Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(C|Net)   Apple shareholders: "Hey, you know, this environmentally friendly attitude is cutting into our profits." Tim Cook: "There is the rounded-edge bi-metal chrome trim sapphire glass retinal display door"   (news.cnet.com ) divider line
    More: Cool, Apple CEO, retina display, environmental standards  
•       •       •

3901 clicks; posted to Business » on 01 Mar 2014 at 1:17 AM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



65 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-01 12:07:13 AM  
I enjoyed the comments section in the article. A bunch of retards saying he shouldn't be dissing conservatives and keep politics out of it. It's like they believe that someone talking about science, facts, and observable evidence is now akin to spouting a political position.
 
2014-03-01 12:41:50 AM  

Cubansaltyballs: I enjoyed the comments section in the article. A bunch of retards saying he shouldn't be dissing conservatives and keep politics out of it. It's like they believe that someone talking about science, facts, and observable evidence is now akin to spouting a political position.


I guess I've never read comments on CNET before. I probably shouldn't be, but I was a bit surprised to find that much derp there.
 
2014-03-01 01:04:24 AM  
Good on Tim for telling the trolls to GTFO.
 
2014-03-01 01:54:34 AM  
[slowclap.gif]
 
2014-03-01 01:56:52 AM  
spotted an "al gore invented the internet" in the comments section. drink!
 
2014-03-01 01:59:06 AM  

DrBenway: Cubansaltyballs: I enjoyed the comments section in the article. A bunch of retards saying he shouldn't be dissing conservatives and keep politics out of it. It's like they believe that someone talking about science, facts, and observable evidence is now akin to spouting a political position.

I guess I've never read comments on CNET before. I probably shouldn't be, but I was a bit surprised to find that much derp there.


I am 100% convinced that there is a small army of people who are paid to spread political propaganda in news story comment sections, primarily from the right.
 
2014-03-01 02:03:48 AM  

Cubansaltyballs: I enjoyed the comments section in the article. A bunch of retards saying he shouldn't be dissing conservatives and keep politics out of it. It's like they believe that someone talking about science, facts, and observable evidence is now akin to spouting a political position.


Along with the old 'Gore invented the Internet' chestnut. I swear there's only five punchlines some of these guys know:

*Gore invented the Internet, hahaha!
*Obama thinks there are 57 states, hahaha!
*Dead people vote in Chicago, hahaha!
*Hillary looks ugly in a pantsuit, hahaha!
*Chappaquiddick, hahaha! (though they seem to finally be letting this one go)
 
2014-03-01 02:40:47 AM  

Harry_Seldon: DrBenway: Cubansaltyballs: I enjoyed the comments section in the article. A bunch of retards saying he shouldn't be dissing conservatives and keep politics out of it. It's like they believe that someone talking about science, facts, and observable evidence is now akin to spouting a political position.

I guess I've never read comments on CNET before. I probably shouldn't be, but I was a bit surprised to find that much derp there.

I am 100% convinced that there is a small army of people who are paid to spread political propaganda in news story comment sections, primarily from the right.


Alternatively, you could hypothesize a small army of people who are paid to disrupt news story comment sections for some reason. This is a simpler theory that still explains derp: it's just the maximal form of disruption, you Obama-fellatin' welfare cowboy.
 
2014-03-01 03:00:08 AM  
The money quote was this

""When we work on making our devices accessible by the blind," he said, "I don't consider the bloody ROI."

Good for Tim - NCPPR is a vile organization.
 
2014-03-01 04:17:23 AM  

Harry_Seldon: DrBenway: Cubansaltyballs: I enjoyed the comments section in the article. A bunch of retards saying he shouldn't be dissing conservatives and keep politics out of it. It's like they believe that someone talking about science, facts, and observable evidence is now akin to spouting a political position.

I guess I've never read comments on CNET before. I probably shouldn't be, but I was a bit surprised to find that much derp there.

I am 100% convinced that there is a small army of people who are paid to spread political propaganda in news story comment sections, primarily from the right.


I sure hope so. If there are so many people who really think that way, we're farked.
 
2014-03-01 04:56:39 AM  
davidhallsocialmedia.files.wordpress.com
Old news from Canada, but yeah.
 
2014-03-01 05:16:07 AM  
Sooooo, let's build solar arrays which require massive mining and other environmentally damaging pursuits to reduce in a negligible fashion the output of a substance which is what all plants crave? Yeah, that's a tough choice, I want to make my smug shortsighted frenemies in media "love" me for supporting Maggie Thatcher's coal miners union-busting crusade. What? Oh right, those silver mines are on the ass end of the world , who cares if some tribals have their water spoiled. You global warming retards should be ashamed.
 
2014-03-01 05:26:49 AM  

Cubansaltyballs: I enjoyed the comments section in the article. A bunch of retards saying he shouldn't be dissing conservatives and keep politics out of it. It's like they believe that someone talking about science, facts, and observable evidence is now akin to spouting a political position.


They're right. Unfortunately, they are themselves the ones responsible for that.
 
2014-03-01 07:19:56 AM  
Tim Cook has an obligation to work in the best interests of shareholders.

Where these particular shareholders are wrong is that the environmental efforts they are complaining about are probably done in an effort to help long term profits and the shareholders. Environmental initiatives can pay off via potentially reducing costs over the long term, reducing future criticism of the company, and reducing the risk of future litigation. Even if those things come to naught, the primary benefit of this to the company is the PR benefit of being able to tell smug apple consumers* and potential consumers "ooh look how much we care about the environment", leading to increased sales and profits.

So yeah, if these shareholders don't agree that these efforts are worth it, then yeah they should sell.

/* posted from my iPad
 
2014-03-01 07:31:40 AM  
I'm thinking Mr. Cook will be hearing from Mr. Icahn.
 
2014-03-01 07:32:17 AM  
So, they bought a few shares of Apple stock, which entitles them to admission to the shareholder meeting. Just so they could troll the shareholder meeting, and then issue a press release with their ranting spin.
 
2014-03-01 07:54:50 AM  

Cubansaltyballs: I enjoyed the comments section in the article. A bunch of retards saying he shouldn't be dissing conservatives and keep politics out of it. It's like they believe that someone talking about science, facts, and observable evidence is now akin to spouting a political position.


Love the comment biatching about Apple's support for the "homosexual agenda" and the response on Tim Cook.
 
2014-03-01 07:58:12 AM  

Debeo Summa Credo: Tim Cook has an obligation to work in the best interests of shareholders.

Where these particular shareholders are wrong is that the environmental efforts they are complaining about are probably done in an effort to help long term profits and the shareholders. Environmental initiatives can pay off via potentially reducing costs over the long term, reducing future criticism of the company, and reducing the risk of future litigation. Even if those things come to naught, the primary benefit of this to the company is the PR benefit of being able to tell smug apple consumers* and potential consumers "ooh look how much we care about the environment", leading to increased sales and profits.

So yeah, if these shareholders don't agree that these efforts are worth it, then yeah they should sell.



And should Apple encounter any upstart competitors with the temerity to challenge their awesomeness, those profits and Tim Cook's PR legacy will come in handy when buying legislators to draw up new regulations that Apple will have the scale to deal with but the competitors won't, especially when the day comes when Apple is run by less-conscientious people.

But in the meantime, good for Apple. They're doing well by doing good (as far as we can tell by what's in the public domain) and that's better than most.

/non-fanboi apple customer
 
2014-03-01 08:05:55 AM  
Agree with Tim Cook's sentiment, but let's not act like making computers is an environmentally sound business.
 
2014-03-01 08:09:45 AM  

Cubansaltyballs: I enjoyed the comments section in the article. A bunch of retards saying he shouldn't be dissing conservatives and keep politics out of it. It's like they believe that someone talking about science, facts, and observable evidence is now akin to spouting a political position.


Unfortunately reality has become something right wingers have decided they oppose.
 
2014-03-01 08:14:57 AM  

Debeo Summa Credo: Tim Cook has an obligation to work in the best interests of shareholders.

Where these particular shareholders are wrong

...

These particular shareholders bought stock to publicize their ideology.

They would gladly sink the stock and kill the company if it brought them attention.

So good on Tim for telling them to STFU.
 
2014-03-01 08:24:39 AM  
"We object to increased government control over company products and operations, and likewise mandatory environmental standards," Danhof wrote alongside NCPPR's demand that the pledge be voted on at the meeting. "This is something [Apple] should be actively fighting, not preparing surrender."

Maybe it is just me, but I imagine a group of fat, old, white men with ruddy skin sitting around at a table drafting this language while convincing themselves West Virginia's recent problem was somehow the result of liberals.
 
2014-03-01 08:25:04 AM  

Gulper Eel: And should Apple encounter any upstart competitors with the temerity to challenge their awesomeness, those profits and Tim Cook's PR legacy will come in handy when buying legislators to draw up new regulations that Apple will have the scale to deal with but the competitors won't, especially when the day comes when Apple is run by less-conscientious people.


Apple will do what it has always done when it comes across a start up that does something good that it wants. It will buy them out. Why spend the money on people who won't stay bought when you can use it on buying the startups who will stay bought.


Good on Tim Cook calling out this short term obession that has gripped the financial markets. Shares are medium to long term investment in companies and not a casino to make money from suckers. Most of these hedge funds and investment banks don't see Enron as a problem, they only saw the problem was not getting out of the pyramid scheme in time as the problem.
 
2014-03-01 08:57:48 AM  
Call me when they start making their phones in the US.

/no, seriously, call me. I have an iPhone and will pick up
 
2014-03-01 09:15:45 AM  

Unobtanium: So, they bought a few shares of Apple stock, which entitles them to admission to the shareholder meeting. Just so they could troll the shareholder meeting, and then issue a press release with their ranting spin.


Bingo. It's not a new approach, but only very recently was I aware of it being taken by the right to push a larger agenda this way. A similar tack has been used to confront corporations from worker perspectives, etc. -- the documentary Harlan County USA comes to mind (from the mid-70s and about a coal strike in Kentucky; it's very good if anyone hasn't seen it). Don't know how far back before that it's been used.
 
2014-03-01 09:16:46 AM  

Harry_Seldon: DrBenway: Cubansaltyballs: I enjoyed the comments section in the article. A bunch of retards saying he shouldn't be dissing conservatives and keep politics out of it. It's like they believe that someone talking about science, facts, and observable evidence is now akin to spouting a political position.

I guess I've never read comments on CNET before. I probably shouldn't be, but I was a bit surprised to find that much derp there.

I am 100% convinced that there is a small army of people who are paid to spread political propaganda in news story comment sections, primarily from the right.


http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/feb/08/what-is-astrotu rf ing
 
2014-03-01 09:17:07 AM  
"We object to increased government control over company products and operations, and likewise mandatory environmental standards," Danhof wrote alongside NCPPR's demand that the pledge be voted on at the meeting. "This is something [Apple] should be actively fighting, not preparing surrender."

Why do conservatives always blame the government for things the government had no hand in? Apple voluntarily makes environmentally-conscious business decisions and this group of tards starts crying about "increased government control" and  "mandatory environmental standards."   That Duck Dynasty douchebag says a bunch of racist, homophobic things that causes a bunch of their show's advertisers to pull out, and Sarah Palin starts babbling about his "First Amendment rights" being violated.

For all their tri-corner hats and 'Murrican flags, these people don't understand even the most rudimentary aspects of how America works.
 
2014-03-01 09:27:09 AM  
Wait. So a share holder asked if certain spending had a return on investment and the CEO, instead of answering it, lashed out at the shareholder?

Is this what I'm supposed to be cheering?

Also, asking if they would be viable without government subsidies( this is the corporate welfare the hive mind hates) is a valid question.

Apple believes this stance will be profitable and they aren't wrong but let's not pretend this is anything but a profit driven statement. People want to feel like they are helping even if they aren't. Looking at you entire hybrid car marketing industry.
 
2014-03-01 09:37:10 AM  

Gosling: Cubansaltyballs: I enjoyed the comments section in the article. A bunch of retards saying he shouldn't be dissing conservatives and keep politics out of it. It's like they believe that someone talking about science, facts, and observable evidence is now akin to spouting a political position.

Along with the old 'Gore invented the Internet' chestnut. I swear there's only five punchlines some of these guys know:

*Gore invented the Internet, hahaha!
*Obama thinks there are 57 states, hahaha!
*Dead people vote in Chicago, hahaha!
*Hillary looks ugly in a pantsuit, hahaha!
*Chappaquiddick, hahaha! (though they seem to finally be letting this one go)


It's a new millennium. Some have moved on to:

"Benghazi!"
"Obamacare!"
"Protect Marriage!"
 
2014-03-01 09:40:32 AM  

Brostorm: Wait. So a share holder asked if certain spending had a return on investment and the CEO, instead of answering it, lashed out at the shareholder?


Awfully early to be this disingenuous on a Saturday, isn't it?
 
2014-03-01 09:45:32 AM  

DrBenway: Brostorm: Wait. So a share holder asked if certain spending had a return on investment and the CEO, instead of answering it, lashed out at the shareholder?

Awfully early to be this disingenuous on a Saturday, isn't it?


Oh I guess mocking and dismissing is the accepted mode of conversation for you and Mr. Cook?
 
2014-03-01 09:48:21 AM  

Brostorm: Wait. So a share holder asked if certain spending had a return on investment and the CEO, instead of answering it, lashed out at the shareholder?

Is this what I'm supposed to be cheering?

Also, asking if they would be viable without government subsidies( this is the corporate welfare the hive mind hates) is a valid question.

Apple believes this stance will be profitable and they aren't wrong but let's not pretend this is anything but a profit driven statement. People want to feel like they are helping even if they aren't. Looking at you entire hybrid car marketing industry.

media.tumblr.com

Yeah apple is going to go under because a few derps said and furthermore comma, semi colon; period.

Save that shiat for your fans at the sisterfarking republic circle jerk. I hope for your sake thats not the best you've got otherwise I foresee a lot of whinging butthurt oozing out of you in very near future ms. Derpstorm.
 
2014-03-01 09:48:22 AM  
is it chamfered?
 
2014-03-01 09:58:45 AM  

ScaryBottles: Brostorm: Wait. So a share holder asked if certain spending had a return on investment and the CEO, instead of answering it, lashed out at the shareholder?

Is this what I'm supposed to be cheering?

Also, asking if they would be viable without government subsidies( this is the corporate welfare the hive mind hates) is a valid question.

Apple believes this stance will be profitable and they aren't wrong but let's not pretend this is anything but a profit driven statement. People want to feel like they are helping even if they aren't. Looking at you entire hybrid car marketing industry.


Yeah apple is going to go under because a few derps said and furthermore comma, semi colon; period.

Save that shiat for your fans at the sisterfarking republic circle jerk. I hope for your sake thats not the best you've got otherwise I foresee a lot of whinging butthurt oozing out of you in very near future ms. Derpstorm.


Responding with gifs and straw men, Am I really on Tumblr?

This is about profits, I don't see where I said this would hurt apples business

Go argue with 13 year old girls about being a pansexual otherkin transexual reincarnated Norse God Barony on tumblr and leave the gifs there.
 
2014-03-01 10:07:14 AM  

Brostorm: DrBenway: Brostorm: Wait. So a share holder asked if certain spending had a return on investment and the CEO, instead of answering it, lashed out at the shareholder?

Awfully early to be this disingenuous on a Saturday, isn't it?

Oh I guess mocking and dismissing is the accepted mode of conversation for you and Mr. Cook?


Yeah, sorry about that. You totally deserve better. Clearly.
 
2014-03-01 10:09:58 AM  

Brostorm: ScaryBottles: Brostorm: Wait. So a share holder asked if certain spending had a return on investment and the CEO, instead of answering it, lashed out at the shareholder?

Is this what I'm supposed to be cheering?

Also, asking if they would be viable without government subsidies( this is the corporate welfare the hive mind hates) is a valid question.

Apple believes this stance will be profitable and they aren't wrong but let's not pretend this is anything but a profit driven statement. People want to feel like they are helping even if they aren't. Looking at you entire hybrid car marketing industry.


Yeah apple is going to go under because a few derps said and furthermore comma, semi colon; period.

Save that shiat for your fans at the sisterfarking republic circle jerk. I hope for your sake thats not the best you've got otherwise I foresee a lot of whinging butthurt oozing out of you in very near future ms. Derpstorm.

Responding with gifs and straw men, Am I really on Tumblr?

This is about profits, I don't see where I said this would hurt apples business

Go argue with 13 year old girls about being a pansexual otherkin transexual reincarnated Norse God Barony on tumblr and leave the gifs there.


Whatevs sparky...
 
2014-03-01 10:47:01 AM  

Harry_Seldon: I am 100% convinced that there is a small army of people who are paid to spread political propaganda in news story comment sections, primarily from the right.


Some of them even show up here.

The only good thing about derp is that it's easy to spot.
 
2014-03-01 10:47:42 AM  

Harry_Seldon: DrBenway: Cubansaltyballs: I enjoyed the comments section in the article. A bunch of retards saying he shouldn't be dissing conservatives and keep politics out of it. It's like they believe that someone talking about science, facts, and observable evidence is now akin to spouting a political position.

I guess I've never read comments on CNET before. I probably shouldn't be, but I was a bit surprised to find that much derp there.

I am 100% convinced that there is a small army of people who are paid to spread political propaganda in news story comment sections, primarily from the right.


Except for the fact it is leftist groups who have admitted to that...
 
2014-03-01 10:53:54 AM  

Barricaded Gunman: "We object to increased government control over company products and operations, and likewise mandatory environmental standards," Danhof wrote alongside NCPPR's demand that the pledge be voted on at the meeting. "This is something [Apple] should be actively fighting, not preparing surrender."

Why do conservatives always blame the government for things the government had no hand in? Apple voluntarily makes environmentally-conscious business decisions and this group of tards starts crying about "increased government control" and  "mandatory environmental standards."   That Duck Dynasty douchebag says a bunch of racist, homophobic things that causes a bunch of their show's advertisers to pull out, and Sarah Palin starts babbling about his "First Amendment rights" being violated.

For all their tri-corner hats and 'Murrican flags, these people don't understand even the most rudimentary aspects of how America works.


They say thy love America, without knowledge of how it works. Of course if they had the knowledge, they probably would be elitist a since they couldn't vote with their gut anymore. Besides, knowledge is dangerous for conservatives because their arguments quite often fail when confronted with reality.
 
2014-03-01 11:13:14 AM  
"environmentally friendly attitude"

You're kidding, right?

Has anybody been to China? You know, the place where visibility is so bad due to the smog that they are going to have to start issuing gas masks to visitors so they don't die on their first day there?

Lower labor costs is only a smokescreen for the real reason for moving production to China. Offshoring our pollution, and then getting to look all smug about how "environmentally friendly" we are.
 
2014-03-01 11:16:39 AM  
Beijing would like a word, Mr. Cook.
 
2014-03-01 11:19:42 AM  

RickyWilliams'sBong: Cubansaltyballs: I enjoyed the comments section in the article. A bunch of retards saying he shouldn't be dissing conservatives and keep politics out of it. It's like they believe that someone talking about science, facts, and observable evidence is now akin to spouting a political position.

Love the comment biatching about Apple's support for the "homosexual agenda" and the response on Tim Cook.


Wow, that guy deserves 11/10 on his trolling...or maybe he actually believes that shiat.

I'm sick of hearing about homosexuality.  Let them get married.  Let's also not pretend it's a big deal when someone comes out.  If some NFL or NBA athlete or some other celebrity announces they're gay, let's respond collectively with "So what?"

But here's what I got out of the article:   "We do a lot of things for reasons besides profit motive," Cook said

/mind blown
//have I been suddenly transported to an alternate universe?
 
2014-03-01 12:09:31 PM  

Debeo Summa Credo: Tim Cook has an obligation to work in the best interests of shareholders.

Where these particular shareholders are wrong is that the environmental efforts they are complaining about are probably done in an effort to help long term profits and the shareholders. Environmental initiatives can pay off via potentially reducing costs over the long term, reducing future criticism of the company, and reducing the risk of future litigation. Even if those things come to naught, the primary benefit of this to the company is the PR benefit of being able to tell smug apple consumers* and potential consumers "ooh look how much we care about the environment", leading to increased sales and profits.

So yeah, if these shareholders don't agree that these efforts are worth it, then yeah they should sell.

/* posted from my iPad


Debeo Summa Credo: Tim Cook has an obligation to work in the best interests of shareholders.

Where these particular shareholders are wrong is that the environmental efforts they are complaining about are probably done in an effort to help long term profits and the shareholders. Environmental initiatives can pay off via potentially reducing costs over the long term, reducing future criticism of the company, and reducing the risk of future litigation. Even if those things come to naught, the primary benefit of this to the company is the PR benefit of being able to tell smug apple consumers* and potential consumers "ooh look how much we care about the environment", leading to increased sales and profits.

So yeah, if these shareholders don't agree that these efforts are worth it, then yeah they should sell.

/* posted from my iPad


You've read Apple's Articles of Incorporation and By-Laws?
 
2014-03-01 12:19:36 PM  

gfid: RickyWilliams'sBong: Cubansaltyballs: I enjoyed the comments section in the article. A bunch of retards saying he shouldn't be dissing conservatives and keep politics out of it. It's like they believe that someone talking about science, facts, and observable evidence is now akin to spouting a political position.

Love the comment biatching about Apple's support for the "homosexual agenda" and the response on Tim Cook.

Wow, that guy deserves 11/10 on his trolling...or maybe he actually believes that shiat.

I'm sick of hearing about homosexuality.  Let them get married.  Let's also not pretend it's a big deal when someone comes out.  If some NFL or NBA athlete or some other celebrity announces they're gay, let's respond collectively with "So what?"

But here's what I got out of the article:   "We do a lot of things for reasons besides profit motive," Cook said

/mind blown
//have I been suddenly transported to an alternate universe?


Apple has been doing things "for reasons besides profit motive" for many years. It's just that you don't get to hear about it, because a positive news story about Apple doesn't get as many page clicks as a negative troll headline.

And other companies that try to be socially responsible are also being criticized by these "profits are the only thing that matters" crackpots. It just doesn't get the same amount of publicity.
 
2014-03-01 12:40:04 PM  
and yet, Apple won't even sell people an OS upgrade for early iPads, meaning you have to buy another one.

Apple, like many companies are in the environmental thing as PR. If they were serious about the environment they'd make products with longer lives that were easier to repair.
 
2014-03-01 01:38:57 PM  

Debeo Summa Credo: Tim Cook has an obligation to work in the best interests of shareholders.


The fact that Apple stock has risen ten-fold in five years isn't enough for them? JFC, we really do need pitchforks and torches.
 
2014-03-01 02:08:47 PM  

DrBenway: Unobtanium: So, they bought a few shares of Apple stock, which entitles them to admission to the shareholder meeting. Just so they could troll the shareholder meeting, and then issue a press release with their ranting spin.

Bingo. It's not a new approach, but only very recently was I aware of it being taken by the right to push a larger agenda this way. A similar tack has been used to confront corporations from worker perspectives, etc. -- the documentary Harlan County USA comes to mind (from the mid-70s and about a coal strike in Kentucky; it's very good if anyone hasn't seen it). Don't know how far back before that it's been used.


It's a tactic also used by the Yakuza in Japan where a gang will buy some shares of a major company, then threaten to show up at the shareholder's meeting drunk and causing a major disturbance unless they get paid off.
 
2014-03-01 02:21:28 PM  

farkeruk: and yet, Apple won't even sell people an OS upgrade for early iPads, meaning you have to buy another one.

Apple, like many companies are in the environmental thing as PR. If they were serious about the environment they'd make products with longer lives that were easier to repair.


All of their OS updates are free. Why would you want to pay for one???
 
2014-03-01 02:40:33 PM  

digistil: farkeruk: and yet, Apple won't even sell people an OS upgrade for early iPads, meaning you have to buy another one.

Apple, like many companies are in the environmental thing as PR. If they were serious about the environment they'd make products with longer lives that were easier to repair.

All of their OS updates are free. Why would you want to pay for one???


Perhaps Google's Project Ara will come up with something equivalent modular/replaceable, but I wouldn't hold your breath.  I have a printer whose components are EOL and replaceable but at greater cost than to buy a new one. Let's not forget I'm a bit clumsy with the screwdriver. So, off to the local electronics recycler it will go.

The iPad 1 got left behind at iOS 5, and thanks to limited RAM/CPU doesn't run so well with that update. I'm too impatient to use ours, the kids don't mind.
 
2014-03-01 02:55:46 PM  
Go Apple, be environmentally conscious and eat into profits where it is easy and low cost.

/What is the air quality in China like?
 
Displayed 50 of 65 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report