Target warns theft, crime-fueled losses could top $1.2B this year

[Mosby]

Retail giant Target reported another quarterly profit loss Wednesday, and gave a cautious outlook for the rest of the year.

The Minneapolis-based company estimated in its earnings release that losses, driven primarily by organized crime, could result in a whopping $1.2 billion hit to its bottom line this year. The announcement comes after Target estimated losses of $700 to $800 million from theft last year.

Retailers have faced a rash of thefts in recent months, with some companies, like Walmart, closing down "underperforming" stores in areas of high crime. Others have turned to locking up many everyday items to prevent them from being stolen. But that too has negatively impacted sales.

Merchandise stolen from stores led to more than $94 billion in losses in 2021, up from $90.8 billion the previous year, according to a study by the National Retail Federation. A majority of retailers also reported that offenders are "somewhat more" or "much more" violent.

https://scrippsnews.com/stories/target-warns-theft-crime-fueled-losses-could-top-1-2b-this-year/

[TheRealNorth]

1. Listening to the "social justice warriors" when it comes to enforcing the law....

Has been a failure imo. Now businesses in some of the most economically depressed areas are shutting their doors because criminal gangs are taking advantage of the lax enforcement. This will only make matters worse.

I am sorry, but stealing $500 in electronics should not be treated the same as stealing a candy bar.

[Farmer-Rick]

2. Well this social justice warrior says businesses in poor areas are always

Shutting their doors. Businesses go where the money is. They are in business to sell their junk. If no one's buying, they close.

I live in a rural not so rich area and we have to drive a minimum of 40 minutes to get to a grocery store. Where are our stores???? Why did so many close up shop during the pandemic never to open up again? And they still got their PPP billions of loans forgiven.

It's nothing new for stores to close in poor areas because no one is shopping there because most locals are broke.

Law enforcement in poor areas has always been lax. Cops don't respond as quickly to complaints in poor areas as they do for the filthy rich.

Here in a not rich rural area we are lucky to see cops an hour after calling them. Luckily the fire department and EMTs are much more responsive.

[BlueWaveNeverEnd]

3. the theft isnt driven by the poor but by the organized gangs. one can be a SJW and be anti crime

[TheRealNorth]

4. I should clarify

I am mostly complaining about those that pushed lessening punishments or non enforcement for non-violent crimes because there were more minority offenders, or because it led to more situations with police that could end in the police using unjustified force, or putting people who broke the law in jail was deemed "too harmful to their long-term prospects." I mean, much of the crime is bore by the people in their community, who also suffer when their property is stolen or destroyed. But instead we cared more for the financial well-being and long-term prospects of the criminal, instead of the victim.

When rules and laws become optional, we shouldn't be surprised when people break them, especially when it is profitable to do so.

[radius777]

5. Exactly, crime only benefits a few to the detriment of many.

Very few people commit crimes. The ones that do lead to the corrosion of communities as investment/businesses leave. They also consume policing/court resources that could be used for others. Basically, criminals are parasites on their own communites. Nobody wants to see a kid who shoplifts a cheap item get jail time. But those committing these crimes are often repeat offenders and affiliated with gangs, who will send under-age kids (who they know won't be tried as adults) to do the crimes.