Bootstrap wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2023 9:01 pm
So what is the overall trend? There are always business closings and business openings, what is happening to total business employment?
Employment isn’t the topic. The topic is that store closures and stores shrinking hours and putting everything behind lock and key has gotten to a level where it’s difficult for ordinary people (or tourists) to access basic goods and services.
Unemployment is low in Detroit too.
Oh, sorry. I should have read the OP before responding to later posts.
I think crime is one significant issue, but I also think there are others: it's harder to find workers, you have to pay them more than you used to, businesses are competing against online sales, and the price of store space has gone through the roof in a lot of places.
One of the big reasons shoplifting is going up: stores now tell their employees not to try to apprehend shoplifters:
Recently, many retailers have instituted policies that specifically prohibit their employees from attempting to deter or physically interfere with shoplifters. In the National Retail Federation’s 2022 survey, 37.9% of participating retailers don’t allow employees of any kind to apprehend shoplifters. The potential liability if the employee is harmed is more of a risk than the lost revenue.
While many employees no doubt appreciate being in a safe workplace, the tradeoff has (in some cases) been an upward trend in shoplifting cases. Perpetrators are increasingly aware that no one is going to chase after them. That said, that same survey indicated that many retailers plan to compensate for the lack of employee intervention by investing in sophisticated loss-prevention technology like RFID systems and AI analytics tools.
Why would businesses tell employees not to apprehend shoplifters? It's not worth the risk. Employees might be hurt in the process. Two examples:
Store employee chases two suspect thieves into the parking lot. They separate and she goes after one. The second jumps in a car (out of her sight now), runs her down and his buddy jumps in. She suffered serious but not fatal injuries. The store’s insurance company wouldn’t cover her injuries, the store fired her and the town was outraged. The store had to cover the damage to the car of another shopper the pair slammed into in the process of getting away.
Not a month later, a store security guard takes off after a suspect. An employee, evidently seeing that the guard (overweight) is no match for the suspect, takes off after him. She’s a fitness type so she’s gaining ground on him rapidly. He yells something in a language she doesn’t understand … and then drops. A car door flies open and an associate opens up on the employee. The security guard, losing ground by the moment, is slightly wounded. The employee is killed. The store has to repair several shoppers’ cars due to bullets hitting them.
Ken wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2023 10:35 pm
The wealthy elites in San Francisco have deliberately and systematically made it impossible to build low income housing in San Francisco. Or practically any housing for that matter. Social programs are pointless if there is no place for people to live.
Ken,
That’s simply not correct. SF has a “housing first” model with housing actually available for anyone homeless. The 4,000 who choose to remain outside do so because they don’t want to deal with the very minimal requirements to get off the streets.
That is the fundamental difference between San Francisco and pretty much any place in Ohio. The cost of housing. Crime rates are basically the same. It is the cost of housing. For example, West Virginia has much higher crime rates and much higher addiction rates than California. But barely any homeless. That is because dirt cheap housing is abundant.
Some places in Ohio have expensive housing yet there isn’t SF style “homeless” there.
Housing isn't even that difficult of a problem to solve. They just don't want to solve it in San Francisco and so here we are. And no, housing won't solve addiction and crime. Witness West Virginia. But it will solve people living on the streets so at least it is a start. Each problem has its own solutions. And complex inter-related problems have complex inter-related solutions.
You keep saying this yet SF has some of the strictest requirements on making sure low income or affordable housing is included in any development.
The reason some people live on the streets is because they want to and they can get away with it.
Bootstrap wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2023 9:01 pm
So what is the overall trend? There are always business closings and business openings, what is happening to total business employment?
Employment isn’t the topic. The topic is that store closures and stores shrinking hours and putting everything behind lock and key has gotten to a level where it’s difficult for ordinary people (or tourists) to access basic goods and services.
What basic goods and services do you think that ordinary residents of San Francisco have difficulty accessing? Not someone living in the Tenderloin which is San Francisco's skid row. But some ordinary neighborhood in San Francisco where most people actually live? Like say Sunset or Richmond?
The Tenderloin is an ordinary neighbourhood where ordinary people live, and indeed, has always had the cheapest housing.
Don’t you think people who live there should be able to have stores that aren’t subject to running out of stock due to mass shoplifting?
Richmond isn’t SF and is in the East Bay. As I said earlier, outside of SF doesn’t have close to the same level of dysfunction.
Looks like only about 10% of businesses have "inventory shrinkage" above 3%, and only a little more than 1/3 of that is due to shoplifting. I would guess that stores that sell guns or alcohol have much higher theft than some other businesses, but that's just a guess.
MaxPC wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2023 11:42 pm
A question for only the actively practicing Anabaptists on this group: how would you and your church seek to evangelise in a place such as S.F.?
Distribute tracts and invite them to church services 2 hours away in the Valley.
MaxPC wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2023 11:42 pm
A question for only the actively practicing Anabaptists on this group: how would you and your church seek to evangelise in a place such as S.F.?
Distribute tracts and invite them to church services 2 hours away in the Valley.
MaxPC wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2023 11:42 pm
A question for only the actively practicing Anabaptists on this group: how would you and your church seek to evangelise in a place such as S.F.?
Distribute tracts and invite them to church services 2 hours away in the Valley.
Does your church do public song teams too?
Not as much as I’d like to, but the Pilgrim / Hope sort of folks do lots of this in L.A., NYC, Pittsburgh, and other places.