Jump to content

Random News Items

Rich

By Rich
in General Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 5.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

blue_gold_84
blue_gold_84

Shell: $9.1B (https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/05/shell-earnings-q1-2022.html) [highest quarterly profit since 2008] It's not inflation. It's not the Russian invasion of Ukraine. It's not the carbon

Wanna-B-Fanboy
Wanna-B-Fanboy

Kind of big news...    

JCon
JCon

Tax the churches. 

Brandon Grand Master

Brandon

Posted
Posted

They talked about that move about 3 weeks ago on the radio.  They have been here for  awhile.  

As for that flight I heard it was only 10 people who fell ill not 100....

JCon Grand Master

JCon

Posted
Posted (edited)
54 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

And there will be people whining about spending $11 million to earn $59 million in tax revenue.

First, let me say that I am in complete agreement with this proposal. When government can invest, without having to expand their footprint, into a stable, well thought out infrastructure project, it should. 

That being said, government's of all levels have put lots of money and faith into these types of projects in the past and never seen the return that was projected. Meanwhile, the tax payers foot the bill and let businesses off without bearing the risk. 

Sometimes it works out. Sometimes you have to wonder if government is eating too much. 

I wonder if Sam would have built the ball park with less from the city? What happens when property taxes start to be collected on that prime land? I love that park and think it's in the perfect place. But I'm also a sports fan. 

I have been in the room when businesses threaten to pick up and move if they don't get the "break" they are looking for. Politicians are squeezed from both sides and you can never be certain if the business is serious or bluffing. 

It's always very tricky and highly politicized. 

Anyhow, this is great deal for both sides, I think. 

Edited by JCon
The Unknown Poster Newbie

The Unknown Poster

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, FrostyWinnipeg said:

https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/shoplifting-siege-at-city-liquor-marts-rages-on-guards-told-not-to-intervene-492996971.html

 

I'd put the blame squarely on MLL for this.  The policy of non-intervention might sound nice when its dealing with occasional issues, but as soon as the policy became known, these punks were simply walking in, loading up on booze while everyone watched, and walked out.

When I worked for Lotteries years ago, doing security at a casino, we were told the same thing.  Under no circumstances were we to get involved in any incidents.  Our job was to observe.  I thought it was ridiculous.  Nothing ever happens at the casino's...but there was one fight while I worked.  From my years of bouncing, instinct takes over, I ran from an adjoining post to break it up.  Brought one person out and handed him to the slack-jawed security, went back and grabbed the other and brought him out to find the first guy had not been secured and they began fighting again, which I also broke up while a bunch of security, including the investigator, watched and were amazed.

I dont blame the guards, many of whom are minimum wage or barely above.  They dont have training.  They might have fancy kevlar vests and radios, but have never dealt with an incident in their lives. 

The companies hiring them to be visible deterrents dont want liability.  But as WPS says in this story, there is a certain onus on the business to do their own security.

Stop hiring crappy minimum wage security companies.  Hire the right people.  Train your people.  Support your people.  

Brandon Grand Master

Brandon

Posted
Posted

They will have to do something different now that it's very public that they won't stop shop lifters.  It will just open the doors for more people. 

In Thompson when I went to the liquor mart they have  2 - 3 guards at the front  door and they prevent certain people from coming in and most definitely stop certain people from leaving the store without paying.  

When I worked in retail for the most places I worked at we could stop people before they leave the front door and once they leave the building we were not suppose to follow.  I wonder why it's not the same for liquor marts?

FrostyWinnipeg Grand Master

FrostyWinnipeg

Posted
Posted
52 minutes ago, Brandon said:

They will have to do something different now that it's very public that they won't stop shop lifters.  It will just open the doors for more people. 

In Thompson when I went to the liquor mart they have  2 - 3 guards at the front  door and they prevent certain people from coming in and most definitely stop certain people from leaving the store without paying.  

When I worked in retail for the most places I worked at we could stop people before they leave the front door and once they leave the building we were not suppose to follow.  I wonder why it's not the same for liquor marts?

Well it's not just LM, i was at a RCSS and a manager was yelling at someone but "Come back here!" apparently does not work.

 

Brandon Grand Master

Brandon

Posted
Posted

Walmart used to only have the old person greeting at the front as studies showed that having someone making eye contact with a potential thief will scare off a large amount of them.    

On Regent it used to be like that until the last year or so where now they have a security guard checking bags and keeping an eye.    I know that I used to see a lot of people who would come in from downtown and would run out with bottles of hairspray, mouthwash , whatever other solvents they could get their hands on with zero regards. 

bustamente Grand Master

bustamente

Posted
Posted

Nothing like advertising that you can walk in and walk out and not even bother paying, same goes for transit, this city is becoming more and more crime infested and the clowns at city hall have no clue.

The Unknown Poster Newbie

The Unknown Poster

Posted
Posted
18 hours ago, bustamente said:

Nothing like advertising that you can walk in and walk out and not even bother paying, same goes for transit, this city is becoming more and more crime infested and the clowns at city hall have no clue.

Its interesting because there seems to be a desire to avoid any sense of liability if a security person gets into a physical altercation (liability over the security OR the perp getting hurt).  Some of the ways to weed out these types of crimes dont seem to worm anymore because of the type of criminal.  Video cameras, for example...these criminals dont care if you tape them.  

They have to go back to old school security.  And Im not advocating violence, but if punks know it will always be a fight to get their bottle of booze, they'll soon look for something else to steal.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

×
×
  • Create New...