Upon leaving Wollaston’s one afternoon with a $4.79 box of Ritz crackers (normally $3.29 at Stop ‘ Shop, $2.50 at Shaw’s with a Shaw’s card, and cheaper when bought in bulk at Costco), a posted sign on the window caught my attention. It said, “Shoplifting hurts everybody.”
The sign claims that if people steal, the price of goods in the store will increase. At first the message made me think, “Wow, there must be a lot of Husky thievery for me to pay nearly 30 percent more on average for a box of crackers.” Continuing this, I thought there must be a disproportionate amount of merciless Benadryl, toothpaste and toilet paper heists due to particularly high prices on only the most convenient toiletry items.
Personally, I think the sign only begs the question: Could the shoplifting sign be a smokescreen that passes blame to the wrong people?
We all know that stealing is wrong, bad for business, unfair and unethical. No way do I support or encourage any form of stealing.
Given this, I ask Wollaston’s, and other campus-area stores, why they appear to base their operation and price index on the premise that college students, namely freshmen, have not yet become accustomed to reasonably priced grocery items before their jump into the college lifestyle. How is it a respectable business practice to exploit those who have the least transportation flexibility to get to a supermarket, and the least money to spend?
Of all the ways to make money in the business world, why does it seem like the administrative staff at campus stores picked “taking advantage of the little guy” as their main career goal and purpose in life?
Perhaps they know how easy it is to swipe a Husky Card. Perhaps they know how some parents blindly “top off” Husky accounts when their kids tell them “Boston prices are much higher than back home.”
I understand that one could demonstrate on a supply and demand curve how campus store prices are justified by “convenience.” If the justification for a notable price hike on some items is “convenience,” I would love to see a “convenience tax” printed on every receipt so students are no longer blind to the gouging.
Also, if the justification for the price gouging is reduced to a simple supply and demand equation, I would love to see Northeastern students organize to show a decrease in demand.
Until that time, I can understand why Wollaston’s has a self-proclaimed shoplifting problem. Instead of attacking shoplifters who are simply disenfranchised with their campus store’s pricing system, why don’t the staffs at the campus stores decrease the incentive to shoplift by fixing their out-of-control gouging? They could also post a new sign with a message that is more truthful: “Shopping here hurts everybody.”
– Rocky Slaughter is a middler political science major.
