Is everyone really a racist?

[aygart]

"Should" means in a perfect, charitable world, where people are willing to lose money to help society. Obviously, it's not always feasible fiscally, and it's not wrong.

Is this really what a store SHOULD do? Why should everyone subsidize a community just because they steal and make it unprofitable to do business there?

[YitzyS]

Is this really what a store SHOULD do? Why should everyone subsidize a community just because they steal and make it unprofitable to do business there?

I should have been more careful with my words. Should was the wrong word.

But it is not "they steal". Rather it is "some within them steal". And for someone who cares about those less fortunate, they may choose to open a store in such a neighborhood.

[aygart]

I should have been more careful with my words. Should was the wrong word.

But it is not "they steal". Rather it is "some within them steal". And for someone who cares about those less fortunate, they may choose to open a store in such a neighborhood.

And who should absorb the losses?

[CountValentine]

The question wasn't if it's a bad idea. The question was if it's racist. If it's driven by profit alone, it's not racist. However, yes, stores should have a social conscience and not implement this. But it's not wrong.

No it is not racist but IMHO it is wrong.

[YitzyS]

And who should absorb the losses?

I'm going to deflect that question to @CountValentine as he has taken a stronger stance on that than me...

[CountValentine]

I'm going to deflect that question to @CountValentine as he has taken a stronger stance on that than me...

Send them my way. 
Some here think these same thieves will stop stealing. No they will just move on to different stores probably in your community.

[CountValentine]

And who should absorb the losses?

If it is any of the major chains they would absorb the loss.

[aygart]

If it is any of the major chains they would absorb the loss.

Why should their shareholders absorb it?

[CountValentine]

Why should their shareholders absorb it?

IMHO businesses have more of a responsibility than just the bottom line. Our views are just different.

[AJK]

If it was purely a cost benefit analysis shouldn’t they steal and then resell at the same rate as stealing for personal use?

Uhm, no?

Folks in the middle and lower class have a limited amount of disposable income.  I imagine that the vast majority of thieves can "afford" buying the $4.00 hair product that is locked up.  Notwithstanding, if they just pocket it and walk out, they can now "save" that $4.00 and use it on something else -- perhaps that cannot be stolen.

[AJK]

Or it could be “I need it but I’m too poor to afford it”. Well, which is it? I don’t know, but something tells me poverty rates would line up nicely in this equation..

Yea, unlikely.

We're not talking Cadillacs; we're talking shampoo.  And, while I'm sure there are certain folks who may not be able to afford shampoo, frankly, the world over has to make choices each and every day on how to spend, save, sacrifice and splurge.  While your bleeding heart approach is kind, it's terribly misguided IMHO.

[AJK]

I honestly can't believe I'm reading post after post about how the locking up "isn't racist," but it is "wrong" (by what measure I wonder?) and companies (if they're big corporate chains only?) should just eat the losses, day after day, because they "have a responsibility" (apparently to people more important than the actual owners and shareholders regardless of color) to what...? Become suckers for punishment by way of repeated theft when there is such an easy solution?

My goodness, this world gets crazier every day.

[CountValentine]

I honestly can't believe I'm reading post after post about how the locking up "isn't racist," but it is "wrong" (by what measure I wonder?) and companies (if they're big corporate chains only?) should just eat the losses, day after day, because they "have a responsibility" (apparently to people more important than the actual owners and shareholders regardless of color) to what...? Become suckers for punishment by way of repeated theft when there is such an easy solution?

My goodness, this world gets crazier every day.

They are locking up items that are being stolen not based on who is stealing them. Home Depot locks up power tools by me. Are they racist?

[AJK]

They are locking up items that are being stolen not based on who is stealing them. Home Depot locks up power tools by me. Are they racist?

1) Have you done a complete 180? You were the one who said half the things I am surprised to read (though, candidly, I shouldn't be surprised to read anything by anyone these days)
2) That is entirely not the same thing.  I assume the "black" hair products cost the same as the "white" hair products, are the same size, and are otherwise just as accessible to the public.  I don't think power tools are the same price as boxes of tape, they're not primarily bought by one ethnicity or race, etc.

Oh, and to answer your question -- obviously no.

[CountValentine]

1) Have you done a complete 180? You were the one who said half the things I am surprised to read (though, candidly, I shouldn't be surprised to read anything by anyone these days)
2) That is entirely not the same thing.  I assume the "black" hair products cost the same as the "white" hair products, are the same size, and are otherwise just as accessible to the public.  I don't think power tools are the same price as boxes of tape, they're not primarily bought by one ethnicity or race, etc.

Oh, and to answer your question -- obviously no.

180 on what?

Did you comment yet on the original question you pinged us on?

ETA: Are you saying the black hair products are being locked up because the blacks use them and not because they are the highest theft items? Just trying to understand your position.

[S209]

Yea, unlikely.

We're not talking Cadillacs; we're talking shampoo.  And, while I'm sure there are certain folks who may not be able to afford shampoo, frankly, the world over has to make choices each and every day on how to spend, save, sacrifice and splurge.  While your bleeding heart approach is kind, it's terribly misguided IMHO.

This is exactly my point. What do you think their primary motivation is? If it’s pure greed there is no reason they wouldn’t steal all hair products equally.

[S209]

Uhm, no?

Folks in the middle and lower class have a limited amount of disposable income.  I imagine that the vast majority of thieves can "afford" buying the $4.00 hair product that is locked up.  Notwithstanding, if they just pocket it and walk out, they can now "save" that $4.00 and use it on something else -- perhaps that cannot be stolen.

Again, why are they willing to resort to thievery for a measly $4? Do you know anyone that would do that? Why would that be? Don’t you think that is something we should perhaps be addressing?

[CountValentine]

Just a side note. Don't underestimate the price of these hair products.

[AJK]

180 on what?

Did you comment yet on the original question you pinged us on?

ETA: Are you saying the black hair products are being locked up because the blacks use them and not because they are the highest theft items? Just trying to understand your position.

I mean, I didn't comment directly, but I think my position is evident. I think it is asinine to call it racist for a business to take prudent measures to protect itself from the repeated theft of certain items, regardless of who is stealing them or what is stolen.

[S209]

I mean, I didn't comment directly, but I think my position is evident. I think it is asinine to call it racist for a business to take prudent measures to protect itself from the repeated theft of certain items, regardless of who is stealing them or what is stolen.

Is it anti-Semitic for the police and Mayor to specifically target Orthodox Jewish businesses, schools, and funerals if they have a higher rate of noncompliance?