Manipulated?storewanderer wrote: ↑August 13th, 2022, 1:43 pmThe issue is more the impact it has on the people who live in a given place. Even if some manipulated statistic (in this case, using per capita) makes you feel like somehow this is a bigger problem in those little small states back east or the big not dense states elsewhere, the impact this has on the overall environment is different in those places than it is in San Francisco (or Portland...). The problem in places like San Francisco is that this problem is so pervasive that it IS impacting just about everyone who lives in these cities because the side effects caused by this problem, is causing large sections of the city to turn into an unlivable situation. This is a retail thread. Stores are closing in San Francisco because of this problem. I don't see chain retailers closing this number of stores in MT, VT, CT, WV, MI, NH, or any other state on that list because of the circumstances stores are being closed in San Francisco for... people are leaving the big cities. We can place the blame on whatever we want but people are leaving these big cities, retailers are leaving, tourists are not coming back as often, and the convention business has dried up. It is fine if you don't want to blame the leadership of these cities (in this case, elected officials, primarily affiliated with a specific political party) for what is happening, maybe they just got dealt a bad deck of cards, you know, like a good store manager who gets moved to a store with a terrible crew, I guess. But that good store manager should be able to at least stem the declines to a degree even with a terrible crew, over time; through attrition and trying to mend the situation to improve the existing crew. But these big cities are just getting worse and worse... and EVERY store closure just pushes the decline further.
Hardly. I found similar statistics from several sources.
Google can be your friend.