4 ms·

https://goodjobsfirst.org/report-walmart-state-and-local-tax-avoidance-exceeds-400-million-annually/ https://goodjobsfirst.org/report-walmart-state-and-local-ta

https://goodjobsfirst.org/report-walmart-state-and-local-tax-avoidance-exceeds-400-million-annually/ https://goodjobsfirst.org/report-walmart-state-and-local-tax... They also don’t seem to make an effort to actually stop shoplifting. They take out regular check out lanes and replace them with self check outs that are unbelievably frustrating to use and make it very easy to shoplift accidentally. One time I apparently shoplifted an item by accident while using the self checkout lane, the only reason I realized is because I went back to return the item and it wasn’t on the receipt. The clerk helping me with the return just laughed and said it happens all the time. If their only response to shoplifting is to just jack up prices and then go on TV and blame democrats for “crime” while doing literally nothing to stop shoplifting then I have little to no sympathy for them.

pandaman 3y ago
That article does not say that Walmart does not pay local taxes but suggests that it should not have used legal allowances it was given and pay more than it should by law. Your shopping experience in Walmart does not seem to be relevant at all, if you don't like it - don't go there, it in no way justifies allowing crime against Walmart to go unpunished.
- eesmith 3y ago
  Are you really so focused on just this one sort of crime, or does your opinion extend equally to all other crimes? We accept that some crimes go unpunished, yes? We don't hire enough traffic police to detect and punish all speeders, even though that's a crime, and that's only one of many crimes I can think of which are underprosecuted. Nor is there much of a cry to increase the number of traffic police and bring traffic speed down to the posted limits. So why must all shoplifting by punished, with the police doing most of the work at the store? We've long said that if an organization needs a higher level of security they can have their own security force, which may be private guards or a private police force, as with some campus police, transit police, and railroad police forces. Just like there is no law saying a store must pay more than is legally required, there is also no law saying the government is required to supply a police force for the store. Nor does it make economic sense for broadly trained police to handle a specialized task like providing security for a store. One of the biggest crimes is wage theft. The total cost of wage theft is estimated at 100x that of every robbery: https://www.workingnowandthen.com/blog/wage-theft-the-50-billion-crime-against-workers/ https://www.workingnowandthen.com/blog/wage-theft-the-50-bil... We know Walmart has committed that crime. ("According to a 2018 report by Good Jobs, between January 2000 to 2018, Walmart paid over $1.4bn in fines and settlements over wage theft violations, FedEx paid over $500m during the same period, and Bank of America paid over $380m." - https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jun/15/wage-theft-us-workers-employees https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jun/15/wage-theft-u... ). Will these police officers assigned to Walmart also be charged with investigating and preventing wage theft at those stores? No, of course that hasn't been part of the general discussion. What, in your opinion, justifies allowing wage theft by Walmart to go unpunished?
  - pandaman 3y ago
    >Are you really so focused on just this one sort of crime, or does your opinion extend equally to all other crimes? In the US, there are thousands of crimes on the books, which are not enforced and are ridiculous [1]. So no, I do not think that all crimes should be punished. >So why must all shoplifting by punished, with the police doing most of the work at the store? This is a loaded question. I don't think the police should be doing most of the work at the store, but I think the police should take the apprehended criminals from the store when called. And DAs should prosecute those, and the judges should try them, that's all. Nothing of this happens right now. This is why stores do not try to apprehend criminals as the same police, DA and judges will happily go after the business and its employees if the criminal is hurt in the process or claims to be hurt[2]. 1. https://www.distractify.com/p/ridiculous-laws https://www.distractify.com/p/ridiculous-laws 2. https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/11/us/new-york-bodega-stabbing-murder-charges/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/11/us/new-york-bodega-stabbing-m...
    - eesmith 3y ago
      Since I meant to be serious, and not present a sophomoric straw man, let's narrow things down to a specific example I gave: Which should police investigate more - shoplifting from Walmart or wage theft at Walmart, and why? My question is meant to probe what goes into your decision to prioritize investigating two related types of crime which can both take place at Walmart. It is meant to be more head-to-head than jliptzin's series of questions early in this thread "Someone want to explain to me why my tax dollars should go towards protecting target and Walgreen’s inventory? When they have one security guard in their entire store? When police could instead be spending that time finding the driver of the truck that smashed into my car and drove away?". How is your [2] at all related to shoplifting? It feels like you are trying to raise the emotional level by switching to manslaughter. This alternative topic has consumed endless discussion over the years. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_New_York_City_Subway_shooting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_New_York_City_Subway_shoo... and https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1986-12-16-8604030893-story.html https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1986-12-16-860403... from the 1980s as two examples. NYC has had a long time to refine how to handle something like your [2], and there is no way it makes sense to discuss it futher here. > I don't think the police should be doing most of the work at the store, but I think the police should take the apprehended criminals from the store when called. Right, but the top-level topic centers more about Target is locking things up, and how shoplifters can grab-and-run, and why Walgreens seems to only have "one security guard in their entire store". Larger companies already expect "shrink" (theft by employees and customers) and factor it into their calculations of how much staff to have, how much security to have, the effect of locking up particular items, the use of self-checkout vs. cashiers, etc. They have long ago figured out how to maximize profit in the face of shoplifting. In your terms, Walmart already allows crime to go unpunished because they don't want to spend enough to identify those crimes. The police response - no matter how good! - is rather useless if over-worked employees don't notice the shoplifting so never contact the police, or if the police physically can't arrive until many minutes after the thieves have left. Low wage employees of large companies, as a general rule, do not get paid to risk bodily harm to stop thieves. Your [2] is a rare exception, ... and also not an employee of a large company. In general discussion, the argument is the city should direct the police to do more to help prevent shoplifting. Which means the big companies will go to their spreadsheets and figure out how to spend even less money on security and staff, ending up with more profit as the government ends up subsidizing their security.

pandaman 3y ago

That article does not say that Walmart does not pay local taxes but suggests that it should not have used legal allowances it was given and pay more than it should by law. Your shopping experience in Walmart does not seem to be relevant at all, if you don't like it - don't go there, it in no way justifies allowing crime against Walmart to go unpunished.

eesmith 3y ago
Are you really so focused on just this one sort of crime, or does your opinion extend equally to all other crimes? We accept that some crimes go unpunished, yes? We don't hire enough traffic police to detect and punish all speeders, even though that's a crime, and that's only one of many crimes I can think of which are underprosecuted. Nor is there much of a cry to increase the number of traffic police and bring traffic speed down to the posted limits. So why must all shoplifting by punished, with the police doing most of the work at the store? We've long said that if an organization needs a higher level of security they can have their own security force, which may be private guards or a private police force, as with some campus police, transit police, and railroad police forces. Just like there is no law saying a store must pay more than is legally required, there is also no law saying the government is required to supply a police force for the store. Nor does it make economic sense for broadly trained police to handle a specialized task like providing security for a store. One of the biggest crimes is wage theft. The total cost of wage theft is estimated at 100x that of every robbery: https://www.workingnowandthen.com/blog/wage-theft-the-50-billion-crime-against-workers/ https://www.workingnowandthen.com/blog/wage-theft-the-50-bil... We know Walmart has committed that crime. ("According to a 2018 report by Good Jobs, between January 2000 to 2018, Walmart paid over $1.4bn in fines and settlements over wage theft violations, FedEx paid over $500m during the same period, and Bank of America paid over $380m." - https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jun/15/wage-theft-us-workers-employees https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jun/15/wage-theft-u... ). Will these police officers assigned to Walmart also be charged with investigating and preventing wage theft at those stores? No, of course that hasn't been part of the general discussion. What, in your opinion, justifies allowing wage theft by Walmart to go unpunished?
- pandaman 3y ago
  >Are you really so focused on just this one sort of crime, or does your opinion extend equally to all other crimes? In the US, there are thousands of crimes on the books, which are not enforced and are ridiculous [1]. So no, I do not think that all crimes should be punished. >So why must all shoplifting by punished, with the police doing most of the work at the store? This is a loaded question. I don't think the police should be doing most of the work at the store, but I think the police should take the apprehended criminals from the store when called. And DAs should prosecute those, and the judges should try them, that's all. Nothing of this happens right now. This is why stores do not try to apprehend criminals as the same police, DA and judges will happily go after the business and its employees if the criminal is hurt in the process or claims to be hurt[2]. 1. https://www.distractify.com/p/ridiculous-laws https://www.distractify.com/p/ridiculous-laws 2. https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/11/us/new-york-bodega-stabbing-murder-charges/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/11/us/new-york-bodega-stabbing-m...
  - eesmith 3y ago
    Since I meant to be serious, and not present a sophomoric straw man, let's narrow things down to a specific example I gave: Which should police investigate more - shoplifting from Walmart or wage theft at Walmart, and why? My question is meant to probe what goes into your decision to prioritize investigating two related types of crime which can both take place at Walmart. It is meant to be more head-to-head than jliptzin's series of questions early in this thread "Someone want to explain to me why my tax dollars should go towards protecting target and Walgreen’s inventory? When they have one security guard in their entire store? When police could instead be spending that time finding the driver of the truck that smashed into my car and drove away?". How is your [2] at all related to shoplifting? It feels like you are trying to raise the emotional level by switching to manslaughter. This alternative topic has consumed endless discussion over the years. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_New_York_City_Subway_shooting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_New_York_City_Subway_shoo... and https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1986-12-16-8604030893-story.html https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1986-12-16-860403... from the 1980s as two examples. NYC has had a long time to refine how to handle something like your [2], and there is no way it makes sense to discuss it futher here. > I don't think the police should be doing most of the work at the store, but I think the police should take the apprehended criminals from the store when called. Right, but the top-level topic centers more about Target is locking things up, and how shoplifters can grab-and-run, and why Walgreens seems to only have "one security guard in their entire store". Larger companies already expect "shrink" (theft by employees and customers) and factor it into their calculations of how much staff to have, how much security to have, the effect of locking up particular items, the use of self-checkout vs. cashiers, etc. They have long ago figured out how to maximize profit in the face of shoplifting. In your terms, Walmart already allows crime to go unpunished because they don't want to spend enough to identify those crimes. The police response - no matter how good! - is rather useless if over-worked employees don't notice the shoplifting so never contact the police, or if the police physically can't arrive until many minutes after the thieves have left. Low wage employees of large companies, as a general rule, do not get paid to risk bodily harm to stop thieves. Your [2] is a rare exception, ... and also not an employee of a large company. In general discussion, the argument is the city should direct the police to do more to help prevent shoplifting. Which means the big companies will go to their spreadsheets and figure out how to spend even less money on security and staff, ending up with more profit as the government ends up subsidizing their security.