• BigWheelPowerBrakeSlider@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    57
    ·
    1 year ago

    They are talking about organized retail theft. Individuals stealing still could make up a large amount of loss. Article doesn’t seem clear to me on that point.

      • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Having insurance isn’t a free money glitch. Insurance companies wouldn’t be able to operate if the insurance didn’t cost more than the claim payouts.

      • PrettyLights@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        26
        ·
        1 year ago

        And the more they use the coverage, the more it costs.

        Have you ever filed claims against your home or auto insurance? Even when it was fully in policy and not your fault, your rates likely spiked.

    • TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      That type of knee jerk conjecture is really weak. The data collected on shrinkage, as noted in the linked Reuter’s article, is noisy. You can’t differentiate lose due to theft or shipping mistakes or cliericsl error.

      More importantly, and not mentioned directly in the boingboing article, was the cited number of rising organized theft was based upon an analyst from a security firm. The report was created in partnership with that firm. With the recent redaction, there is no mention of that firm.