It’s important to keep this in mind whenever retailers decry shoplifters as a source of price increases - the retailers steal more from their employees paychecks than what is stolen from them (and most shrinkage isn’t due to theft anyways).
It’s also important to keep this in mind whenever asshats like Bezos or Musk talk about eliminating the NLRB.
Depends on the theft. I won’t rat out someone stealing food or baby formula. But I would for sure rat out those group-assaults on premium brands. They smash and break shit unnecessarily and leave chaos for the workers when they’re gone.
We need a critical mass boycott that has actual change. Lots are prepping to boycott all Kellogg’s products starting April 1 (giving time to prep, but not bulk buy) for 3 months.
Hopefully this kinda shit actually starts to make a real dent. Causing actual crash, or actual positive change.
Every person that votes against companies with their wallets makes a dent. I think the economy is helping by making more people HAVE to start making some tough spending decisions. Companies are pretty stupid to not be considering that as they continue to try to fuck people over more each day.
I’m not entirely convinced. The bud light bullshit was MASSIVE and their stock only took a tiny hit, and that was a right wing thing which means the participation percentage was massive.
How was the bud light thing massive? People were buying Bud just to pour it out and then just buying other products in Inbev’s portfolio. People don’t understand that 85% of the beer in most liquor stores is a split between Coors and Inbev portfolios.
I’ve found most people are more talk than action. I am almost to the point of having to create my own supply chain as my boycott list continues to grow over the years lol
I agree on Stouffer’s, but I knew about that one as I live in the same region as the original US factory for them. However, I stick with whatever knock-off brand looks best these days. Yes, being intimately familiar with the finickiness of cats, that is the only option.
Fingers crossed this stuff keeps people galvanized to vote cons the fuck out of each branch of government in 2024. My hope is that trump’s term and the Dobbs decision will push the gop to implode. They can’t back away from pandering to far right christians, the older generations are dying off, and hopefully moderate-leaning conservatives will choose to not vote, since I doubt they’ll let themselves vote for democrats.
Though this’d also likely lead to far right extremists ramping up their violence as they feel themselves losing power
Fingers crossed this stuff galvanizes people to realize that voting is, at best, a temporary stopgap and they will need to be a bit more active in the whole political process. What happened to the riots that were promised if Roe vs. Wade was overturned? When the Democrats fall in lockstep with the far right extremists how will you hold them accountable?
Though this’d also likely lead to far right extremists ramping up their violence as they feel themselves losing power.
That is what overturning Roe vs. Wade is about. The parent article is a story of far right extremists ramping up their violence as American empire loses power. Is your plan to vote that away? It hasn’t worked for the last 40+ years.
What happened to the riots that were promised if Roe vs. Wade was overturned?
Honestly I’m surprised we didn’t get George floyd/blm levels of protest after Dobbs was official, though a lot of it would’ve been moot since liberals and progressives have spent several decades disarming themselves and fostering a hatred towards guns. Christian nationalists don’t give a single fuck about peaceful protests and if things come to blows, our side is the one with far less firepower and far less zealots willing to risk personal harm for this topic (not saying the second one is good or bad morally, just pointing out that the right’s fostering of that kind of zealotry is an additional hurdle we’ll face).
That is what overturning Roe vs. Wade is about.
I was specifically referring to extra-judicial here. If/as they understand they can’t force their draconian laws on everyone through the normal channels of government, they’ll switch to embracing direct, physical violence as a first resort.
They absolutely are and pretending they’re not is stupid. They’re a last resort, but they’re still a tool that needs to be on the table if worst comes to worse. Soap box, ballot box, jury box, ammo box.
For progressives to abandon every principle they espouse and start using violence as a political tool and direct threat would mean the very last nail in the coffin.
Please, I’m engaging this conversation in good faith so don’t take my words out of context. I am not encouraging the use of violence out of hand and I think you know that. I’m encouraging a healthy respect for a tool of last resort, and a deterrent against things progressing to the point where we want to use that last resort. Armed but peaceful protests often result in less violence from the cops and alt right counter protesting, because at the end of the day they see disarmament as an invitation for violence.
There’s a reason that if you go far enough left, you start to get your guns back. Some people still understand that right wingers and the elite would prefer fascists and genocide to losing control.
This is why they leaked the decision but said “it could change it’s not the final decision” to slow roll the information and make it less likely people would take direct action.
In the 90s boomers weren’t dying off in large amounts, conservative bastions weren’t in overwhelming support of abortion rights when left to the peoples’ vote, and Texas of all places wasn’t turning purple in state-wide elections. Things have absolutely changed from a population standpoint and gop leaders have shown that they’re terrified of the millenial+Z vote, which trends significantly more liberal (and the millenial vote has not shifted conservative with age, as older generations did), now being larger than the boomer vote.
Things are absolutely changing if you pay attention to the data. That being said, it’s still something that only changes over the course of generations, and the gop’s fraternization with Christian nationalists has created a monster that they’re now losing control of. We’re at a phase where things will either start to get better because of right wing ideology losing the numbers game, or right wingers lashing out at their loss of control will lead to them taking over via less democratic means (their capture of the SCOTUS is a more tame example of what they might try).
That’s pretty fucked up. I would add them to the list of companies that I will no longer patronize, but they there were already there for being gross in other ways.
You’d think so… but our two tier justice system just let Trump cut his bail requirement in a third because “it so hawwwd”. Never underestimate how stuffed with corporate toadies our justice system is.
There’s a right wing seminar of economics that they invite and “educate” supreme Court justices on how economics works. Well their ideology of economics anyway. Don’t recall if it was a one time thing back then or ongoing but holy cow.
You don’t even need something so explicit - justices regularly rub elbows with billionaires and are pretty clearly influenced by the association.
We need something like Discworld’s unseen university where they can just be academics locked away from public discourse and celebrity - being a Supreme Court Justice should be an obscure dead-end of a job that only appeals to the legally obsessed.
I think the original commenter’s point is that calling grown women “girls” is a commonly used tactic to infantilize women and make the situation seem not as serious as it’s supposed to be.
Take for example the headline that we’re talking about here: “girl” vs “woman” is the difference in thinking that this is some 16 year old who made dumb decisions and someone who probably understands the consequences of what they’re doing and takes proper precautions to prevent it.
This is not to say that I personally believe that one abortion is more justified than the other (because I don’t), but just want to point out the semantic difference here.
One of the cornerstones of the religion they profess to follow is that followers will be beset by false prophets who try to lead the faithful into wickedness. It's the origin of the idiom "wolf in sheep's clothing". Followers of Jesus are then advised that they'll be able to tell who's who the same way you can tell that rotten fruit means a fig tree is blighted: you will know them by their fruits. In other words, if you listen to the warning and take even the slightest notice of what Jesus tells you is the right way to live, you won't be led astray by people who pretend to be spiritual authorities but preach things Jesus said are bad things for any human to do, such as proclaming their own righteousness, claiming to be more Godly than you, and openly seeking riches and power. Whether you believe in Christianity or not, what it comes down to is that these people are "following God" in a way they are, word for word, told not to. By God.
It's like if you tried to start up a Anarcho-Capitalist club and then immediately set up a hierarchical power structure and began extracting dues from the members to fund a project that disproportionately benefits the poorer members. It's like if you taught a class on healthy eating and then began extolling the benefits of swallowing batteries.
Performers at Disneyland theme park in Anaheim voted overwhelmingly in favor of unionizing in an election this week, the National Labor Relations Board announced Sunday. They will be members of the Actors’ Equity Association, the same union that represents performers and stage managers at Walt Disney World in Orlando, Florida.
The election at the theme park involved more than 1,700 employees in the character and parade departments. The vote count was 953 in favor of unionizing and 258 against it, according to a board spokesperson.
Actors’ Equity said in a statement that those workers had been an “exception” among the heavily unionized workforce at Disneyland “until now.”
Nah, they want to reduce the number of poor and non-white people because they hate them. They have no need to send them overseas to be killed on profitable wars. They have drones for that now.
I feel that reducing access to abortion actually creates more poor people no? As in, not being able to financially support a child is a common reason for not wanting to complete a pregnancy.
This really is the trajectory for most unwanted children.
No heritable resources, a fuck ton of trauma, and unaffordable healthcare leads to lifelong difficulties finding and retaining work with no hope of mental health care to fix the central issue.
The fight isn’t over because the castle retailated against 3 of the striking workers by refusing to bring them back on.
I used to work at one of these places, also as a knight, and the conditions/pay/treatment were deplorable.
I got fired for being unable to perform after being injured by one of our horses. Of course, I was young and more stupid at the time, not knowing my rights, and just moved on with my life. It was a fun 18 months though.
huffpost.com
Top