Want to see America's future? Look at our retail chains.
Costco and Sam's Club are members-only. They have a loyal customer base—but they also keep people out.
CVS and Walgreens are open to everyone. They rely on high social trust.
Guess which model is winning? (1/15)
Costco and Sam's Club are raking in record profits. CVS and Walgreens are closing hundreds of stores across the country.
Why? Well, for one, they have different business models. The former seeks to exclude bad customers; the latter seeks as many customers as possible. (2/15)
This isn't just a surface-level difference. It’s an entirely different kind of business: Non-membership-based retailers rely primarily on sales for profit.
But Costco’s source of profit isn’t sales; it's membership prices. (See thread below). (3/15)
Costco, Sam's Club and other "club stores" are killing it right now.
Sam’s Club—which hasn’t opened a new store in 10 years—plans to open 30 new locations over the next 5 years. They've had record membership numbers and 11 straight quarters of double-digit sales growth. (4/15)
Costco's revenue has doubled since 2016. Historically, it opened about 15 new stores a year. But last year, it opened 25—and forecasts another 25-30 per year over the next decade.
Both companies have seen double-digit increases in foot traffic from before the pandemic. (5/15)
CVS, Walgreen's and other non-"club" stores aren't faring as well. In 2019, Walgreens closed 200 stores. Last year, it closed an additional 150 stores. This June, it announced another round of "significant" closures.
Last year, Rite Aid filed for bankruptcy. (6/15)
CVS closed 244 stores from 2018-2020. In 2021, it closed another 900.
One reason is that "retailers have been hit by shoplifting and resorted to locking up items or closing high-theft stores since the pandemic," CNN reported in June.
The situation on the ground is bleak: (7/15)
In 2022, Walgreens said their rate of “shrink”—i.e., lost inventory, largely due to theft—had increased by 52% since the beginning of the pandemic, amounting to tens of millions of dollars in lost earnings.
This has fundamentally transformed the way they do business. (8/15)
CVS, too, loses egregious amounts of their earnings every year to shrink.
But at club stores, the issue doesn't exist. Costco's shrink is below 0.2%—roughly 1/10th of the industry average.
The disparity isn't just in profits; it's in the average shopper's experience. (9/15)
So what's the point here?
"Exclusion" has become a dirty word in modern politics. But in reality, exclusion is the basis of civilization. All functional institutions have an element of exclusiveness. Nations themselves are exclusive: They have citizens, borders, etc. (10/15)
America was a high-trust society because we were exclusive. Our colleges excluded poor students. Our neighborhoods excluded bad residents. Our borders excluded. Our legal system excluded. We had a shared way of life because we excluded those who were unfit to participate. (11/15)
Today, that high-trust society is collapsing because we're too inclusive—or at least, too inclusive of bad things. (At the same time, our institutions have become increasingly exclusive towards good things).
The result is a large-scale version of what's happening to CVS. (12/15)
If trends continue, the CVS/Walgreens of the country will continue to get worse. They don't have a mechanism to self-correct.
But decent, law-abiding Americans will begin to gravitate towards new communities, institutions, and initiatives that are willing to exclude. (13/15)
Costco and Sam's Club aren't exactly wealthy country clubs. If anything, their names are associated with the working and middle classes.
But their loyal customers are from the parts of Middle America that are still capable of abiding by basic civilizational norms. (14/15)
There are millions of these Americans out there. And they need somewhere to go. They don't want to shop somewhere where everything's locked and everyone looks like they might steal your wallet.
They want the life we used to have. And who can blame them? We do too. (15/15)
🚨 We're a new account on here. We'll be doing a lot more in-depth threads and videos over the next few months.
Our philosophy is simple: America first. America forever. 🇺🇸
If you like our work, you can support us by following us here: @America_2100
Last night, we heard a lot about the Biden-Harris record on infrastructure.
They're right about one thing: They threw tons of cash at the issue—more than $1.6 trillion since 2021.
The problem is, we have no idea where most of that money went.
The details are shocking. (1/15)
Biden's big infrastructure "wins" involve four bills: The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the Inflation Reduction Act, the American Rescue Plan, and the CHIPS Act.
The first two alone had a price tag of almost $1 trillion. But only $1.25 billion has actually been spent. (2/15)
We see the same issue with the CHIPS Act—one of Biden's signature infrastructure bills. The law was pitched as a way to bring semiconductor manufacturing back to America.
The bill appropriated $52 billion. Two years later, less than $1 billion has been formally awarded. (3/15)
People are challenging @RepThomasMassie on this by pointing out that we don't even know if there are any dual citizens in Congress.
Well, that's the problem—we don't know. Members of Congress aren't required to disclose it.
But there are almost certainly more than a few. (1/6)
The foreign-born share of lawmakers in Congress is growing. It's still small—just 18 lawmakers, or 3%—but dozens of members have at least one parent who was born in another country.
Together, there are 81 immigrants and children of immigrants in Congress—15% of the body. (2/6)
Immigrants and children of immigrants represent 25 states in Congress. "Three-in-ten members in this group claim heritage in Central American countries. About a quarter or fewer have roots in Europe (26%), Asia (17%) and the Caribbean (16%)," according to Pew. (3/6)
The Left believes that the West has to be punished for its historic sins. That's the animating principle behind their policy agenda.
Don't believe us? We'll show you. 🧵 (1/15)
In 1927, the economist Ludwig Von Mises coined the term the "Fourier complex": A "pathological mental attitude" in which "one so hates somebody for his more favorable circumstances that one is prepared to bear heavy losses if only the hated one might also come to harm." (2/15)
This is the impulse lurking beneath the surface of the entire left-wing program today. All the nice-sounding buzzwords—"justice," "human rights," "equality," etc—are just rhetorical window dressing.
The Left's fundamental conviction is that the West deserves to suffer. (3/15)
The Inflation Reduction Act spent $2.2 billion on reparation-style payments for minority farmers.
The payments went out last week.
Biden promised to "embed equity" at every level of government. Now, he's following through.
Do you know where your tax money is going? (1/9)
The Biden-Harris administration originally wanted to simply funnel $4 billion directly to black and minority farmers — explicitly discriminating against whites.
But that effort stalled out in the face of lawsuits from white farmers.
So they had to get creative. (2/9)
Instead of explicitly awarding tax dollars on the basis of race, Democrats tucked a "Discrimination Financial Assistance Program" into the Inflation Reduction Act.
Under the new rule, farmers could receive cash if they "experienced discrimination" prior to 2021. (3/9)
In his first public appearance in weeks, Joe Biden called for radical reforms to the Supreme Court—including term limits for judges.
This is why the Left wins. They're relentless. They never stop pressing their advantage.
Their war against the Court is a perfect example. (1/9)
The Left's arguments on this issue are always just a means to an end. There is no actual argument for packing the Supreme Court, for example. The Left barely even tries to pretend otherwise.
They want to "reform" the Court because they don't control it. That's it. (2/9)
The fact that they’re renewing calls to "expand the Court" now gives the game away. Why are they calling for it now? Not because of some well-reasoned, altruistic philosophical argument, but because the Court delivered a ruling that conflicts with their partisan interests. (3/9)