Related to Boston bombing, an article

[AZRedhawk44]

Statist

 

[makattak]

lulz, no.

Just pointing out that free market collusion between competitors can result in effective coercion of the populace.

It won't just be Safeway giving your teen daughter the pat-down while Albertsons is live-and-let-live.  They'll both enact the same policy at the same time.  And they'll do their damnedest to try and scapegoat the action on some feel-good legislation passed by Congress to mandate pat-downs in "commerce facilities capable of holding more than 100 people as inspected by the local fire marshall" or some fluff like that, which they lobbied for in the first place.

And then I do all my grocery shopping online. Until one dying store gets the bright idea to stop frisking their customers.

[Gewehr98]

Used to have Safeway deliver groceries for a while. 

That's kinda neat!

[Jamisjockey]

Used to have Safeway deliver groceries for a while. 

That's kinda neat!

Giant in Virginia does that. 

[Balog]

Amazon Fresh does here in the Seattle-ish area, and they do a darn good job of it too. I've gotta think their business would expand enormously if the grocery marts did TSA style groping.

But you've gotta understand, all grocery stores operate on razor, razor thin margins. There's no way they'd all play nice and agree to it, they're just not able to offer an effective enough monopoly.

[AZRedhawk44]

Groceries, clothing, auto dealerships, whatever.  Doesn't matter the market.

[Balog]

Groceries, clothing, auto dealerships, whatever.  Doesn't matter the market.

I suppose it isn't technically impossible, but it'd be incredibly difficult to muster anything like a true monopoly these days. Aside from utilities etc, and that's more a practical matter of infrastructure. But they'd also need to somehow outlaw internet commerce, which isn't terribly practical and would certainly piss off many millions of folks.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

Groceries, clothing, auto dealerships, whatever.  Doesn't matter the market.

Your experience with real business differs with mine

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk 2

[vaskidmark]

I just have to hug myself reading you go at 4A "infringement" by private property owners without getting all twisted up about those same private property owners "infringing" all over 2A.

That's not to say that I am all for private property owners groping me whenever they feel like it.  Someone tries to engage in inappropriate behavior with me - especially at that intimate a level - will be finding out that there are ways to put a stop to the rudeness without yelling "Constituutional Rights!!11ELEVENTY11!!"  If a magistrate will not issue a warrant for assault/assault&battery there is always small clasims court for damages for having suffered the tort of assault.

It's going to be a hard row to hoe when 97% of the population either eagerly participates or grudgingly allows it.  More than likely what it will take is an "event" that boldly demonstrates that security theater was not sufficient to save us - and then 99% of the 97% are going to start demaning answers about what wewnt wrong.  It will not be pretty and that crowd will not be patient.

stay safe.

[Perd Hapley]

Groceries, clothing, auto dealerships, whatever.  Doesn't matter the market.

It does matter. People can go for a long time without new clothes or cars. Clothes can be had from thrift stores and yard sales. People can keep driving their old cars, or shop the classified section, Craigslist, whatever.

Groceries are different, but in urban areas you'll have small, independent grocery stores, kosher delis, Mexican groceries, farmers' markets, bakeries, convenience stores, restaurants. Rural folks would be able to grow their own, hunt, etc.

[BlueStarLizzard]

This thread is making my eyes roll.

Seriously, private property is private property is private property.

Are we so much more special then the people who own and operate these stores, so we can tell someone if you have such and such you can't come on my property, but they can't?

AZ, don't be a bloody hypocryte. It's just sad.

Darn. My eyes rolled so much, I have a bit of a headache...

[AZRedhawk44]

This thread is making my eyes roll.

Seriously, private property is private property is private property.

Are we so much more special then the people who own and operate these stores, so we can tell someone if you have such and such you can't come on my property, but they can't?

AZ, don't be a bloody hypocryte. It's just sad.

Darn. My eyes rolled so much, I have a bit of a headache...

"Private property" becomes really damned fuzzy when you're dealing with corporations that trade ownership on the stock market and everyone owns a piece of that particular company... and therefore its "private" property.

"Private property" also means a hell of a lot less when it isn't accompanied by a "no trespassing" sign.

When your goal is to advertise and entice people to visit your particular venue, the notion of visitorial discretion and illicit materials on private property really goes out the window.  It's the whole "private" thing.  You want it private, then keep it membership-based like Costco.  If you're "open to the public" then it's just stupid.

[Fitz]

"Private property" becomes really damned fuzzy when you're dealing with corporations that trade ownership on the stock market and everyone owns a piece of that particular company... and therefore its "private" property.

"Private property" also means a hell of a lot less when it isn't accompanied by a "no trespassing" sign.

When your goal is to advertise and entice people to visit your particular venue, the notion of visitorial discretion and illicit materials on private property really goes out the window.  It's the whole "private" thing.  You want it private, then keep it membership-based like Costco.  If you're "open to the public" then it's just stupid.

So, government intervention is needed to fight this stupidity?

[AZRedhawk44]

So, government intervention is needed to fight this stupidity?

Government isn't needed at all, IMO.

But since we have government and these jackals like to use government as a scapegoat for the policies they lobby for, then we need government laws that prohibit their collusion to strip us of dignity vis-a-vis searches when entering malls or stores, or similar behavior.


ETA:  Do you REALLY think that Delta/Southwest/American/et cetera really gave a frak whether or not security was enhanced at airports?  They're just glad it's uniform and no one has a choice in the matter.  If consumers had a choice, the most secure places places with the most security theater that violates peoples' sensibilities would go out of business.

ETA2:  This is the root of fascism.  Corporations dictating societal behavior by proxy of government force.  The air industry is essentially a fascist industry.  Same with professional sports.  Shall we go for shopping malls next?

[Fitz]

So the solution to fascism is more government?

But government isn't needed

But we need government to step in  

You're all over the place on this one

[AZRedhawk44]

So the solution to fascism is more government?

But government isn't needed

But we need government to step in  

You're all over the place on this one

SUPPOSEDLY  , law acts as a restraint on power.  I had to choke down a little bit of vomit as I typed that, but that's the premise behind our Constitution and most of our laws that are supposed to be worth a damn.

That entire legal codex is obviously either impotent, or even worse: an enabler of authoritarian coercion.  The results speak for themselves.

The only two choices here, right now, are to throw out the whole damned thing (my preferred choice), or to write yet another law to protect individuals from corporate fascism and collusion.  BEFORE these industries conspire and collude and lobby for things in their favor rather than ours.

[Fitz]

Throw it all out. Beats your oppressive statist solution ;-)

[lupinus]

So then AZ where does the government stop telling businesses located on private property what they can and can't do?  If they can set their security practices, to what extent can they set or constrain them? What other areas can they do so?

And so what if a bunch of stores get together to implement such measures at once, what's to stop you from exercising your own free market solution? Open AZ's Gropeless Groceries. If enough people don't want a free groping you'll make a killing.

[Perd Hapley]

ETA:  Do you REALLY think that Delta/Southwest/American/et cetera really gave a frak whether or not security was enhanced at airports?  They're just glad it's uniform and no one has a choice in the matter.  

Actually, the airlines like TSA because it's easier for them to let the feds handle security. I don't know exactly how it's all paid for, but it saves the airlines a load of cash.

[Tallpine]

"AZ Gropeless"

That actually has a somewhat familiar ring to it, if you are an old time Arizona resident 

 

[lupinus]

"AZ Gropeless"

That actually has a somewhat familiar ring to it, if you are an old time Arizona resident 

 

I thought it had a nice ring to it

[Perd Hapley]

I'd buy my furniture at Ungroped Arizona.

[Tallpine]

I thought it had a nice ring to it

There is or used to be an "AJ Bayless" grocery chain in Arizona. 

At one time it was the closest to where we lived - only two or three miles away.  That was back when much of the valley was still onion, lettuce, etc fields.

[AZRedhawk44]

There is or used to be an "AJ Bayless" grocery chain in Arizona.  

At one time it was the closest to where we lived - only two or three miles away.  That was back when much of the valley was still onion, lettuce, etc fields.

Probably part of the Basha's chain now, morphed into "AJ's Fine Foods."

Basha's operates 3 tiers of grocery stores out of AZ:  AJ's, Basha's and Food City.  AJ's is their hoity-toity top tier stuff, Basha's is comparable to Safeway or Albertsons, and Food City is kind of like if a "dollar store" was a grocery store.


Ha!  Google and Wiki strike again.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AJ%27s_Fine_Foods

[AZRedhawk44]

So then AZ where does the government stop telling businesses located on private property what they can and can't do?  If they can set their security practices, to what extent can they set or constrain them? What other areas can they do so?

And so what if a bunch of stores get together to implement such measures at once, what's to stop you from exercising your own free market solution? Open AZ's Gropeless Groceries. If enough people don't want a free groping you'll make a killing.

My core biyatch here, guys, is that the government CAN already tell businesses what security they can/can't have.

It's called the airport.


It seems that government sets security standards for what security MUST be present, and never seems to give a frak about the freedom of the rest of us to be left alone from the groping.  Moar s'kuritee is always the rally cry.

There's currently no consumer protection against over-zealous security.