Agent Orange Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 He has, housing (or lack of it) issues... Damn, you edited your post. I know what you mean't and I love the response :D ---------- Post added 20-06-2013 at 23:23 ---------- Are you trying to get sectioned? He'd love that... free accommodation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anywebsite Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 People should look down upon and call out the wealthy who shop at the reduced section. ---------- Post added 20-06-2013 at 21:25 ---------- To avoid food being wasted, it could be distributed via foodbanks to the poor. It's usually perishable food that's about to be no good, by the time it'd been distributed it would be. Nobody wants a soggy pre packed sandwich, even that guy who eats from bins down town would throw it back. Anybody can buy from the reduced section & if it's not bought then it's wasted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cgksheff Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 It's usually perishable food that's about to be no good, by the time ........... Not really. A lot of it stays in my fridge for weeks before finally being consumed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted June 20, 2013 Author Share Posted June 20, 2013 What a prize winning cockrel you are. Get a grip. This is what a reduced section "chaos" looks like... This is what starving despraration looks like.... Once again your brain has leaked its faceas and any logic or sense has flowed out with it. I give up with you. Stealing a penny, stealing a pound, stealing a million, all different, but all theft. Exploiting a cheap resource of food, relied upon by the poorest is the same whether it is wealthy or comfortably off people buying reduced stuff in the supermarket, or rebels stealing rice destined for famine victims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anywebsite Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 Not really. A lot of it stays in my fridge for weeks before finally being consumed. Depends what it is, some of the veg will last a bit if removed from the plastic bags & stored properly. Meat can be frozen. Lots of other stuff just isn't going to last very long at all, especially the stuff a policeman might buy for their snap while working: cakes, sandwiches, etc. Going back to these original policemen, I hope they were just buying some sandwiches or something for their break while on shift. They shouldn't be doing their week's shopping on shift. If they were reduced sandwiches, then they're at least 2 days old & about to turn green, not much you can do to preserve them to hand out to the homeless or whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted June 20, 2013 Author Share Posted June 20, 2013 It was Malthus and he was right. Malthus was a prize idiot, he was wrong and has been proven to be wrong. ---------- Post added 20-06-2013 at 23:47 ---------- So, looking at a coppers starting wage of £21,000 and someone on benefits of £25,000 ( have they been capped yet?) who would you say has the moral obligation? You really don't think things through, do you? Don't be an imbecile. A single person on £21k v a single person on £6k. Only large families get anywhere near £25k and a large chunk of that goes to their landlord. ---------- Post added 20-06-2013 at 23:54 ---------- Are you trying to get sectioned? No, I was lamenting them for taking advantage of a food source increasingly relied on by the poorest in our society. If I wanted to get sectioned I would get myself sectioned. I have no desire to be sectioned, I'm not a violent person, and I dislike violence very much. Violence can be; chopping/beating/shooting somebody up, denying them access to land to grow food/live upon/work upon, exploiting a food source and causing another undue hardship. I don't think violence does people any favours. Especially the victims of the violence. There might be somebody unemployed through no fault of their own, facing jail for being unable to pay his council tax, going hungry tonight due to there being no reduced food for him, whilst a morbidly obese and handsomely remunerated person is living the life off riley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longcol Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 Stealing a penny, stealing a pound, stealing a million, all different, but all theft. Exploiting a cheap resource of food, relied upon by the poorest is the same whether it is wealthy or comfortably off people buying reduced stuff in the supermarket, or rebels stealing rice destined for famine victims. If the reduced section in supermarkets is "relied on by the poorest" then there can't be many poor given that the reduced sections in supermarkets take up about 1% of shelf space. BTW buying in a supermarket isn't stealing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECCOnoob Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 Going back to these original policemen, I hope they were just buying some sandwiches or something for their break while on shift. They shouldn't be doing their week's shopping on shift. If they were reduced sandwiches, then they're at least 2 days old & about to turn green, not much you can do to preserve them to hand out to the homeless or whatever. Im sure they shouldn't. How do we know they were not on their break? Even police officers have one. Im sure they are perfectly entitled to do what they want in their own 'lunch hour'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted June 20, 2013 Author Share Posted June 20, 2013 He has, housing (or lack of it) issues... Damn, you edited your post. I do have some issues stemming from a lack of housing in the past. Being homeless messed my head up, and a great fear of mine is being homeless again. It isn't really a laughing matter, it's stopped me contributing to society when I could have done, and we are all poorer for that. I am comfortably housed now, however I know that many others are not. If everybody was comfortably housed, I would have nothing to rant about, all would be well on the housing front. Our fellow men, women and children would be in a much better position, and society as a whole would be a lot better for it. ---------- Post added 21-06-2013 at 00:03 ---------- If the reduced section in supermarkets is "relied on by the poorest" then there can't be many poor given that the reduced sections in supermarkets take up about 1% of shelf space. BTW buying in a supermarket isn't stealing. That 1% of shelf space has a very quick turnover. Shelves full of goods that do not shift can't really be compared to shelves that do in terms of shelve space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick43 Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 There might be somebody unemployed through no fault of their own, facing jail for being unable to pay his council tax, going hungry tonight due to there being no reduced food for him, whilst a morbidly obese and handsomely remunerated person is living the life off riley. Seriously? This is your justification for this thread? I see you ignored what I posted earlier...obviously didn't fit into your criteria Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.