[ home / overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / music / 777 / posad / i / a / lgbt / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]

/b/ - Siberia

"We need an imageboard of action to fight for OC making posters."
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Captcha
Tor Only

Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

Matrix   IRC Chat   Mumble


File: 1742798806104.jpg ( 74.62 KB , 1080x1283 , 1716726442841362.jpg )

 No.157031

I work at a shitty grocery store in an even shittier area. People come in who are completely illiterate and need to be walked through each step of paying. Basically everyone uses foodstamp payment and we get robbed every single day whether it's the carts and baskets getting carried off or someone running out the front with food.

Is it anti-Marxist to prevent shoplifting? Should I just ignore people blatantly stealing when I am working the self checkout machines?
>>

 No.157032

Well, I don't think it's specifically anti-Marxist to prevent shoplifting (I might be wrong), but are you getting paid to prevent it?
In my experience working retail, they gave me some instructions about, like, asking customers questions and watching for weird shit, but they never hired actual security and any attempt to physically intervene to stop anyone would have been at our own risk and offered no additional payment benefit. If that's the kind of situation you're dealing with, I don't think there's any good solution to this. Working a store where shoplifting is very common sounds dismal just because that's a very chaotic situation, but if they're not paying you for security then that limits what you can do, and the problem itself is a deeper one than you can singularly fix. It's not really good to ignore it, but you also can't solve it and your employer is unlikely to see the thefts as a large enough liability that they'd justify paying for better security. You could bring it up to them just as a safety issue. Shoplifting itself is morally gray, but I'm not going to shame you for hating to see it.
>>

 No.158663

>>157032
>>157031
Shoplifting in general has declined a great deal, at least on the customer side
Most shoplifting is done by employees
>>

 No.158701

>>158663
This guy works there and sees it. I think he knows there's plenty happening.
>>

 No.158702

That job sounds like hell, OP. I'm not the kind of guy who can let that stuff go. I'm often put in the position of "being a narc" with coworkers and subordinates. I'm not cool with breaking the rules. I'm not cool with sneaking drugs and drinks at work or stealing. I hate those people.
To have to actually bust people trying to steal in front of me would be weird for me. I'd not want to do it but if I had to I'd be a real asshole about it. I'd probably risk getting assaulted. Just better I not be put in that situation. I'm on a website like this and I think 'fuck the man, fight the power', whatever. But in reality I KNOW the person ripping off the store is a fucking meth head or a fentanyl junkie. It's not some poor schmo who lost his job and just needs something to eat. It's a deplorable scumbag looking to sell it or return it for fucking drug money.
If only there were a way to separate them and help the TRULY good poor. I mean, I give to my local shelter and halfway house. They give drug tests and have curfew and rules. I respect that. I don't respect living on the street because you're a fucking outlaw and you can't deal with society and the system of rules.
>>

 No.158705

>>158702
>I'd probably risk getting assaulted. Just better I not be put in that situation. I'm on a website like this and I think 'fuck the man, fight the power', whatever. But in reality I KNOW the person ripping off the store is a fucking meth head or a fentanyl junkie. It's not some poor schmo who lost his job and just needs something to eat. It's a deplorable scumbag looking to sell it or return it for fucking drug money.

What the fuck is up with this site and these thinly-veiled reactionary tirades?
"Um, like fight the power & shit but like um did you know drug addicts exist"
It's clear that a post like this is made by someone who has spent more time thinking of reactionary excuses to shit on homeless people than about actual class politics. The idea that there is some objective moral line between different kinds of homeless people depending on whether they're addicted to drugs or not is a poor understanding of the circumstances of extreme poverty. Even engaging with posts like this is nauseating because, from experience, I know that a typical response to my criticism will be to "inform" me that "um acshully they're not all from the ghetto, and they're bad, and you're a DAM BLEEDING HEART LIBERAL" or whatever, and there's always a complete obliviousness displayed to the point in favor of these stupid cliches where it's assumed that anyone who recognizes poverty as a broad systemic problem must romanticize the poor in some way. In reality, the opposite is true; I recognize the corrupting effects of poverty for what they are, I recognize the miserable existence of addicts (whether or not every single one of them starts as poor as they end, I do not care - the condition of these people and their context in broader society is not dependent on how sympathetic I find them or their backstory personally), and I've worked jobs where people like this were co-workers.

Whether it is unemployment & eviction, mental illness, drug addiction, or some combination of these, all homelessness is ultimately economic. Those least equipped to be sheltered would benefit from the same reforms which would radically lower housing costs and improve employment prospects and infrastructure for the rest of the working class. We exist under the shadow of a hostile force which destroys lives, wealth, and cities, and condemns those who would seek to mitigate the degradation and alienation it creates. That's not as abstract as it sounds, it's something I see in the rot around this place. We should have time to deal with this stuff appropriately, but instead of that we either have time or we have money, and the money goes to the landlord, to the state, to domestic surveillance and Israeli healthcare.
>>

 No.158706

You're not being paid to put yourself on the line to prevent shoplifting, there's a reason they haven't paid for security - it's expensive.

There are countless stories of people getting fired for trying to prevent theft, you're damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Talk to everyone that comes into your store, get to know them, be friendly, that's all you can really do is let them know they have your attention.
>>

 No.158709

File: 1754279636870.png ( 219.03 KB , 405x421 , 098097969578 (146).png )

>>158705
Jesus christ, what the fuck? Are you then advocating for just letting all these "good" homeless junkies take what they want (which makes everything more expensive for those of us living within the rules of society) as "reparations" or something?
I don't know why you're so offended by my post. I'd certainly consider myself a liberal, but that doesn't mean I'm going to stand by and assume it's the "Evil System" that put these people where they are. I used to be tangentially connected to that world. I smoked heroin and ran around with these scummy people and watched them shoplift and scam whoever they could for enough cash to get their next fix. Luckily I'm not retarded, so when it looked like I was going to have to graduate to the needle and start living like these people, I checked into rehab and got my shit together. As SOON as it became "get act together" or "live on the streets with your addiction", the choice was clear.

I wish I could better understand where you're coming from and what you think the solution would be. I don't advocate rounding up the homeless and moving them past the city limits exactly, but I also don't like them camped out around downtown businesses panhandling and smoking and letting their dogs shit and bark at people trying to engage in commerce.

I know we need to just fix everything so this doesn't happen, but what's the solution? The 1% just keep taking and taking and leaving us less. I've seen situations where homes are provided to these people and I've seen them not even be able to keep their FREE fucking room together. They live in filth and cause drunken fires and shit. They end up being too wild for their government-given surroundings.

I'm saying the difference is that I was on that road to ruin and I did the hard thing and lived in a shelter and pissed in a cup and made curfew until I could wrangle a place of my own for a new start. There are resources to help you save money and get back on your feet. I used those resources. And when I've suggested such places to beggars on the street they start in about the rules and how they like their drink and their drugs.

Some of these places are hardcore religious and I don't believe you should have to hear a sermon for your dinner, but still it's better than the streets.

I don't think all these people are bad. I just can't see your justification for them stealing to support their lifestyle. Especially when they COULD do better if they wanted. They could start over like I did.
Mental illness is another story. I take it on a case-by-case basis. I've got no love for a meth head stealing in front of me. I'm not going to look the other way like I guess you are.
>>

 No.158711

>>158709
>I'd certainly consider myself a liberal,
Ok, that explains it somehow.
>>

 No.158712

>>158711
Explains what? That you don't have any response because you don't know anything about who you're responding to?
You don't have any issue with my opinions after all. That's what I thought.
>>

 No.158743

>>158712
"Liberal" is a slur around these parts here

That anon doesn't like you because you don't automatically sympathise with junkies to the point of becoming a door mat.
Alot of LeftyPol users are pro -NEETs and glorify the lumpenproletariat
>>

 No.158744

>>158743
>"Liberal" is a slur around these parts here
Yes, and he helpfully self-identified.

>That anon doesn't like you because you don't automatically sympathise with junkies to the point of becoming a door mat.

No.

I went into my position here: >>158705
I am clear and unambiguous. My position has fuck all to do with how "sympathetic" I personally find junkies. It also has nothing to do with whether any given individuals are "good homeless" or "bad homeless," that entire framing is retarded. It's a systemic problem, and the things which would benefit the homeless broadly will benefit all of them and will benefit me. That's not conditional on what interpersonal beef I do or don't have with some individual guy, that shit is irrelevant.

>Alot of LeftyPol users are pro -NEETs and glorify the lumpenproletariat

I'm not glorifying anything. I am a lumpenprole. Nothing I say has anything to do with "glorification," and I've explained this to you, specifically, before in other threads where you've made the same misrepresentation of others' positions. I'm not sure if you're really this dense or if you're just trolling or something worse. I don't romanticize or glorify anyone, get it through yr skull that the existence of the lowest rungs of the working class is not conditional on your approval, we are literally just people who have had shit opportunities for 'mainstream' work, an extraordinarily common thing since the capitalist economy keeps shitting the bed. There are millions of us, and the only people who don't interact with us regularly are the richest capitalists, we're not some alien thing which anybody in this milieu is "glorifying."

Unique IPs: 6

[Return][Catalog][Top][Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / music / 777 / posad / i / a / lgbt / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]
ReturnCatalogTopBottomHome