San Francisco never defunded the police. (IIRC, voters passed a measure eliminating a mininum funding mandate, but the actual budget has increased.)
The SFPD may choose not to enforce laws, but I don't think anyone outside of SFPD directed that, it's just organized nonfeasance as leadership political protest.
SF went from $668 million in 19/20 to $661 million in 20/21 for the SFPD, mainly due to police not being required as much at SFO.
If the police can't stop crime and enforce the laws of 47 square miles and 874,961 residents for the princely sum of $755 per person/year or $14 million per square mile/year what exactly are people paying for? Like if I told you that you pay $62/mo for a police subscription and this was the service you were going to get for it, would you still subscribe to it? Probably not.
It's a protection racket. Lower the police budget even in a non-meaningful way just a little and they hold the city to ransom. Just scrap it and start again from scratch, perhaps trying Peelian principles instead of relying on the corrupted outgrowth of slave hunter patrols.
Getting closer to being a capitalist utopia. No retail stores, no theft. All items have to be ordered online, rule by code. It would be interesting to know the stores financial statements to see if this was just an excuse to get rid of the retail footprint due to sales & property tax in SF. The current building demand with low interest rates and COVID re-opening should more than compensate the remodeling costs.
You want to be where the police aren't. A bank near me gets robbed a few times a year because the neighborhood is safe and isolated enough that the city mostly avoids stationing officers nearby.
> During this time to help combat this issue, we increased our investments in security measures in stores across the city to 46 times our chain average in an effort to provide a safe environment.”
Throwaway, but I can assure you as an SF resident, most of us are more than happy to see Walgreens go.
They pay and treat their employees terribly along with pushing junk food and other garbage to people just trying to fill a prescription.
We are excited for quality, owner operated pharmacies to return and replace them. Just like they served us before Walgreens came in and muscled them all out of business.
It’s almost as if not looking out for your community results in that community not looking out for you.
>We are excited for quality, owner operated pharmacies to return and replace them. Just like they served us before Walgreens came in and muscled them all out of business.
What makes you think that the owner operated pharmacies won't be targeted by shoplifters? Are a significant chunk of the shoplifters doing it for ideological reasons?
>It’s almost as if not looking out for your community results in that community not looking out for you.
Sounds like victim blaming to me. The whole point of having laws and law enforcement is to have an official way to pay your dues to the community and get protection in return, rather than having to pay for "protection" from the community itself.
I’m also a SF resident and the above comment does not represent the vast majority of people here. A good example is Ahsha Safai’s comment (the supervisor for district 11):
“I am completely devastated by this news - this Walgreens is less than a mile from seven schools and has been a staple for seniors, families and children for decades. This closure will significantly impact this community.”
That's all nice to say when you are not one of the Walgreens employees who may lose a job as a result of the closures, right?
Owner-operated pharmacies have been out of business for decades. I'm sure you yearn for the days of Blockbuster video or, better still, your neighborhood video stores. No Netflix for you, right?
Walgreens is not 'pushing' anything on anyone - people make choices to buy Doritos.
More importantly -> they're going there for the Doritos as much as anything else.
Walgreens has incredible economies of scale and operational expertise. They know what people want, they know how to keep the shelves stocked efficiently, which is not exactly novel, but it's hard for mom and pop shops to do.
If SF residents truly wanted 'independent pharmacies' for prescriptions, they would have been using them already.
As far as 'employee treatment' - maybe there is something there, but I'm doubtful if it rises to the threshold that we'd want them closed.
'The Problem' is entirely San Francisco's insane attitudes towards crime.
And finally, most poignantly, those criminals will steal from the 'locally owned stores' just as well, and they won't have 500 other locations to absorb the losses.
This is an SF civic problem.
Get SF to act rationally - and then - maybe it's possible to have a discussion about 'locally owned' shops etc..
You think they'll stop at Walgreens? Lol. I suspect this is only the beginning. You should understand that the political incumbents don't care because there is nothing stopping them or holding them accountable. That way of thinking will guarantee they stay in power, so they'll continue their experiments.
I've been to multiple Walgreens and none of them have pushed junk food on anyone. In fact, the most direct path from the entrance to the pharmacy hasn't even contained the food. That's always been on the opposite side of the store.
I'd think Amazon is a big influence too. Traditionally these pharmacies sell stuff a huge markups, its amazing how much cheaper OTC medicines and lotions are online. These big pharmacy chains are on borrowed time even without the shoplifting.
> Rodriguez is finally in jail, but he rode the city’s revolving door of justice to allegedly rip off Walgreens 37 times this year. He was particularly partial to the drug store at 91-08 Roosevelt Ave. in Jackson Heights, which he hit 23 times, police said.
The NY Post has an editorial incentive to hype up cases like this. Having lived in the city my entire life: I've never heard anything remotely similar to this. It's a bit like the guy who keeps trying to steal subway trains[1]: you can write a great breathless article about him, but there's still only one of him.
I wonder if there is some Marxist website somewhere celebrating this.
These huge businesses like Walmart, Walgreens and Starbucks target and study successful mom and pop businesses and then move in ruthlessly. In Portland I've seen so many great local businesses destroyed because they couldn't compete with the large chains. And, if that eventually doesn't work out for the chain, they close up shop.
Amazon and Walmart have destroyed small mom and pop grocery stores across the country.
I bet these retail gangs wouldn't go after a mom and pop shop of any kind. The owner would probably fight them with their bare hands. That's why they are going after Walgreens.
In some weird way, this feels like capitalism, actually. It's just a hidden facet we don't see often.
> I bet these retail gangs wouldn't go after a mom and pop shop of any kind. The owner would probably fight them with their bare hands. That's why they are going after Walgreens.
That's a big assumption...If elderly Asian people are being attacked on the streets, I don't think their moral code extends to mom and pop shops, even if they're willing to throw down, unless they bring out guns.
It's pretty unlikely that Walgreens is included in the USDA's definition of a food desert. I believe the most nutritious things available for sale there are dry cereal and maybe bananas.
It's not his most artful turn of phrase, but if you read the context of the remarks, I think Safai is saying "we can't continue to let them close" as in "we can't continue to allow these conditions which are forcing them to close," not as in "government should mandate that they stay open."
> During this time to help combat this issue, we increased our investments in security measures in stores across the city to 46 times our chain average in an effort to provide a safe environment.”
I wonder how they arrived at this number of 46x.
46x the chain average of single minutes spent reviewing security staff resumes?
46x the chain average of security camera photos sent to LEOs?
46x the average number of bic lighters placed further back? No, up more? No, up and back higher, like where you can't reach? No, they can really jump that high, so up higher?
Most Walgreens don’t have dedicated security guards. If these stores had guards working all operating hours (2-3 shifts per day, every day) and some stores might have employed multiple security guards, the multiple is there.
36x 0.5 cents is 18 dollars. So they started spending on security and it made them unprofitable perhaps. Retail runs on razor thin margins, so there may be some substance to this 36x number.
bryan0|4 years ago
zthrowaway|4 years ago
dragonwriter|4 years ago
The SFPD may choose not to enforce laws, but I don't think anyone outside of SFPD directed that, it's just organized nonfeasance as leadership political protest.
Veliladon|4 years ago
If the police can't stop crime and enforce the laws of 47 square miles and 874,961 residents for the princely sum of $755 per person/year or $14 million per square mile/year what exactly are people paying for? Like if I told you that you pay $62/mo for a police subscription and this was the service you were going to get for it, would you still subscribe to it? Probably not.
It's a protection racket. Lower the police budget even in a non-meaningful way just a little and they hold the city to ransom. Just scrap it and start again from scratch, perhaps trying Peelian principles instead of relying on the corrupted outgrowth of slave hunter patrols.
s5300|4 years ago
[deleted]
l-|4 years ago
nimos|4 years ago
kevin_thibedeau|4 years ago
speedybird|4 years ago
zardo|4 years ago
throwoutway|4 years ago
From the article. This isn’t normal
throwaway3776|4 years ago
They pay and treat their employees terribly along with pushing junk food and other garbage to people just trying to fill a prescription.
We are excited for quality, owner operated pharmacies to return and replace them. Just like they served us before Walgreens came in and muscled them all out of business.
It’s almost as if not looking out for your community results in that community not looking out for you.
gruez|4 years ago
What makes you think that the owner operated pharmacies won't be targeted by shoplifters? Are a significant chunk of the shoplifters doing it for ideological reasons?
>It’s almost as if not looking out for your community results in that community not looking out for you.
Sounds like victim blaming to me. The whole point of having laws and law enforcement is to have an official way to pay your dues to the community and get protection in return, rather than having to pay for "protection" from the community itself.
grandmczeb|4 years ago
“I am completely devastated by this news - this Walgreens is less than a mile from seven schools and has been a staple for seniors, families and children for decades. This closure will significantly impact this community.”
https://twitter.com/ahsha_safai/status/1447988178586013698?s...
rmk|4 years ago
Owner-operated pharmacies have been out of business for decades. I'm sure you yearn for the days of Blockbuster video or, better still, your neighborhood video stores. No Netflix for you, right?
jollybean|4 years ago
Walgreens is not 'pushing' anything on anyone - people make choices to buy Doritos.
More importantly -> they're going there for the Doritos as much as anything else.
Walgreens has incredible economies of scale and operational expertise. They know what people want, they know how to keep the shelves stocked efficiently, which is not exactly novel, but it's hard for mom and pop shops to do.
If SF residents truly wanted 'independent pharmacies' for prescriptions, they would have been using them already.
As far as 'employee treatment' - maybe there is something there, but I'm doubtful if it rises to the threshold that we'd want them closed.
'The Problem' is entirely San Francisco's insane attitudes towards crime.
And finally, most poignantly, those criminals will steal from the 'locally owned stores' just as well, and they won't have 500 other locations to absorb the losses.
This is an SF civic problem.
Get SF to act rationally - and then - maybe it's possible to have a discussion about 'locally owned' shops etc..
proc0|4 years ago
ziml77|4 years ago
zz865|4 years ago
zz865|4 years ago
> Rodriguez is finally in jail, but he rode the city’s revolving door of justice to allegedly rip off Walgreens 37 times this year. He was particularly partial to the drug store at 91-08 Roosevelt Ave. in Jackson Heights, which he hit 23 times, police said.
woodruffw|4 years ago
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darius_McCollum
xrd|4 years ago
These huge businesses like Walmart, Walgreens and Starbucks target and study successful mom and pop businesses and then move in ruthlessly. In Portland I've seen so many great local businesses destroyed because they couldn't compete with the large chains. And, if that eventually doesn't work out for the chain, they close up shop.
Amazon and Walmart have destroyed small mom and pop grocery stores across the country.
I bet these retail gangs wouldn't go after a mom and pop shop of any kind. The owner would probably fight them with their bare hands. That's why they are going after Walgreens.
In some weird way, this feels like capitalism, actually. It's just a hidden facet we don't see often.
DantesKite|4 years ago
That's a big assumption...If elderly Asian people are being attacked on the streets, I don't think their moral code extends to mom and pop shops, even if they're willing to throw down, unless they bring out guns.
rgergerger4|4 years ago
woodruffw|4 years ago
BobbyJo|4 years ago
b9be520d93286|4 years ago
[deleted]
oliv__|4 years ago
[deleted]
faut_reflechir|4 years ago
themodelplumber|4 years ago
I wonder how they arrived at this number of 46x.
46x the chain average of single minutes spent reviewing security staff resumes?
46x the chain average of security camera photos sent to LEOs?
46x the average number of bic lighters placed further back? No, up more? No, up and back higher, like where you can't reach? No, they can really jump that high, so up higher?
throwawaylinux|4 years ago
> our investments in security measures in stores
Clearly this refers to their dollar expenditure on security measures, however that had been accounted.
vnchr|4 years ago
rmk|4 years ago