Boycott Safeway Supermarket

roybot · November 2, 2011, 7:04pm

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

The bottom line is that supermarkets can afford to lose whatever is eaten on the premises (and just as a customer I’ve lost count of the times I’ve seen empty wrappers, soda cans etc. left on shelves - casual “theft” of food and drink is far more common than most people think, when all you have do to get rid of the evidence is to consume it and dump the wrapper ), just as they can afford to throw out vast amounts of expired, but perfectly good food on a daily basis.

[/quote]
I can afford a new TV but if I ever see someone trying to steal mine I will shoot them. Even if clean up costs more than a new tv.

Lets not make this thread “Occupy T-Nation”.[/quote]

You’re not a supermarket. Again, I never said it was right; I’m explaining why supermarkets don’t do anything about it. It’s their prerogative.

[/quote]

But they ARE doing something about it. Theyre hiring security guards and “secret shoppers” to watch for it and report it so that they can have these people arrested for shop lifting.

How is that “not doing anything about it”?[/quote]

Yes. And what those security guards do is to spot check for thefts. They can’t catch everyone and the primary role of security staff is to provide a visual deterrent.

TheBodyGuard · November 2, 2011, 7:04pm

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

The bottom line is that supermarkets can afford to lose whatever is eaten on the premises (and just as a customer I’ve lost count of the times I’ve seen empty wrappers, soda cans etc. left on shelves - casual “theft” of food and drink is far more common than most people think, when all you have do to get rid of the evidence is to consume it and dump the wrapper ), just as they can afford to throw out vast amounts of expired, but perfectly good food on a daily basis.

[/quote]
I can afford a new TV but if I ever see someone trying to steal mine I will shoot them. Even if clean up costs more than a new tv.

Lets not make this thread “Occupy T-Nation”.[/quote]

You’re not a supermarket. Again, I never said it was right; I’m explaining why supermarkets don’t do anything about it. It’s their prerogative.

[/quote]

But they ARE doing something about it. Theyre hiring security guards and “secret shoppers” to watch for it and report it so that they can have these people arrested for shop lifting.

How is that “not doing anything about it”?[/quote]

seriously? the only common denominator here I can think of is anaconda. Are you taking it too? Does it make you stupid? If what you said was true, and it isn’t, security would immediately reprimand you for opening and consuming an item and escort you to the counter to pay. Of course, they don’t do this. They just make sure you pay, which is general theft prevention - not any edict implied or otherwise against consuming something in the store that you pay for.

smfh.

TheBodyGuard · November 2, 2011, 7:06pm

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]MytchBucanan wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Christine wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]Christine wrote:

[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:

[quote]Christine wrote:
Loads of people eat while shopping. If the stores don’t like it, they should do something to prevent it.[/quote]

they are trying to, but all these people in the thread are bitching that they aren’t allowed, LOL
[/quote]

Most grocery stores I go to have free samples all over the place. They encourage people to eat while shopping. [/quote]

Grocery stores encourage people to eat “the FREE SAMPLES” not the items that are “For Sale”… Big difference.[/quote]

But they do nothing to prevent it.

They really can’t because it is mostly parents with children who are doing the eating. If they were to try and stop it, parents would shop elsewhere.

[/quote]

LOL…you just had someone who works as loss prevention state that he follows those types around to see if they pay.

That means it matters.[/quote]

That means it only matters if they don’t pay.

Logic is like an apparition to you. [/quote]

…and they didn’t pay.[/quote]

Yet he’s talking about my “logic”.

These people did NOT pay. Why is this so hard for people?

No one gives a shit if the rest of you eat food that in stores IF YOU PAY FOR IT.

Are people really still lost on this?[/quote]

again, did you miss the part about “intent” being an element to the alleged theft?

go ahead and repeat again how it was “overkill” but “justified”. that was GOLD.

Derek542 · November 2, 2011, 7:07pm

[quote]xlpicard wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]xlpicard wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]xlpicard wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]xlpicard wrote:
Arguing on the internet, is like running in the special olympics…Even if you win you’re still retarded.
[/quote]

EDITED TO KEEP IT PG:
You’re a friggin turd for making fun of special Olympic competitors. Those people have more courage and a bigger heart than you’ll ever have. You should be ashamed of yourself… Now GTFO :)[/quote]

You’re right, you win.
I guess this proves my point.[/quote]

We weren’t arguing so there is no “winner” or “loser” I was just stating a fact, that you are a bad person for making fun of people with special needs.

Nice try tough.[/quote]

I couldn’t find a picture that said “Stating a fact on the internet…”
But I would consider this in the same category.[/quote]

Again, “stating a fact” doesnt result in a winner or a loser (having a “winner” and a “loser” is necessary for your picture to be applicable)

Nice try again though. Care to go for round 3?[/quote]

So, would you consider what I said about Arguing on the internet to be a fact also?
If you leave out the “retarded” part of the comment…and make it more PC.
[/quote]

Its not PC there are people on here, Me being one of them that have children that are special needs. I go to special olympics every year, my suggestion is find your local one and go volunteer.

Maybe you will become a better person.

TheBodyGuard · November 2, 2011, 7:07pm

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
In that case, why is shoplifting a prosecutable offense? It’s been accounted for and is common practice, so not illegal?[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

The bottom line is that supermarkets can afford to lose whatever is eaten on the premises (and just as a customer I’ve lost count of the times I’ve seen empty wrappers, soda cans etc. left on shelves - casual “theft” of food and drink is far more common than most people think, when all you have do to get rid of the evidence is to consume it and dump the wrapper ), just as they can afford to throw out vast amounts of expired, but perfectly good food on a daily basis.

[/quote]

?

OK, then I can assume the guy driving a new Corvette has the money and insurance to buy a new stereo system if I take his.[/quote]

Captain Fallacious rides again! LOL you’re too good to be true.

In retail, they account for “shrinkage” (theft and other loss) - same in restaurants. Prices for goods are set in accordance with this factor.

The guy driving the Vette does not account for the loss of the stereo in the price of doing business.

You keep setting up those terrible analogies, and I’ll happily keep tearing them down. It’s fun. [/quote]
[/quote]

don’t be an asshole (yeah, i know…hard). i was deconstructing his terrible analogy. not defending shoplifting. duh.

orion · November 2, 2011, 7:08pm

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Christine wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
^LOL. This is why they have “do not eat” on toilet bowl deodorizers. If people really need a sign to know opening up a closed package in a store is not ideal, there is something wrong.

No one made you have kids. Yeah, you probably should bring a snack along if they NEED a snack. My mom did. We ate Cheerios as little toddlers when out. I don’t remember her ever opening up a box in a store for us to eat before she bought it.

For one, I think culturally some people would EXPECT a negative result from doing that.

Some here seem to think it is just fine and dandy…but also seem to miss how important that PAYING FOR IT step is.

They are likely following some of you around the store as you do this but you just couldn’t pick out the undercover.

Trust me, there are few stores that allow you to open a package without following you if they have any reason at all to think you won’t pay.[/quote]

No one is arguing that paying for food items is important. We are arguing about the timing of that payment.

Some of us have empathy and can see shades of grey, others are cold-hearted, facist bastards. :)[/quote]

Look, there are no “shades of gray” here. If you open the package, you BETTER pay for it.

If not, you freaking stole it.
[/quote]

Still no.

You would make a shitty lawyer-

Your view of the law was last seen in German tribal law and even they had a philosophy that was a tad more sophisticated.

Christine · November 2, 2011, 7:09pm

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Ulty wrote:

[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
Just got back from Jewel: I pounded a Muscle Milk - banana flavor, love it - right there in the aisle, then went to the deli section and got a premade ham and cheese on a baguette. Ate it while in the self-service line to check out.

Paid for both items and the empties went right in the garbage next to the discarded receipts.

World did not end. No lectures from employees or patrons.

Might do this every day for the next month.

Edit: I have, in the past, also purchased Kleenex and cold medicine from this same Jewel and opened and used both before checking out. I didn’t give get a second glance from the cashier. I’m thinking eating/using/manipulating an item, at least from a grocery store in an urban area, isn’t as big of a deal as some people think.
[/quote]
Well, I hate you for doing this, but as long as you pay, I won’t bother you. I’ll glare at you through the eyeholes in my newspaper though.[/quote]

Mind you, you are Loss Prevention, but they keep ignoring the part about you not being happy with it.[/quote]

It keeps him employed. What is there not to be happy about?

If we all started following your rules, he would be unemployed.

So, Utly, you are welcome!

HoustonGuy · November 2, 2011, 7:09pm

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
In that case, why is shoplifting a prosecutable offense? It’s been accounted for and is common practice, so not illegal?
[/quote]

Apparently now. We can all just say we meant to buy it if we get caught.[/quote]

I will say, “You accounted for this theft already. I’m on your books it’s cool. And give me a fucking TV too, mine was stolen, I did not account for it.”

And to throw in some compassionate socialism after the tv comment I will say “You owe me plus it really sucks that my TV was stolen and you are a faceless corporation after all”

Ulty · November 2, 2011, 7:09pm

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

The bottom line is that supermarkets can afford to lose whatever is eaten on the premises (and just as a customer I’ve lost count of the times I’ve seen empty wrappers, soda cans etc. left on shelves - casual “theft” of food and drink is far more common than most people think, when all you have do to get rid of the evidence is to consume it and dump the wrapper ), just as they can afford to throw out vast amounts of expired, but perfectly good food on a daily basis.

[/quote]

?

OK, then I can assume the guy driving a new Corvette has the money and insurance to buy a new stereo system if I take his.[/quote]

I never said it was “right”. In fact, people grazing in-store annoys the hell out of me, but I digress. My point is that if their profits were affected by people literally eating them, they would do something about it. The profit margins are so high on what they do sell, they don’t even factor in losses from unseen theft of the type I described.

The amount of food supermarkets throw out due to expiry/ sell by/ best before dates is shameful (I won’t get into why this happens). They can do this and still make massive profits, because those margins are so high to begin with. It’s like Corvette guy throwing out his new stereo system and replacing it with a new one every day.

[/quote]

Of course their profits are affected by this stuff. In fact, a full third to half of retail prices are attributed to account for theft and shrinkage on its own. This is a common fact in retail.

Stores don’t throw out expired food because they want to. That would be stupid. It’s a matter of quality and safety (although I don’t think it’s actually a legal issue).

gregron · November 2, 2011, 7:17pm

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:
But they ARE doing something about it. Theyre hiring security guards and “secret shoppers” to watch for it and report it so that they can have these people arrested for shop lifting.
[/quote]
If what you said was true, and it isn’t…
[/quote]

What part of what I just wrote isn’t true?

Why would security reprimand you? Didn’t I say that their job is to watch out for and report shop lifters?

I think you may have quoted the wrong post because your little rant doesn’t apply to what I wrote. You actually agreed with what I said.

HoustonGuy · November 2, 2011, 7:17pm

Don’t be an asshole! Baby, I was born this way. But I’m on the right track so it’s all good. Frankly I think the asshole thing is overblown anyways.

I know what you were doing and I realize the argument was originally regarding paying before using a product or vice versa.

However, the argument took a twist to shoplifting in general which is technically what your comment is discussing and mine fits. But I see we are in agreement, and X too.[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
In that case, why is shoplifting a prosecutable offense? It’s been accounted for and is common practice, so not illegal?[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

The bottom line is that supermarkets can afford to lose whatever is eaten on the premises (and just as a customer I’ve lost count of the times I’ve seen empty wrappers, soda cans etc. left on shelves - casual “theft” of food and drink is far more common than most people think, when all you have do to get rid of the evidence is to consume it and dump the wrapper ), just as they can afford to throw out vast amounts of expired, but perfectly good food on a daily basis.

[/quote]

?

OK, then I can assume the guy driving a new Corvette has the money and insurance to buy a new stereo system if I take his.[/quote]

Captain Fallacious rides again! LOL you’re too good to be true.

In retail, they account for “shrinkage” (theft and other loss) - same in restaurants. Prices for goods are set in accordance with this factor.

The guy driving the Vette does not account for the loss of the stereo in the price of doing business.

You keep setting up those terrible analogies, and I’ll happily keep tearing them down. It’s fun. [/quote]
[/quote]

don’t be an asshole (yeah, i know…hard). i was deconstructing his terrible analogy. not defending shoplifting. duh.[/quote]

gregron · November 2, 2011, 7:18pm

^^LOL

xlpicard · November 2, 2011, 7:18pm

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]xlpicard wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]xlpicard wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]xlpicard wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]xlpicard wrote:
Arguing on the internet, is like running in the special olympics…Even if you win you’re still retarded.
[/quote]

EDITED TO KEEP IT PG:
You’re a friggin turd for making fun of special Olympic competitors. Those people have more courage and a bigger heart than you’ll ever have. You should be ashamed of yourself… Now GTFO :)[/quote]

You’re right, you win.
I guess this proves my point.[/quote]

We weren’t arguing so there is no “winner” or “loser” I was just stating a fact, that you are a bad person for making fun of people with special needs.

Nice try tough.[/quote]

I couldn’t find a picture that said “Stating a fact on the internet…”
But I would consider this in the same category.[/quote]

Again, “stating a fact” doesnt result in a winner or a loser (having a “winner” and a “loser” is necessary for your picture to be applicable)

Nice try again though. Care to go for round 3?[/quote]

So, would you consider what I said about Arguing on the internet to be a fact also?
If you leave out the “retarded” part of the comment…and make it more PC.
[/quote]

Its not PC there are people on here, Me being one of them that have children that are special needs. I go to special olympics every year, my suggestion is find your local one and go volunteer.

Maybe you will become a better person.
[/quote]

Crap!!
Of course this comment wasn’t meant to be used to make fun of Special needs people.
I can only imagine how offended you are, and I am sorry.
I just read a bunch of the arguments in this thread and everyone had their own perception of the truth, and did not see the other side of the coin.

They are still arguing about it, and the case is solved.

Also there is no way of knowing what the actual truth is…Unless we ask this couple, and even then…

Professor_X · November 2, 2011, 7:21pm

[quote]Ulty wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

The bottom line is that supermarkets can afford to lose whatever is eaten on the premises (and just as a customer I’ve lost count of the times I’ve seen empty wrappers, soda cans etc. left on shelves - casual “theft” of food and drink is far more common than most people think, when all you have do to get rid of the evidence is to consume it and dump the wrapper ), just as they can afford to throw out vast amounts of expired, but perfectly good food on a daily basis.

[/quote]

?

OK, then I can assume the guy driving a new Corvette has the money and insurance to buy a new stereo system if I take his.[/quote]

I never said it was “right”. In fact, people grazing in-store annoys the hell out of me, but I digress. My point is that if their profits were affected by people literally eating them, they would do something about it. The profit margins are so high on what they do sell, they don’t even factor in losses from unseen theft of the type I described.

The amount of food supermarkets throw out due to expiry/ sell by/ best before dates is shameful (I won’t get into why this happens). They can do this and still make massive profits, because those margins are so high to begin with. It’s like Corvette guy throwing out his new stereo system and replacing it with a new one every day.

[/quote]

Of course their profits are affected by this stuff. In fact, a full third to half of retail prices are attributed to account for theft and shrinkage on its own. This is a common fact in retail.

Stores don’t throw out expired food because they want to. That would be stupid. It’s a matter of quality and safety (although I don’t think it’s actually a legal issue). [/quote]

Uh oh…more realness.

Derek542 · November 2, 2011, 7:22pm

[quote]xlpicard wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]xlpicard wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]xlpicard wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]xlpicard wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]xlpicard wrote:
Arguing on the internet, is like running in the special olympics…Even if you win you’re still retarded.
[/quote]

EDITED TO KEEP IT PG:
You’re a friggin turd for making fun of special Olympic competitors. Those people have more courage and a bigger heart than you’ll ever have. You should be ashamed of yourself… Now GTFO :)[/quote]

You’re right, you win.
I guess this proves my point.[/quote]

We weren’t arguing so there is no “winner” or “loser” I was just stating a fact, that you are a bad person for making fun of people with special needs.

Nice try tough.[/quote]

I couldn’t find a picture that said “Stating a fact on the internet…”
But I would consider this in the same category.[/quote]

Again, “stating a fact” doesnt result in a winner or a loser (having a “winner” and a “loser” is necessary for your picture to be applicable)

Nice try again though. Care to go for round 3?[/quote]

So, would you consider what I said about Arguing on the internet to be a fact also?
If you leave out the “retarded” part of the comment…and make it more PC.
[/quote]

Its not PC there are people on here, Me being one of them that have children that are special needs. I go to special olympics every year, my suggestion is find your local one and go volunteer.

Maybe you will become a better person.
[/quote]

Crap!!
Of course this comment wasn’t meant to be used to make fun of Special needs people.
I can only imagine how offended you are, and I am sorry.
I just read a bunch of the arguments in this thread and everyone had their own perception of the truth, and did not see the other side of the coin.

They are still arguing about it, and the case is solved.

Also there is no way of knowing what the actual truth is…Unless we ask this couple, and even then…[/quote]

No worries, I agree some things in our society has gotten to PC. We all need a little levity in life, makes you more enjoyable human IMO.

I just think when it comes to certain demographics and certain lines in the sand we all need to be a little PC.

Again no worries man.

Greg Okay I dont hate you anymore, but next family reunion I am dunking you in the pool for the Cowboys comment in the NFL thread.

roybot · November 2, 2011, 7:22pm

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

The bottom line is that supermarkets can afford to lose whatever is eaten on the premises (and just as a customer I’ve lost count of the times I’ve seen empty wrappers, soda cans etc. left on shelves - casual “theft” of food and drink is far more common than most people think, when all you have do to get rid of the evidence is to consume it and dump the wrapper ), just as they can afford to throw out vast amounts of expired, but perfectly good food on a daily basis.

[/quote]
I can afford a new TV but if I ever see someone trying to steal mine I will shoot them. Even if clean up costs more than a new tv.

Lets not make this thread “Occupy T-Nation”.[/quote]

You’re not a supermarket. Again, I never said it was right; I’m explaining why supermarkets don’t do anything about it. It’s their prerogative.

[/quote]
We are both private entities. Just because supermarkets don’t have faces doesn’t change anything.

I can afford to give away some money. If someone tried to steal from my business I would, in a perfect world, shoot them. Would definitely prosecute.

I feel for the corporations and not the people in this scenario, I will be honest. It’s not like they just exist. Somebody puts up collateral on all those products, be it a single guy or a whole bunch of shareholders.

In the original argument of when to pay, I still say stores are not credit cards. Here I say stealing is stealing. [/quote]

I urge you to do some research on how much supermarkets throw away. They can do it because they are huge businesses that buy vast amounts of stock dirt cheap and the huge mark-up offsets any losses they make (including consumption of unpurchased foodstuffs).

How much do you think that $2.50 sandwich in the OP cost them to make? Nowhere near $2.50…

I’m not saying supermarkets deserve to be robbed, which seems to be what people think I’m saying judging by some of the responses I’ve read; I agree that theft is theft, in which case the supermarkets should ban in-store eating, certainly eating from sealed containers. At the very least it would cut out the confusion over whether someone “forgets” to pay for an item.

HoustonGuy · November 2, 2011, 7:24pm

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Ulty wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

The bottom line is that supermarkets can afford to lose whatever is eaten on the premises (and just as a customer I’ve lost count of the times I’ve seen empty wrappers, soda cans etc. left on shelves - casual “theft” of food and drink is far more common than most people think, when all you have do to get rid of the evidence is to consume it and dump the wrapper ), just as they can afford to throw out vast amounts of expired, but perfectly good food on a daily basis.

[/quote]

?

OK, then I can assume the guy driving a new Corvette has the money and insurance to buy a new stereo system if I take his.[/quote]

I never said it was “right”. In fact, people grazing in-store annoys the hell out of me, but I digress. My point is that if their profits were affected by people literally eating them, they would do something about it. The profit margins are so high on what they do sell, they don’t even factor in losses from unseen theft of the type I described.

The amount of food supermarkets throw out due to expiry/ sell by/ best before dates is shameful (I won’t get into why this happens). They can do this and still make massive profits, because those margins are so high to begin with. It’s like Corvette guy throwing out his new stereo system and replacing it with a new one every day.

[/quote]

Of course their profits are affected by this stuff. In fact, a full third to half of retail prices are attributed to account for theft and shrinkage on its own. This is a common fact in retail.

Stores don’t throw out expired food because they want to. That would be stupid. It’s a matter of quality and safety (although I don’t think it’s actually a legal issue). [/quote]

Uh oh…more realness.[/quote]
Next time I see a whiney brat jacking up my Cinnoman Toast Crunch prices I’m spanking him myself. His mom and dad too for giving in to a little baby. Right there in the aisle.

HoustonGuy · November 2, 2011, 7:25pm