10y ago
  > And as they pay property and sales taxes They often fight their local assessment, and argue it down as much as possible. ============= At its retail stores, windowless concrete boxes that carry a low value for property-tax purposes, the company saved an average of $40,000 a store where it filed a challenge, the report found. The distribution center savings averaged $289,000 for each challenge, it said. The report suggested that Wal-Mart saves about $3 million annually from challenging property tax bills, a small sum compared with the company’s revenue, nearly $1 billion a day. ============= http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/10/business/10prop.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/10/business/10prop.html?_r=0 Yes, this is 10 years old now, but not sure there's been much of a corporate culture change to stop doing this. $40k would definitely go a long way towards funding a police officer in many areas.
  - whoopdedo 10y ago
    Even so, a Walmart store carries significant economic weight in a community. The relatively lower property tax bill will still be very large. They will often be in the top-5 employers after the government and hospitals. And there won't be any other nearby business that can provide the same quantity of affordable consumer goods, so community leaders will fear losing a Walmart.
    - bsder 10y ago
      > The relatively lower property tax bill will still be very large. They will often be in the top-5 employers after the government and hospitals. And there won't be any other nearby business that can provide the same quantity of affordable consumer goods, so community leaders will fear losing a Walmart. This is precisely the opposite in my experience. In western Pennsylvania, Walmart drove out other stores (grocery, hardware, appliances, auto service, etc.) that paid far more in both taxes and wages (and thus payroll taxes) and employed more people.
      - mgkimsal 10y ago
        On top of that, you've just concentrated all your focus on one employer. When things go bad, or they leave, there's far fewer other employers to buffer the shock.
- frozenport 10y ago
  In the article their sin was that they didn't invest in security.
- kafkaesq 10y ago
  Walmart's sin here isn't lack of policy/procedure/strategy. It's serving poor customers. That's the thing about Walmart -- they don't just sell to poor customers. What they literally do -- buy selling products that might have the lowest price point, but also by far the lowest value; and hence are generally the worst investment in the long run -- is sell poverty itself.
mikeash 10y ago
Let's say you have a house that's easy for burglars to get into. Would it seem unreasonable for you to call the police every time you're burgled? I would argue that you should secure your house better, but only because it's going to suck to have so many thefts, not because you're somehow placing an undue burden on the police. There's no expectation that people need to take precautions against being victims of crime in order to avoid abusing police resources. To the extent that we expect people to do this, it's because we think people don't want to be victims of crime. I find the tone of this article worrying. Why is private security an expected thing? I thought that the government's function in preventing crime and punishing criminals was one of the few things that nearly all political ideologies agreed on.
- ahi 10y ago
  > There's no expectation that people need to take precautions against being victims of crime in order to avoid abusing police resources. Yes, yes there is. Soaking up police resources due to fundamental incompetence makes everyone else less safe. http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1892621,00.html http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1892621,0...
  - mikeash 10y ago
    I see no relationship between the sort of wilderness rescue described in your link and protecting oneself from property theft.

wang_li 10y ago

Walmart's sin here isn't lack of policy/procedure/strategy. It's serving poor customers. We're told frequently that poverty and crime go hand in hand, why should we be surprised that people who provide services to those in poverty are also subjected to increased crime victimization. And as they pay property and sales taxes, they're entitled to the same protections as anyone else.

mgkimsal 10y ago
> And as they pay property and sales taxes They often fight their local assessment, and argue it down as much as possible. ============= At its retail stores, windowless concrete boxes that carry a low value for property-tax purposes, the company saved an average of $40,000 a store where it filed a challenge, the report found. The distribution center savings averaged $289,000 for each challenge, it said. The report suggested that Wal-Mart saves about $3 million annually from challenging property tax bills, a small sum compared with the company’s revenue, nearly $1 billion a day. ============= http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/10/business/10prop.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/10/business/10prop.html?_r=0 Yes, this is 10 years old now, but not sure there's been much of a corporate culture change to stop doing this. $40k would definitely go a long way towards funding a police officer in many areas.
- whoopdedo 10y ago
  Even so, a Walmart store carries significant economic weight in a community. The relatively lower property tax bill will still be very large. They will often be in the top-5 employers after the government and hospitals. And there won't be any other nearby business that can provide the same quantity of affordable consumer goods, so community leaders will fear losing a Walmart.
  - bsder 10y ago
    > The relatively lower property tax bill will still be very large. They will often be in the top-5 employers after the government and hospitals. And there won't be any other nearby business that can provide the same quantity of affordable consumer goods, so community leaders will fear losing a Walmart. This is precisely the opposite in my experience. In western Pennsylvania, Walmart drove out other stores (grocery, hardware, appliances, auto service, etc.) that paid far more in both taxes and wages (and thus payroll taxes) and employed more people.
    - mgkimsal 10y ago
      On top of that, you've just concentrated all your focus on one employer. When things go bad, or they leave, there's far fewer other employers to buffer the shock.
frozenport 10y ago
In the article their sin was that they didn't invest in security.
kafkaesq 10y ago
Walmart's sin here isn't lack of policy/procedure/strategy. It's serving poor customers. That's the thing about Walmart -- they don't just sell to poor customers. What they literally do -- buy selling products that might have the lowest price point, but also by far the lowest value; and hence are generally the worst investment in the long run -- is sell poverty itself.

mikeash 10y ago

Let's say you have a house that's easy for burglars to get into. Would it seem unreasonable for you to call the police every time you're burgled? I would argue that you should secure your house better, but only because it's going to suck to have so many thefts, not because you're somehow placing an undue burden on the police. There's no expectation that people need to take precautions against being victims of crime in order to avoid abusing police resources. To the extent that we expect people to do this, it's because we think people don't want to be victims of crime. I find the tone of this article worrying. Why is private security an expected thing? I thought that the government's function in preventing crime and punishing criminals was one of the few things that nearly all political ideologies agreed on.

ahi 10y ago
> There's no expectation that people need to take precautions against being victims of crime in order to avoid abusing police resources. Yes, yes there is. Soaking up police resources due to fundamental incompetence makes everyone else less safe. http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1892621,00.html http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1892621,0...
- mikeash 10y ago
  I see no relationship between the sort of wilderness rescue described in your link and protecting oneself from property theft.