and if people bring it over make them take it back
Forgot to mention it in my post, but absolutely this too. People loooove pawning off junk food to friends. It’s an easy gift.
and if people bring it over make them take it back
Forgot to mention it in my post, but absolutely this too. People loooove pawning off junk food to friends. It’s an easy gift.
Stop buying it. That’s how we slowed down / stopped.
I did, yes. The second link has the relevant quote from the CFO - “We’re probably – you know, maybe we cried too much last year when we were hitting numbers that were 3.5% of sales”.
Though looking at the context, it looks like he regrets the actions (specifically increased security hired) that came from that. There doesn’t seem to be anything about the link to store closures.
The actual link came from an article Shepard Pie below you provided here (Is Shoplifting Really Surging?). Apparently nationwide, shoplifting is down - except in certain cities
But the increase in shoplifting appears to be limited to a few cities, rather than being truly national. […] There are some exceptions, particularly New York City, where shoplifting has spiked.
Out of the 24 cities, 17 reported decreases in shoplifting.
I’m guessing the 7 remaining cities are where the stores were closed.
This is just like Walgreens and RiteAid claiming they have to close stores due to theft, only to later admit that was a complete fabrication.
Thought this was interesting, so I tried looking for more information. Didn’t find anything other than people speculating. If you have a link or search terms I could use to find of an article of these or similar companies saying the closings were actually because of something else, I’d appreciate it.
People like this and the ones who responded to you aren’t thinking. They see the words Ticketmaster or Corporation and immediately lose any sense of higher-level reasoning - they just start metaphorically foaming at the mouth. Other trigger words: libs/trump/edison/GMO/coal/big tech/ you get the picture
On topic to the OP -
Definitely not shitty-bad, but it seemed like a Seinfeld moment. Looks like he’s still a small artist so I won’t name him here - but a guy I sat next to on a plane turned out to have drawn/designed the shirt I wore that day. We were having a nice chat when the discussion turned to the CCP and his admiration for their authoritative actions.
I definitely Noped out mentally from the conversation, but we still kept talking for a while because… well we were on a plane. Was still a nice guy (to me) - just …interesting… views.
Can’t say anything about buying new clothes, but as the budget’s tightened in my household I’ve been leaning how to mend my clothes. The ones I normally would’ve thrown away due to armpit/toe/crotch holes can be fixed somewhat easily.
One catch is that I use a sewing machine my MIL gave me - so there was some cost somewhere. But I see machines on craigslist going for sub 60 fairly often. The second catch is that I was lucky enough to develop an interest (and spend my free time) learning about how to mend clothes. If people lack free time/interest to learn how to do it, then they end up paying the new-clothes tax.
Got it. People on this site are stupid idealistic as hell, so it’s probably good that I spelled out why these things are expensive. I wouldn’t be surprised if some folks thought animal cruelty exists in these industries because people are mean.
You’re basically telling me that in order to have cruelty-free wool, I have to be wealthy.
Congrats. You found out why there’s animal cruelty in the first place. People need cheaper things -> other things need to be sacrificed to make that happen.
Processed food cereal’s too expensive
Ok. What about the president using the bully pulpit to call out price gouging after inflation has cooled down. Like last month. Or trying to tackle junk fees?
…wow. From what I know - the defense generative models have against copyright is that they don’t copy their training data directly. If the models have that data in some form that can be repeated back, they can/should get reamed by lawsuits.
That’s what gets me about the “do your own research” parrots. Ok - let me just google it and blindly trust the top SEOd results. That’s what most people’s research is going to be
It’s good advice if the audience knew how to critically evaluate articles, but people don’t even read the articles.
I wonder if the farms normally have insurance for this kinda thing. “Infected flocks are normally destroyed to prevent the flu’s spread, and then the farms are decontaminated.” sounds damn expensive and ruinous to a plant.
No way… people who are experts in the food/health industry are involved with giving dietary advice? The horror.
Of course there isn’t a link to the reports, so I have to go looking for it. Anyway here’s the report. PDF - page 8 for the results. I spot-checked a few of them - the conflicts of interest I saw was in the form of companies sponsoring research done. …which is pretty much how the majority of research gets done I believe…
Also I see coca-cola referenced ONCE as a “possible” COI
Position in industry-sponsored conferences: Dr. Booth was selected to speak at a conference sponsored by Bayer, Coca-Cola, and Abbott, among other industry actors
yet this article seems to deem it alright to put it as the posterboy image and list it prominently among other unpopular company names. Also they have to link to their boogeyman reporting about aspartame. You can see where HN tore it apart here.
This is why I hate news nowadays. I could’ve made some good food in the past 20 minutes on a nice Saturday, but instead I wasted time finding out a guardian article was bullshit.
Clickbait. Actual reason they were sued -
A few weeks ago, ZUMA Press filed a complaint at a federal court in California, accusing Plex of using a photo of actress Cuca Escribano on its website, without permission. The photo was shot by Jose Perez Gegundez who typically licenses it to third parties for a fee.
Not the reason people would think of with this type of title.
Any shithead not paying their taxes is a problem
-someone who actually pays taxes