3 ms·

> But Union Pacific is partly to blame for not deploying more security, said Los Angeles Police Capt. German Hurtado, who works in the Hollenbeck Division. Hal

by dls2016 5y ago

> But Union Pacific is partly to blame for not deploying more security, said Los Angeles Police Capt. German Hurtado, who works in the Hollenbeck Division. Half-way through the article we get the point. This is just another example of how our retail supply lines are optimized at every turn to shovel maximum crap through the pipe... be it minimally-staffed stores or unsecured trains. It's all about cash flow, baby! Let the market fix the problem.

ALittleLight 5y ago
How can the market fix the problem? Some people aren't abiding by the market so how could the market constrain them? It's like advising a chess player to just play better when his opponent is snatching his pieces off the board - that might not work. If the market reacts by making it harder to steal, then presumably this will increase the cost of goods which will, presumably, increase the value of stealing them. The market doesn't have a lot of options that I can see.
- dls2016 5y ago
  Retail and supply chain theft will always be a cat and mouse game. This is not an issue for which society/government should pay the cost to fix it (which you seem to imply by saying the markets have no options).
  - ALittleLight 5y ago
    The idea that government shouldn't be the party to address crime seems very foreign and wrong to me. We shouldn't want private companies handling crime and punishment. That is a role for government.
    - dls2016 5y ago
      Government or police? Government enforces pollution laws and will step in over wage theft. But you can't call 911 and say "my boss stole from my paycheck!" whereas that happens all the time with shoplifting. Why must the government step in when these skeleton-crewed retail stores and supply chains have inevitable, predictable loss issues? The article itself makes this point.
  - solveit 5y ago
    Enforcement of property rights is basically the textbook example of a government function. Or do you want logistics companies to hire private armies?
    - dls2016 5y ago
      Railroads already have police, armored cars are allowed armed guards (as do other high-value shipments, I'm sure), retail stores have security (however neutered they may be). I don't see why shoplifters are thrown in jail and wage thieves are not. Why do cops gun down shoplifters but won't lift a finger for wage thieves? Why don't cops bust down the doors of polluters? It's the selective enforcement of property rights I have a problem with. The enforcers already side with capital 9 times out of 10.
      - solveit 5y ago
        I understand that you have justified complaints, but saying stupid things (government should not go after retail and supply chain theft) in order to take potshots against "capital" does not make a good conversation and I would rather see less of it on HN. Obviously you want shoplifters to be prosecuted as well as wage thieves and polluters.
        dls2016 5y ago
        The original articles on this are already very sympathetic to capital, and so that’s the direction of my criticism. The story suggests we should feel bad for the railroad companies without any investigating whether the company itself could share some of the blame. Today there’s a story about how UP cut many of their security employees. The original articles and discussion here on HN is surprisingly one-sided. Obviously I don’t like railroad theft but let’s not send in the army to protect a supply chain which has perhaps been made too efficient.
  - ajsnigrutin 5y ago
    The government has a legal monopoly on many things, including putting people behind bars. If you pay taxes, you'd expect them to "do something", because if they don't, where's the point in paying those taxes?
    - ultrarunner 5y ago
      The point for those paying, or those collecting?
- walkhour 5y ago
  > If the market reacts by making it harder to steal, then presumably this will increase the cost of goods which will, presumably, increase the value of stealing them. The market doesn't have a lot of options that I can see. These increases needn't be the same. It could be that by increasing the security budget 10%, theft decreased by 90%, and prize increased by 1%, which wouldn't be high enough to create a "theft demand". It could also be that the same security budget increase did nothing on the theft rate. My point is this is not necessarily how the market works. This is similar to the argument that taxes increase the cost of products, which increases the cost of running the government (since the government consumes free market products), which will require more taxes. This needn't be the case. In any case, there are and have been societies with more inequality and poverty than USA where there was less crime. Obviously nobody wants those solutions in USA but the market would find its was absent regulation in this case.
flyinglizard 5y ago
Optimization is good. It means everything is efficient, cheaper, more abundant and new things can be built on top of old things. It's a wonderful quality. Now, in which first world country do freight train need guards across their route? And it's not like the train is being hit in the middle of the desert, Breaking Bad style. There are few spots where this happened. It seems to me like police across the US are either scared of doing their job or simply don't care, together with a public which has been desensitized to crime.
- Syonyk 5y ago
  > efficient "Efficient" in terms of what outputs, relative to what inputs?
  - flyinglizard 5y ago
    Efficient in respect to the meaning imparted by the comment I responded to, of course.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

ALittleLight 5y ago

How can the market fix the problem? Some people aren't abiding by the market so how could the market constrain them? It's like advising a chess player to just play better when his opponent is snatching his pieces off the board - that might not work. If the market reacts by making it harder to steal, then presumably this will increase the cost of goods which will, presumably, increase the value of stealing them. The market doesn't have a lot of options that I can see.

dls2016 5y ago
Retail and supply chain theft will always be a cat and mouse game. This is not an issue for which society/government should pay the cost to fix it (which you seem to imply by saying the markets have no options).
- ALittleLight 5y ago
  The idea that government shouldn't be the party to address crime seems very foreign and wrong to me. We shouldn't want private companies handling crime and punishment. That is a role for government.
  - dls2016 5y ago
    Government or police? Government enforces pollution laws and will step in over wage theft. But you can't call 911 and say "my boss stole from my paycheck!" whereas that happens all the time with shoplifting. Why must the government step in when these skeleton-crewed retail stores and supply chains have inevitable, predictable loss issues? The article itself makes this point.
- solveit 5y ago
  Enforcement of property rights is basically the textbook example of a government function. Or do you want logistics companies to hire private armies?
  - dls2016 5y ago
    Railroads already have police, armored cars are allowed armed guards (as do other high-value shipments, I'm sure), retail stores have security (however neutered they may be). I don't see why shoplifters are thrown in jail and wage thieves are not. Why do cops gun down shoplifters but won't lift a finger for wage thieves? Why don't cops bust down the doors of polluters? It's the selective enforcement of property rights I have a problem with. The enforcers already side with capital 9 times out of 10.
    - solveit 5y ago
      I understand that you have justified complaints, but saying stupid things (government should not go after retail and supply chain theft) in order to take potshots against "capital" does not make a good conversation and I would rather see less of it on HN. Obviously you want shoplifters to be prosecuted as well as wage thieves and polluters.
      - dls2016 5y ago
        The original articles on this are already very sympathetic to capital, and so that’s the direction of my criticism. The story suggests we should feel bad for the railroad companies without any investigating whether the company itself could share some of the blame. Today there’s a story about how UP cut many of their security employees. The original articles and discussion here on HN is surprisingly one-sided. Obviously I don’t like railroad theft but let’s not send in the army to protect a supply chain which has perhaps been made too efficient.
- ajsnigrutin 5y ago
  The government has a legal monopoly on many things, including putting people behind bars. If you pay taxes, you'd expect them to "do something", because if they don't, where's the point in paying those taxes?
  - ultrarunner 5y ago
    The point for those paying, or those collecting?
walkhour 5y ago
> If the market reacts by making it harder to steal, then presumably this will increase the cost of goods which will, presumably, increase the value of stealing them. The market doesn't have a lot of options that I can see. These increases needn't be the same. It could be that by increasing the security budget 10%, theft decreased by 90%, and prize increased by 1%, which wouldn't be high enough to create a "theft demand". It could also be that the same security budget increase did nothing on the theft rate. My point is this is not necessarily how the market works. This is similar to the argument that taxes increase the cost of products, which increases the cost of running the government (since the government consumes free market products), which will require more taxes. This needn't be the case. In any case, there are and have been societies with more inequality and poverty than USA where there was less crime. Obviously nobody wants those solutions in USA but the market would find its was absent regulation in this case.

flyinglizard 5y ago

Optimization is good. It means everything is efficient, cheaper, more abundant and new things can be built on top of old things. It's a wonderful quality. Now, in which first world country do freight train need guards across their route? And it's not like the train is being hit in the middle of the desert, Breaking Bad style. There are few spots where this happened. It seems to me like police across the US are either scared of doing their job or simply don't care, together with a public which has been desensitized to crime.

Syonyk 5y ago
> efficient "Efficient" in terms of what outputs, relative to what inputs?
- flyinglizard 5y ago
  Efficient in respect to the meaning imparted by the comment I responded to, of course.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]