Walgreens to Close 5 Stores in San Francisco, Citing ‘Organized’ Shoplifting
- Thread starter Sectorseven
- Start date
- News
Just crazy how so many people, including supposed liberals, lap this shit up. Fall for overblown crime stories and copganda shit hook, line, and sinker. And illogical lies from massive corps. Every time.
And it's always San Francisco. It's to shoplifting what Chicago is to shootings.
If shoplifting is so devastating and California law is to blame, why is there not a blip about the problem in Los Angeles, San Diego, or Sacramento?
The problem exists, but the fact that all the voices are only using one city to illustrate the issue should ring some warning bells.
Forgive me, but where do you get the impression that anyone other than the right fall for this?
damn, midterms are over and suddenly big businesses are correcting the record on overblown crime a bit? who would've thought. just like that southern caravan that pops up and disappears for election season.
My local Walgreens has about 75% of the entire store locked up. In order to shop there you need to have someone follow you around to open the cabinets. And there are usually just two people working.
I can't imagine anyone actually putting up with that and shopping there. I was surprised it was still in business.
I can't imagine anyone actually putting up with that and shopping there. I was surprised it was still in business.
Paging all the more reactionary takes on pages one and two. Cleanup on pages one and two.
So this is why half the store I visited was under lock and key the last time I was in SF a few months ago. They had like… Starbucks shit behind glass. Fucking weird.
Yeah. Locking shit up like this AND understaffing is the worst fucking thing right now. Just imagine trying to wait 15 minutes at a Walmart to get baby formula while the kid is crying in the car with the mom. FUN FUCKING TIMES. FUN FUCKING TIMES.
Are you serious...? If so, this very fucking forum! The thread on Walmart shoplifting like a fortnight ago was exhausting.
It's a bad implication. "The right" isn't responsible for every bad opinion. Liberals come up with plenty.
I thought San Francisco either has different laws or enforces the law differently which is why it's a bigger problem there?
I think I must've missed that. It rings a bell but I don't remember people handwringing about a corporation losing money in America. That's kind of surprising, but I'll take your word for it. Oh and fuck Walgreens.
Lolol. This forum right winged. Yes, good guess.
It makes more sense than your other alternative...
And this forum has tons of rightwing sentiment under the surface. You barely have to scratch.
Comparatively speaking, this is a pretty progressive place. If there are rightwing sentiments here (and there are on occasion), they generally get dogpiled on pretty summarily. Maybe I have blinders on? I just can't see the majority of Era having sympathy for corporations like you're implying they do.
This place is barely progressive; it just bans open bigotry. That's why it's so funny when people call this place far left or whatever bullshit.
Having direct sympathy for corporations is not the same as slurping up and regurgitating corporate propaganda. You do not need any sympathy to do the latter, and the latter is widespread.
So then what would you consider progressive if not the popular ideals that are pushed here? Ban bigots, anti-fascist, anti-capitalist, pro-climate, pro-human rights...
When I was still in Chicago it would be like this too. Half the shit inside locked cabinets, two people behind the counter, and both of them extremely pissed off that anyone asks them for help. I was a regular there for five years and they still treated me like I was asking them to walk halfway across the city just so I could get some goddamn deodorant.
I'll PM you as to not get threadbanned and/or banned (but this place ain't those last 3 things). Also pushing for things and actually encapsulating things aren't the same. All these false equivalences...
Last edited:
It's insane how the first page is full of people buying this lie, it always works. People were from the jump calling out the lie
It's progressive on cultural issues it's absolutely not on economics. It's firmly neoliberal consensus which makes sense, it's people fighting for their class interests (lots of tech industry upper middle class)
Surely this is a joke post?
As someone living in a country most US politicians would call a socialist state this forum as a whole is miles more to the left than the most leftist party in the country.
This is a big part of why Chesa Boudin, the progressive DA in SF lost his recall election. Because SF isn't that progressive aside from LGTBQ+ inclusivity.
If you're not shaming others for not being leftist enough by some hidden standard you refuse to explain, are you even a leftist, bro?
It's true, and in particular SF voters swing HARD to the right as soon as property issues come up.
I'd say that there are certain.. cultural subjects that some of the forum just doesn't have the exposure/knowledge about.
Hell, you can see this whenever someone makes a "what slang makes you cringe" kind of topic and just start seeing exactly what culture a lot of the picks tend to come from... another example was when a lot of Era was cheering from the rooftops about Facebook's network outage... while also not actually realizing that poorer countries across the world literally used stuff like WhatsApp to communicate with their jobs/families.
I get what you meant but most current US politicians would call anything slightly off from center-right as socialist these days, this is not a very high bar to cross with this metric
I say Era (and SF as I have been a resident for almost 6 years) is pretty progressive with social issues but probably center to center left on economics (if we are defining far left as all for total socialism/communism and far right as totally unregulated capitalism).
Then again I doubt the majority of Era posters (or even the gen pop) even know what an ideal socialist society actually would look like
Then again I doubt the majority of Era posters (or even the gen pop) even know what an ideal socialist society actually would look like
While the media is absolutely to blame for overblowing constant shit towards cities like SF, LA, NYC, Minneapolis, Seattle, and Portland which infects middle Americas perception of how they are run - you can't ignore the residents of such cities also voting against (or growing against) progressive policy (see Eric Adams in NYC, Chesa Boudin in SF, Caruso in LA, last years Governor race in Oregon). It's important to not hand wave away why the residents within the cities themselves are perceiving/experiencing increased problems.
In my opinion its the chicken vs egg problem if that make sense. The erosion of social safety nets, union power in the US, the "war on drugs" that decimated communities (particularly POCs), the culture shift of "bootstraps and if you are poor it's your fault" among other things created the situation we have today.
A lot of progressive people in the US still feel at the very least subconsciously have a disdain for poorer individuals and vote for some hardline policies and politicians in regards to this
The US hates Black people.
There wasn't a problem. The news kept showing thefts by homeless black people and created one. It allowed evil corporations like Walgreens to close stores to increase profit margins while ignoring their wage theft. Walgreens closed a store on Ocean Avenue citing theft.
Wow, people last year really fell for this, huh? It's always a lie. You only need to look at the data; it's just never a significant problem. Renegade Cut had a good video on it if the stats in this thread and the open corporate admission isn't enough for you already.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGB7QnOZj3g
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGB7QnOZj3g
look, all shops have some theft. Walgreens had a pre-existing plan (called their "store optimization program") to close hundreds of stores nationwide because they had overextended themselves, and then hit upon a made up "organized retail crime" story to justify it and not take the heat for closing neighborhood pharmacies that people in the neighborhood depended on.
also, they closed proportionately more stores in NYC than in SF despite the whole media story only being about a shoplifting epidemic in SF.
the point is, they didn't close the stores because those stores had a shoplifting problem. They closed the stores because they as a corporation had a money problem, then said that they closed them because those stores had a shoplifting problem.
more here from Adam Johnson: https://thecolumn.substack.com/p/4-major-plot-holes-in-the-organized
All these liberal cities voting in "tough on crime" lawmakers and anti-bail reform attorneys.
Wouldn't that inherently make those cities not liberal? I mean I guess you can be liberal in some ways and conservative in others. So, I see your point.
Some of these politicians are ostensibly liberal even when they're doing this especially if their election opponents are pledging to turn homeless into biomatter to fuel suburbanites' sprinkler systems.
Last edited:
Walgreens is an awful place to shop locked up or not. Everything is overpriced to hell and there's barely any people ever working. The self checkout helps a bunch but there's still the pricing problem.
Liberals and Conservatives largely agree on what "tough on crime" looks like. There isn't much difference.
Genuine question, what would you call a liberal who took a "lax on crime" stance then? Still a liberal, or is there a different name for that?