Leaderboard

You probably pay for insurance on your credit card debt and buy extended warranties on small appliances. Risk : reward. If you insure against all risk you will lose. Only lawyers, banks, and insurance companies will make money.

When will you accept that businesses do not insure themselves against theft under $900?

Consider that Sumanjit Sahota is the reason the business is failing. She has the right to refuse them service.

We were not discussing catastrophic loss like a fire. You are all upset about theft under $900. Other states don't have the same populace and money as California. It is literally the best state by profit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_GDP

There is always a deductible. General rule is never insure against a loss you can pay for yourself. You understand insurance companies make money right? They take in more money than they pay out.

No business buys insurance for petty theft. You would just be giving the insurance company all the money. You expect a convenience store to claim a loss of a chocolate bar or a case of beer? Most storefront business don't even sell expensive items. If they do, they keep them in display cases or in the back.

First off businesses do nothing, employees do. They have plenty of ways of defending against theft. Shoplifting detection devices, putting high theft items behind the counter, trained security. Remember armed robbery is still a felony. We are talking about low-value shoplifting here.

No, it's not. Telling your employees to act like cops, with no training, for minimum wage is.

I've never seen a business defend itself. You are talking about people. They can hire security.

Put on your pretend economist hat for a moment. How much money would it cost to catch, prosecute, and punish these minor crime offenders? Does making a person a felon increase or decrease their future employability? Does prison time rehabilitate or harden criminals? Your policies would be penny wise pound foolish.

I didn't say that. You are suggesting poorly paid employees should protect other peoples property.

Vigilantism and regular employees acting as security has been discouraged for a very long time. People shouldn't risk their lives over a small amount of someone else's money. "A vigilante (borrowed from Spanish "vigilante", which means "sentinel" or "watcher", from Latin vigilāns) is a person who practices or partakes in vigilantism, or undertakes public safety and retributive justice without commission."

In reality, many people think that data is of importance. In fact reporting of said emission data is required by law in many places. Have you ever heard of the term "egocentric thought?" You continuously believe that many other people share your views when in reality nobody of importance does. It is trivially easy to disprove your misguided views. You studied law. correct? https://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting/learn-about-greenhouse-gas-reporting-program-ghgrp "Who is Required to Report? A total of 41 categories of reporters are covered by the GHGRP. Facilities and suppliers determine whether they are required to report based on the types of industrial operations, their emission levels, or other factors. Facilities and suppliers are generally required to submit annual reports under Part 98 if: GHG emissions from covered sources exceed 25,000 metric tons CO2e per year. Supply of certain products would result in over 25,000 metric tons CO2e of GHG emissions if those products were released, combusted, or oxidized. The facility receives 25,000 metric tons or more of CO2 for underground injection."

Gasoline and other oil bi-product inventories went way up recently; so much of the uptick in crude demand was from refineries not end users. FYI "exceeding expectations" doesn't always mean you are doing well. It can mean "not as crappy as expected."

They haven't passed all the regulations yet. If you looked with an open mind you would see that historically California leads the way, and they do not ask for you to go green -they demand it- and legislate pollution sources out of existence. As noted above, they have done it many times before. Try buying CFC hairspray, DDT, a 2-stoke lawnmower, a ICE vehicle lacking a catalytic converter, etc. The list of successful regulations is very long and California generally leads the way (in the US). If the carrot (environmental subsidies, compliance promotion, education) doesn't make them move like we want, use the stick (enforcement).

Yeah, mostly poor, unethical, and highly polluted nations. Perhaps set your standards higher than China, India or developing nations? Or should we mimic the poor because it is most cost effective? If you wish to live in filth you could always move. Clearly -with your vast knowledge of economics- you are profoundly wealthy, you could essentially buy some peasants!

You love government fossil fuel subsidies. Yet say things like this: "That is how the economy works, friend, if an industry fails in one location putting hard-earned tax dollars into subsidizing it in the wrong location is a waste of money." Let the industry fail yet again...

Come on people, give the blind guy some razing for his complete stupidity!

Too funny! "Fossil-fuel subsidies surged to a record $7 trillion last year as governments supported consumers and businesses during the global spike in energy prices caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the economic recovery from the pandemic."

You don't understand your own posts!

Vigilantism has long been frowned upon. Report the crime.

Violent B&E wasn't on that list of changes. So no.

I've done a good portion of this list! haha. I got one ticket for public intoxication. Depending on the jurisdiction, examples of misdemeanors may include: petty theft, prostitution, public intoxication, simple assault, disorderly conduct, trespass, shoplifting, vandalism, reckless driving, indecent exposure, and possession of cannabis for personal use.

Processor chips are made by machines with precision, not by hands. But the business owner might have started the business with his own hands beginning with drawing or programming what was needed, refining it with help etc. The key that you might have missed while trying to crack a joke is " to solve problems with functional efficiency"... The illustration, roughly: a) / \. b) \ / / \. \ / / \. \ / a) View of Experts/ professional gets narrower when they dwell into detail. Eventually, they would be trappped at the tip of a horn... b) view of generalists or bare hand pioneers gets more wholistic, the more they know...