Only as recently as 2019, there were more than 200 booming retail stores in San Francisco’s Union Square area. Fast-forward to today and as many as half of these retailers have packed up shop and left the city with many more planning to wrap up their business in San Francisco within a few months to a year.

This sudden and abrupt shift from the booming business district to a ghost town has understandably left many of the denizens of the city shocked and uncomprehending of what could’ve happened to spark such a change.

And, as is only to be expected when things take a turn in such a manner, there has been plenty of finger-pointing and hasty analysis of what could have possibly led to the current state of things.

At the moment, the city is a few steps shy of a full-on uproar as many are coming to claim that the mass exodus of retailers in the city is all thanks to the increasingly liberal-leaning stance of San Francisco, largely fostered by the incumbent district attorney of the city, #Brooke Jenkins.

A few of the most notable retail stores that have hightailed it out of town and have mentioned the increasing safety issues in San Francisco as a core concern include CVS, Whole Foods, Walgreens, Starbucks, Nordstrom, and Walmart, to mention a few.

At this point, there really is no contesting the fact that San Francisco’s downtown business district, once one of the country’s busiest business hotspots, is slowly dying. Now, the big question is, are these retailers actually leaving because of the so-called liberal-leaning policies of the city?

In my opinion, that would be a big “No”.

The reason for this answer is that I believe that, for whatever reason, most people are choosing to ignore a far more plausible possibility – the fact that the business district took a bigger hit from the coronavirus pandemic than anyone could have possibly suspected earlier.

Before you say it, yes, everyone knows. Only a precious few locations and industries in the country were spared the terrifying ravages of the pandemic. But, even with that, there is clear evidence that most of these other regions are on their way to recovery if they haven’t recovered fully already.

So, if indeed all that is happening is due to the pandemic, shouldn’t things be looking up to an extent at this point?

Maybe so.

However, the truth remains that the pandemic hit different places differently. So, it shouldn’t really come as much of a surprise that some places may be more likely to bounce back that much faster than others.

For those who might still be in doubt about how the pandemic might have in any way caused the current situation we have on our hands, here are a few things that you might want to give careful consideration to.

To start with, thanks to the pandemic, online shopping has become the primary means of getting products for most people. Now, there can be no gainsaying the fact that, one way or another, online shopping was going to eventually displace conventional brick-and-mortar stores. Everything from its business model to its method of operation showed anyone who cared to see that it was the future.

However, the bitter truth is that the advent of the pandemic accelerated the timeline of its takeover considerably. As the pandemic forced people to leverage this resource more and more, something that was already convenient to start with became the only available channel and most consumers went on to become almost exclusively dependent on it.

This is why it shouldn’t have been as much of a surprise that, once the worst had passed and stores were allowed to open again, the crowds didn’t flock to them like they normally would. In that regard, the damage has been done and there’s no way of making people effectively forget the numerous benefits of online shopping.

In addition to the above, the pandemic also saw to it that the conventional workplace paradigm was redefined extensively as working remotely became the new norm. Again, to be clear, remote work wasn’t by any means a new concept before this time.

However, before the coronavirus struck, less than 9 million people were working from home in America, according to a study. Today, that same study shows that that value has tripled. This is why, even the retail stores in the city centers see far less traffic now than they normally would’ve in the past.

Evidence that the lack of physical presence of commuters has a direct bearing on the economics of the city rests in the fact that another study has shown that, unlike before, the average office worker spends as much as $4, 600 less annually in city centers today.

Again, in light of this, it’s not too hard to see why retailers in San Francisco might want to try their luck elsewhere.

Finally, there’s also the fact that, as humans, when we’re going through challenging times, we have the habit of personalizing it and making it seem like we’re the only ones dealing with stuff when in reality, that’s far from the case.

The same thing is quite applicable here as well.

As hard as it might be for some people to believe, San Francisco isn’t the only city losing retailers at this rate and in this manner. Other regions that are going through the same thing to a greater or lesser extent according to a JP Morgan Chase Institute study include Miami, New York City, Seattle, Chicago, and Los Angeles.

The fact that this same thing is happening in other cities is proof enough in itself that the policies of San Francisco, liberal-leaning or not, aren’t responsible for the closure of so many retail stores in the city.

Does something need to be done about the situation?

There’s zero doubt about that.

But for a workable solution to be found and employed, we have to start by understanding what the problem is instead of rushing to conclusions based on unsubstantiated news.

Whether the city needs to work on its policies is a topic that’s certainly open to debate. However, it definitely isn’t why we’re where we are today.