Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why it’s hard to buy deodorant in Manhattan

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

651–660 of 763 posts

Re: Why it’s hard to buy deodorant in Manhattan

#651

Post by sbarre »

joenot443 wrote: post #641
sbarre wrote: post #625

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Letting people starve or be homeless is also a breakdown of society. One is harm to capitalism, property and profit, one is harm to neighbours and fellow humans,. Which one is worse, knowing you can't solve it all?

Whenever I witness people clearing shelves in NYC, it's never been by someone who appeared homeless. Usually they're wearing clothes as nice as I am, sometimes they've got Airpods in. Let's not make up excuses for criminals, yeah?

I was speaking broadly, you're citing an anecdote. Not the same thing.

Re: Why it’s hard to buy deodorant in Manhattan

#652

Post by thehappypm »

public_defender wrote: post #613
MichaelCollins wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People are safer on the street. Only if you narrowly define 'people' to mean the tiny minority of people who are thieves, and exclude the overwhelming majority of people who aren't thieves. Thieves are safer on the street but everybody else is safer with thieves off the street. You've got your priorities skewed.

This is a reasonable comment if you're talking about stabbings or murders but not shoplifting. Allowing people to steal from retail stores with impunity doesn't make anyone unsafe. Realize that I'm not arguing for impunity, just that incarceration should be off the table.

What? If I was shopping and a gang busted in and stole a bunch of stuff, I would feel extremely unsafe..

Re: Why it’s hard to buy deodorant in Manhattan

#653

Post by [deleted] »

danielheath wrote: post #626
prottog wrote: post #619

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> forcing people to steal to survive I really don't think these people are choosing between stealing and starving.

According to the [USDA]( https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/fo... ), nearly 10% of americans have missed meals in the past year because they did not have enough food.

[deleted]

Re: Why it’s hard to buy deodorant in Manhattan

#654

Post by hotpotamus »

joenot443 wrote: post #646
hotpotamus wrote: post #643

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If people are just born criminals, then why is this a problem that is arising now? Is it actually a new problem or just media sensationalism? If it's real, then when did it start and can we surmise the reasons for the trend?

I don't think anyone's saying people are born criminals. People commit crime for a variety of reasons, but it's very obvious for anyone who lives in a big American city why this is specifically a problem now. It's absolutely not media sensationalism, I've seen people walk into CVS, Target, bodegas, etc. with a bag and clear entire shelves in full sight of other shoppers. They know nobody wants to end up on TikTok acc…

You seem to be implying that this is both an NYC problem due to the DA, but also a national problem, so it probably isn't just because of a DA in one city. And that's my question - do we even actually have a national problem and if so, what are the causes on a national scale? I don't know if there actually are answers; though it's obvious everyone has their pet theories.

Re: Why it’s hard to buy deodorant in Manhattan

#655

Post by Spooky23 »

lupire wrote: post #218
Spooky23 wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There used to be a pretty active market in selling clearance stuff on Amazon and eBay.

So to block counterfiets and fencing, we need a verifiable chain of custody.

You could do that, or you could compel Amazon to not look the other way when they accept goods that “fall off the truck”.

Re: Why it’s hard to buy deodorant in Manhattan

#656

Post by Spooky23 »

bombcar wrote: post #650
UncleEntity wrote: post #543

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, I drive a truck. It’s hard enough to get them to unload you when all they have to do is count pallets like “yep, 22 pallets of potatoes” even harder when they have to break down pallets to count individual cases and would be impossible if they had to verify every single item by serial number. Even when I used to deliver to individual grocery stores it was difficult because they didn’t plan for unloading the truck…

You could do it like the expiration/plant batch codes on food - ignored unless there’s an investigation for some reason.

Who would investigate? Amazon idngaf to the point that they are find with co-mingling fake and stolen goods and selling them under their own brand.

Re: Why it’s hard to buy deodorant in Manhattan

#657

Post by midasuni »

branon wrote: post #623
midasuni wrote: post #563

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the U.K. you have to pay a premium not to use your corporate ID card. Tesco for example will charge a 20% markup on lunch for privacy.

Interesting, got more info? Which corporations provide the ID card? Are retailers legally obligated to ask for it? Do retailers get fined by the gov't for every non-ID'd transaction? This _could_ be taken to mean that Tesco employees get a 20% discount if they flash their Tesco ID card, which sounds completely normal to my American self.

If you don’t get a Tesco (Major U.K. corporation) ID card scanned at the till you get charged a lot more for your food.

This is normal customers, not employees.

Re: Why it’s hard to buy deodorant in Manhattan

#659

Post by mattkrause »

z9znz wrote: post #401
mattkrause wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the point is that there’s a human on the other side too, not faceless corporation. Rhetorically, the story works just as well if it’s a scary-looking guy in a biker jacket, helping his sister open a ballet studio, or someone clad head-to-toe in Rangers’ gear.

> scary-looking guy in a biker jacket, helping his sister open a ballet studio I think this illustrates the possible unspoken angle of the post. Is the post trying to show a surprising contrast? And if so, should I be surprised to see anyone, hijab or not, working in a family pharmacy store while also working on their MD? With your example, a scary-looking guy in a biker jacket evokes a certain feeling (fear, worry,…

Nope. At least for me, the details are meant to sketch striking human characters that you want to support, whether they are plucky (children of) immigrants, surprising family men, or hometown characters [0]. The rhetorical contrast is not a hijab-less woman, jacket-less man, or Dallas Cowboys fan.

Instead, consider this over-the-top example: "Augustus P. Moneybags, who owns 51% of the parent company Amalgamated Holdings, said deodorant theft reduced earnings per share from $1.20 to $1.19 this year. Although the company still turned record profits, he vowed to crack down on it. Specific plans were not available at press time, as Mr. Moneybags had left on his yacht." Here, I can imagine thinking "Meh, who cares? Maybe people need deodorant more tan this guy needs money."

[0] You didn't mention Rangers guy, but if it wasn't clear from context, the NY Rangers are a local hockey team. Nothing scary about them, except perhaps their recent mediocrity.

Re: Why it’s hard to buy deodorant in Manhattan

#660

Post by DharmaPolice »

joenot443 wrote: post #640
KingMob wrote: post #635

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spoiler alert: wage theft is just as big as regular theft, if not more. https://prospect.org/economy/wage-theft-shoplifting-cost-dif... Think of shoplifting as "inefficient redistribution".

This is one of those talking points I see progressives use that has just never made sense to me. So we can agree people's time is stolen from them, this is wrong. The part that has never made sense to me is why this means stealing as a whole something that society should encourage? If someone is abused by their parents we would agree they suffered injustice, like people who had their wages skimmed by their employer.…

I think people are "bending the stick" a little as a response to traditional perspectives of crime. Ask a kid to draw or describe a crime/criminal and I'm sure it'll be a guy robbing someone either on the street or in their home. That's the dominant image of crime which people are pushing back against.

At some point after the 2008 financial crisis there were some protests in London (allegedly by black block type anarchists but they were only an element). Some vandalism occurred, bank windows got smashed, other shops were targeted and some stuff got looted. Fairly usual stuff. A meeting I was in the next day about something unrelated I listened to two people get into quite a rant about the "mindless destruction" and how much all that damage would cost. Not to mention the severe punishment that anyone involved should face (hard labour, flogging, etc). And yes, I did have to be "that guy" and point out that even if they had the same protest every week for a year it probably wouldn't compare to the cost of the crisis (a very large part of which seemed to be avoidable). That wasn't intended to justify or encourage smashing windows - it's just asking people to put things in perspective.

The problem is (as with many topics) if you only/mainly hang around progressive people (or read things from that perspective) things can seem unhinged because in that limited space the only crime they ever talk about is white collar crime or corporate crime (or white supremacist crime I guess). Those opinions are meant as a reply to mainstream society, not intended as a position statement on crime.

The same things happens with foreign policy. It's useful to be reminded of the crimes of "our side" when analysing the behaviour of Russia/China/whoever. But if you only ever talk about the crimes of the West without ever criticising Russia/China AND you communicate only with likeminded people you can end up sounding very strange to anyone listening to you who isn't in your weird bubble.

Post reply on HN