Comment on San Francisco bill would let people sue grocery stores for closing too quickly
uzi@lemmy.ca 7 months ago
People have no idea of the expenses that must be paid for running a business, even before paying employees. Even the business is losing money and must close, the city could pay the expenses and salaries for 6 months to keep the stores open.
Anticorp@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Major grocery stores in California aren’t losing money, they’re pulling record profits. I imagine that some of the smaller corner markets could be hurting, but the major stores are an outright cartel that are swimming in money.
wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee 6 months ago
I am against the mergers that keep happening in the industry. I would like to see more mergers across the board blocked. Sprint/T-mobile should have never happened. The new Albertsons merger should not happen. There is a point where the company is just to large for a startup to compete.
Anticorp@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Not only that, but now that they have all of the market there’s no room for the profit growth that their board mandate requires. That means things will continually get progressively worse for the consumers so they can eek out their growth target profits. Raised prices, worse products, shitty subscriptions, stuff like that. For grocery stores it’s the elimination of baggers, then checkers, then charging customers for bags, then raising prices, and all the other shit we’ve endured over the years. It will never get better while the industries are dominated by oligopolies, the system forces things to only get worse.
wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee 6 months ago
Board mandates rarely require profit growth. Hell profit is secondary to many companies. Growth is what is normally sought after. I’ve worked for many companies that rarely if ever produced a profit.