Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Monday September 25 2017, @10:33PM   Printer-friendly
from the what-does-Betteridge-buy? dept.

The entire big box economy is a big honking subsidy to people with cars living in the suburbs by the poor, the singles, the seniors, the urban, the cyclists.

It only works because of the highways and the parking lots and the infrastructure paid for by everyone (road taxes do not cover the cost of the roads) and enjoyed by the drivers. The companies charge twice as much for small packages as big ones because they can; the purchasers without cars and access to the big boxes, the ability to drive between the Walmart and the Costco and the Price Club, don't have a choice.

Read on for Treehugger's reasons. Is bulk buying bad after all?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday September 26 2017, @10:51PM (8 children)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday September 26 2017, @10:51PM (#573550) Journal

    What's more, the guy's from New Jersey.

    I recall looking this up [wikipedia.org] before the last time this assertion was made. He's actually from San Diego (born 1961), moved to Pennsylvania ("at a young age"), then New Jersey (~1979), then Montana (1994 to present). He's lived longer in Montana than he has in any other state, including New Jersey.

    He's got some strong negatives (such as the temper that led to him punching a reporter), but funny how people obsess over New Jersey and wealth.

    His opponent [wikipedia.org] in the special election, a Rob Quist, while native Montanan, had the usual Democrat baggage: single payer health care, protecting Obamacare, reverse Citizen United, and bought in to climate change mitigation. If I were voting in that election, I certainly would have gone with the Libertarian candidate.

  • (Score: 2) by Pslytely Psycho on Thursday September 28 2017, @01:02AM (7 children)

    by Pslytely Psycho (1218) on Thursday September 28 2017, @01:02AM (#574128)

    "single payer health care, protecting Obamacare, reverse Citizen United and bought in to climate change mitigation."

    Ah, so supporting policies that are good for the populous are "baggage."
    Got it.

    (for the record, I don't support the right of center Democratic party either. But since our choice is currently right of center or right of right, well, lesser evils and all that...)

    --
    Alex Jones lawyer inspires new TV series: CSI Moron Division.
    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday September 28 2017, @05:09AM (6 children)

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday September 28 2017, @05:09AM (#574221) Journal

      Ah, so supporting policies that are good for the populous are "baggage."

      They're also bad for the populace. It's impossible to think about such stuff, if you never consider the costs.

      • (Score: 2) by Pslytely Psycho on Saturday October 07 2017, @04:31AM (5 children)

        by Pslytely Psycho (1218) on Saturday October 07 2017, @04:31AM (#578478)

        "It's impossible to think about such stuff, if you never consider the costs."

        Actually it's quite easy if you consider the costs.
        The costs are far higher in the long run without them.

        --
        Alex Jones lawyer inspires new TV series: CSI Moron Division.
        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday October 07 2017, @05:31AM (4 children)

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday October 07 2017, @05:31AM (#578488) Journal

          The costs are far higher in the long run without them.

          Keep in mind that you're speaking of "single payer health care, protecting Obamacare, reverse Citizen United and bought in to climate change mitigation". The first is a slow moving train wreck. It only looks good worldwide because the US approach looks so bad. But throughout the developed world, health care costs are increasing faster than the economies are, including the single payer systems. That can't continue forever.

          Obamacare doesn't even have the virtue of being able to hide behind a worse health care system. The price for the ability of some people to pay for what they need, is now everyone pays even more for insurance than they did before.

          Citizen United is simply a protection of First Amendment rights and equal protection under law. You do like the freedom to say what you think, right? So do representatives of corporations.

          And climate change mitigation has a terrible record. To date, attempts to reduce greenhouse gases emissions have been negligible in impact (even under theoretical, ideal circumstances), costly, often widely violated (usually coupled with a disinterest in enforcing the mitigation policy), and frequently with ulterior motives. For example, US corn ethanol subsidies (which were just a cynical gift to US agribusiness), Energiewende in Germany (and the corresponding policies in Denmark) which doubled their cost of electricity and forced dependence on foreign energy sources, and the dysfunctional carbon emission credit markets in Europe (which have repeatedly had violations and fraud occur in the markets with a sluggish response by regulators which seems more driven by public embarrassment than any concern for the integrity of these markets).

          But sure, assert without evidence that these things are somehow better in the long run.

          • (Score: 2) by Pslytely Psycho on Saturday October 07 2017, @10:41AM (3 children)

            by Pslytely Psycho (1218) on Saturday October 07 2017, @10:41AM (#578532)

            "But sure, assert without evidence that these things are somehow better in the long run."

            Don't be an ass.
            It's not like you were an overflowing font of evidence. This was merely a discussion of opinion. I unfortunately have neither the time nor the inclination to provide links that you will just ignore anyway.

            I respectfully disagree with you, especially about climate change and citizens united, and hell, lets throw the unpatriotic patriot act in there as well.

            I don't completely disagree with you on healthcare, it is a huge mess, it would of worked a hell of a lot better before the R's added 150 plus amendments to be certain it couldn't be fully financed. And prices were rising even faster before the ACA. And deliberately sabotaging it since the Creamsicle Charleton got in just makes me nauseous. That is not what the government should be doing. I do feel it should be a right, not an option.

            Opinions are like assholes, everyone's got one, and they all stink.
            I bid you a good day.

            --
            Alex Jones lawyer inspires new TV series: CSI Moron Division.
            • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday October 08 2017, @12:15AM (2 children)

              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday October 08 2017, @12:15AM (#578705) Journal

              I respectfully disagree with you, especially about climate change and citizens united, and hell, lets throw the unpatriotic patriot act in there as well.

              So will you claim that the Patriot Act is net beneficial for the public as well? I don't agree since it is an encroachment on human freedom for some marginal and often purely theoretical security gain.

              it would of worked a hell of a lot better before the R's added 150 plus amendments to be certain it couldn't be fully financed.

              First, Obamacare was supposed to save bunches of money and not require extensive financing. That's a bit of goalpost moving after the fact.

              Also keep in mind who had the supermajority at the time the law was passed. It wasn't the Republicans. They didn't have the power to put those amendments in. Amusing how the Republicans can no longer muster that unity now that it's their turn at the feeding trough and are facing similar difficulties for their own attempts at health care reform.

              Opinions are like assholes, everyone's got one, and they all stink.

              Very graceful concession there. I don't agree, of course. Platitudes like this ignore that some people have thought a lot more about their opinions than others. We have ways to evaluate the strength of arguments rather than merely saying that all are equal because.

              It's not like you were an overflowing font of evidence.

              Well, what was wrong with the evidence that I provided? We have, for example, plenty of history of global warming treaties which advocating harsh cutbacks of greenhouse gases emissions for minuscule improvement. We have significant experience with the failures of Obamacare now.

              • (Score: 2) by Pslytely Psycho on Sunday October 08 2017, @12:32PM (1 child)

                by Pslytely Psycho (1218) on Sunday October 08 2017, @12:32PM (#578859)

                You know, it's unfortunate that I don't have the time to debate this in depth. But I at this time I only have a few hours a week free as I'm covering about half of my bosses shifts right now while he recovers from knee surgery.

                This discussion will undoubtedly come about in another article when I actually have time.

                "Very graceful concession there."

                Dude, develop a sense of humor. And your opinion has no more, or less, merit than mine. After all, I see you as being just as misinformed as you see me, but echo chambers are boring, and I thank you for taking the time to reply without the rhetoric and name calling that generally occurs here and elsewhere.

                Also, I never said your opinion was bad, only that I disagree and haven't the time to go in-depth. However you seemed to insinuate I should link to my evidence while for the most part you simply stated yours.

                But lighten up man. The pendulum swings to and fro....because the middle is where we need to be, we simply differ in how we interpret the information we receive. I'm not interested in changing your mind, I'm a realist, I know that is unlikely. I just enjoy a good debate. Thank you.

                See ya in the funny papers.

                --
                Alex Jones lawyer inspires new TV series: CSI Moron Division.
                • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday October 09 2017, @04:49AM

                  by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday October 09 2017, @04:49AM (#579130) Journal
                  Guess I'll summarize then. My key problem with this as with many such things involving Other Peoples Money, is that the benefit was stated and the cost roundly ignored. That never changed as the thread evolved. Second, I disagree on your characterization of my argument. I'm not going to go with a full blown argument that takes an hour to put together when asserting stuff is the norm. It's too bad that you don't have the time for the argument. But I don't either. This stuff is online. For example, here's a graph [wikipedia.org] of spending per fraction of GDP for six developed world countries, including the US. While the US was a disaster, it still remains that over the 45 year period of the graph, every single one of the other countries at least doubled the share of GDP devoted to health care spending.

                  We also see from the graph that Obamacare did nothing to reverse the increase of spending in the US and let us keep in mind that the recession also would have slowed health care spending in the US even in the event of no change to health care policy. That's not a lot to show for allegedly reforming health care and 2000 pages of bad law.

                  As to the Citizens United case, read the court ruling. You'll get the actual arguments they use. I think it's outrageous that so many justices (though fortunately a minority) could choose to ignore the Constitution in order to get the "right" outcome.

                  And climate change mitigation has a record. Look it up. Also, look up what proponents think victory is. You'll see stuff like bragging about making changes in peoples' behavior or raising awareness of the problem while acknowledging that their mitigation policy didn't actually do anything. Lot of cognitive dissonance there. My previous post on the matter has a few subjects to start with.