If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Marketwatch)   Safeway 3Q earnings now 58% off   (marketwatch.com) divider line 17
    More: Fail, Safeway Inc., account of profits, Canadian Business, activist shareholder, tax expenses, write-downs  
•       •       •

674 clicks; posted to Business » on 11 Oct 2013 at 9:59 AM (26 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



17 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-10-11 11:14:25 AM
I'm shocked to hear that Dominicks is leaving the Chicago area.
 
2013-10-11 11:59:29 AM

Tyrone Biggums: I'm shocked to hear that Dominicks is leaving the Chicago area.


Walmart finally has their really big "in".
What a shame--- not that Dominicks was really any good although their volume discounts on booze were ok.

meh
 
2013-10-11 01:25:07 PM
We recently stopped shopping at Safeway after finding expired products in our groceries for the third time.   While we're pretty good about checking things like Milk, Eggs, etc... you expect that canned and boxed products (like fruit snacks) to not be expired and still on the shelf.
 
2013-10-11 02:01:35 PM

OSULugan: We recently stopped shopping at Safeway after finding expired products in our groceries for the third time.   While we're pretty good about checking things like Milk, Eggs, etc... you expect that canned and boxed products (like fruit snacks) to not be expired and still on the shelf.


I have a long boycott list of gas stations that have soda bottles past the 'date' still in the cooler or on the shelves.
 
2013-10-11 02:48:02 PM
I wonder if this has anything to do with them lobbying to prevent the labeling of GMOs.
Maybe a good chunk of that %25 are people who are fed up with Monsanto and the corporations who support them.
 
2013-10-11 03:01:17 PM

Ego edo infantia cattus: I wonder if this has anything to do with them lobbying to prevent the labeling of GMOs.
Maybe a good chunk of that %25 are people who are fed up with Monsanto and the corporations who support them.


No it has to do with people not wanting to pay 20% more for the same product and worse service.

Why label GMOs? No reputable study has shown any health concerns associated with GMO- based food.
 
2013-10-11 03:09:36 PM

AliceBToklasLives: Ego edo infantia cattus: I wonder if this has anything to do with them lobbying to prevent the labeling of GMOs.
Maybe a good chunk of that %25 are people who are fed up with Monsanto and the corporations who support them.

No it has to do with people not wanting to pay 20% more for the same product and worse service.

Why label GMOs? No reputable study has shown any health concerns associated with GMO- based food.


www.naturalnews.com

Other than Monsanto's own studies that say it can cause cancer. Research it for yourself.
 
2013-10-11 03:32:04 PM
I refuse to shop at Safeways. I use to on occasion, but they still have that stupid card program. I don't carry a wallet, so more often then not I didn't have their card when I was there, but since they won't give you the "discount" without one and they're free I took to going to the busiest line and signing up for a new card every time, I would then proceed to throw the card away as I left the checkout. It's just stupid.

I later had an argument with one of their employees and haven't shop there since.
 
2013-10-11 03:47:26 PM

Ego edo infantia cattus: AliceBToklasLives: Ego edo infantia cattus: I wonder if this has anything to do with them lobbying to prevent the labeling of GMOs.
Maybe a good chunk of that %25 are people who are fed up with Monsanto and the corporations who support them.

No it has to do with people not wanting to pay 20% more for the same product and worse service.

Why label GMOs? No reputable study has shown any health concerns associated with GMO- based food.

[www.naturalnews.com image 600x351]

Other than Monsanto's own studies that say it can cause cancer. Research it for yourself.


Maybe he should study it out.

Snopes link for the lazy.  http://www.snopes.com/food/tainted/monsantocorn.asp
 
2013-10-11 04:00:16 PM

ethernet76: Ego edo infantia cattus: AliceBToklasLives: Ego edo infantia cattus: I wonder if this has anything to do with them lobbying to prevent the labeling of GMOs.
Maybe a good chunk of that %25 are people who are fed up with Monsanto and the corporations who support them.

No it has to do with people not wanting to pay 20% more for the same product and worse service.

Why label GMOs? No reputable study has shown any health concerns associated with GMO- based food.

[www.naturalnews.com image 600x351]

Other than Monsanto's own studies that say it can cause cancer. Research it for yourself.

Maybe he should study it out.

Snopes link for the lazy.  http://www.snopes.com/food/tainted/monsantocorn.asp


By the way, the lack of evidence for the claim that GMOs are dangerous to our health in no means allows us to claim that (A) GMOs are perfectly safe; or (B) Monsanto is not evil.

I think the real concern expressed by the pro-label crowd is (B), which is certainly false (I mean these are the folks who brought us Agent Orange, wanted to make 'terminator seeds' to protect their patents, are in the business of patenting life, etc.).  Yes they are evil but it is important to pinpoint precisely why they are evil.

/sorry about the double negatives there - too lazy to rewrite
 
2013-10-11 04:22:11 PM
The last time I went to a Domick's several months back I was surpised how nice an experience it was with the Fresh Store deal.

Bye, Dominick:

www.trbimg.com

http://galleries.apps.chicagotribune.com/chi-131010-dominicks-throug h- the-years-pictures/?utm_source=buffer&utm_campaign=Buffer&utm_content= buffer19497&utm_medium=twitter

I didn't realize they were from Chicago.
 
2013-10-11 05:46:44 PM

AliceBToklasLives: ethernet76: Ego edo infantia cattus: AliceBToklasLives: Ego edo infantia cattus: I wonder if this has anything to do with them lobbying to prevent the labeling of GMOs.
Maybe a good chunk of that %25 are people who are fed up with Monsanto and the corporations who support them.

No it has to do with people not wanting to pay 20% more for the same product and worse service.

Why label GMOs? No reputable study has shown any health concerns associated with GMO- based food.

[www.naturalnews.com image 600x351]

Other than Monsanto's own studies that say it can cause cancer. Research it for yourself.

Maybe he should study it out.

Snopes link for the lazy.  http://www.snopes.com/food/tainted/monsantocorn.asp

By the way, the lack of evidence for the claim that GMOs are dangerous to our health in no means allows us to claim that (A) GMOs are perfectly safe; or (B) Monsanto is not evil.

I think the real concern expressed by the pro-label crowd is (B), which is certainly false (I mean these are the folks who brought us Agent Orange, wanted to make 'terminator seeds' to protect their patents, are in the business of patenting life, etc.).  Yes they are evil but it is important to pinpoint precisely why they are evil.

/sorry about the double negatives there - too lazy to rewrite


I think you just defined 'derp'.

As we currently understand, GMOs are safe. Science makes no claims to what we will discover tomorrow, but there is no room for policy on what may or may not be discovered in some vague future timeline.

Humans started developing GMOs long before DNA was discovered. Anti-GMO beliefs are just another paranoia persecution complex. Some vague large corporation/government entity/religion are out to harm/influence me/us/America despite incomplete or outright missing evidence.
 
2013-10-11 06:11:54 PM
They are to damn expensive in Chicago. I feel bad about the people who are still there from 13 years ago when I worked there(River Forest)
 
2013-10-11 06:28:19 PM

ethernet76: AliceBToklasLives: ethernet76: Ego edo infantia cattus: AliceBToklasLives: Ego edo infantia cattus: I wonder if this has anything to do with them lobbying to prevent the labeling of GMOs.
Maybe a good chunk of that %25 are people who are fed up with Monsanto and the corporations who support them.

No it has to do with people not wanting to pay 20% more for the same product and worse service.

Why label GMOs? No reputable study has shown any health concerns associated with GMO- based food.

[www.naturalnews.com image 600x351]

Other than Monsanto's own studies that say it can cause cancer. Research it for yourself.

Maybe he should study it out.

Snopes link for the lazy.  http://www.snopes.com/food/tainted/monsantocorn.asp

By the way, the lack of evidence for the claim that GMOs are dangerous to our health in no means allows us to claim that (A) GMOs are perfectly safe; or (B) Monsanto is not evil.

I think the real concern expressed by the pro-label crowd is (B), which is certainly false (I mean these are the folks who brought us Agent Orange, wanted to make 'terminator seeds' to protect their patents, are in the business of patenting life, etc.).  Yes they are evil but it is important to pinpoint precisely why they are evil.

/sorry about the double negatives there - too lazy to rewrite

I think you just defined 'derp'.

As we currently understand, GMOs are safe. Science makes no claims to what we will discover tomorrow, but there is no room for policy on what may or may not be discovered in some vague future timeline.

Humans started developing GMOs long before DNA was discovered. Anti-GMO beliefs are just another paranoia persecution complex. Some vague large corporation/government entity/religion are out to harm/influence me/us/America despite incomplete or outright missing evidence.


I think that needs qualification. GMOs are safe if they were not engineered to be malicious.
 
2013-10-11 07:27:32 PM

ethernet76: AliceBToklasLives: ethernet76: Ego edo infantia cattus: AliceBToklasLives: Ego edo infantia cattus: I wonder if this has anything to do with them lobbying to prevent the labeling of GMOs.
Maybe a good chunk of that %25 are people who are fed up with Monsanto and the corporations who support them.

No it has to do with people not wanting to pay 20% more for the same product and worse service.

Why label GMOs? No reputable study has shown any health concerns associated with GMO- based food.

[www.naturalnews.com image 600x351]

Other than Monsanto's own studies that say it can cause cancer. Research it for yourself.

Maybe he should study it out.

Snopes link for the lazy.  http://www.snopes.com/food/tainted/monsantocorn.asp

By the way, the lack of evidence for the claim that GMOs are dangerous to our health in no means allows us to claim that (A) GMOs are perfectly safe; or (B) Monsanto is not evil.

I think the real concern expressed by the pro-label crowd is (B), which is certainly false (I mean these are the folks who brought us Agent Orange, wanted to make 'terminator seeds' to protect their patents, are in the business of patenting life, etc.).  Yes they are evil but it is important to pinpoint precisely why they are evil.

/sorry about the double negatives there - too lazy to rewrite

I think you just defined 'derp'.

As we currently understand, GMOs are safe. Science makes no claims to what we will discover tomorrow, but there is no room for policy on what may or may not be discovered in some vague future timeline.

Humans started developing GMOs long before DNA was discovered. Anti-GMO beliefs are just another paranoia persecution complex. Some vague large corporation/government entity/religion are out to harm/influence me/us/America despite incomplete or outright missing evidence.


I think you missed point (B), which had nothing to do with food safety. Agent Orange alone makes Monsanto evil.

Re: (A) designing crops to carry a pesticide is slightly different from what our ancient ancestors were doing so the initial concern is nit 'derp'. But sure, the willingness to distort evidence to the contrary because GM sounds scary is derpy.
 
2013-10-11 07:58:48 PM

netringer: The last time I went to a Domick's several months back I was surpised how nice an experience it was with the Fresh Store deal.

Bye, Dominick:

[www.trbimg.com image 850x679]

http://galleries.apps.chicagotribune.com/chi-131010-dominicks-throug h- the-years-pictures/?utm_source=buffer&utm_campaign=Buffer&utm_content= buffer19497&utm_medium=twitter

I didn't realize they were from Chicago.


One of the Chicago area grocery stores (Mariano's) that has been eating Dominick's lunch (so to speak) is owned by a member of the Dominick family.
 
2013-10-11 10:19:14 PM
I avoid Safeway whenever possible, precisely because their union-inflated labor costs require them to charge more than every other store in the area except Whole Foods, who's clientele has more money than sense.
 
Displayed 17 of 17 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report