Disgusting people...

[Deactivated] on 05/06/2017 - 21:42
Last edited 06/06/2017 - 08:48 by 1 other user

Bought a large pack of chicken wings from Costco today. When I reached home and opened the box, I realised that two chicken wings looked like as if they were half eaten. Called Costco and explained them the situation. They were more than happy to refund me the money.

I took the item back and showed it to the person at the refunds counter. He also agreed that the chicken wings in question did look like as they had been eaten.

I am appalled at the behavior of people. Why would someone in right mind do this kind of thing?

TL;DR - Found two pieces of half eaten chicken wings in my purchase from Costco.

Food & Grocery

Comments

  • RockyRaccoon on 05/06/2017 - 21:44
    +12

    Homer does it again… 😀

    • kwijybo on 05/06/2017 - 22:04
      +24

      If it has a toothpick in it, it's free!

    • Scrooge McDuck on 07/06/2017 - 15:41
      +3

      People of WalmartCostco.

  • Savas on 05/06/2017 - 21:45
    +26

    Probably thought it was a sample, but yeah that's disgusting. For example, at the tip people constantly chuck recyclables and paper in the garbage, PLEASE RECYCLE. But what can you do?

      • Jolakot on 05/06/2017 - 22:35
        +26

        I imagine it's the energy cost and the waste produced while making it that people want to avoid.

      • kale chips suck on 06/06/2017 - 13:14
        +21

        It's because the embodied energy in recycled paper is less than 'virgin' paper and because companies like reflex continue to use native timbers in their paperstock but they use less in their recycled paper.

        Also, the 'stored CO2' argument is nonsensical when you realise that paper in landfill decomposes and releases its "stored" CO2 quite rapidly.

        • Pacify on 07/06/2017 - 15:07
          +19

          Pretty clear its you who that doesn't understand basic principles of resource use, nor how paper is made.

        • FabMan on 09/06/2017 - 23:28
          +1

          @Gershom: You are an idiot

        • Pacify on 07/06/2017 - 15:10
          +8

          Pricing mechanisms are inefficient for recycling, it costs more to create and administer than it returns in increased recycling, which is why SA is the only state that has it (though its still worthwhile for aluminium, due to how energy intensive aluminium refining is, but for anything else its very marginal.)

          Education and awareness is much more effective to get people to change their recycling habits.

        • echelon6 on 07/06/2017 - 15:13
          -8

          @Pacify: If pricing mechanisms are inefficient, that's the economic signal that that sort of thing probably shouldn't be done. If it's a public good situation, then the government should subsidise it, either way, market forces are needed.

        • Pacify on 07/06/2017 - 15:19
          +7

          @echelon6:

          Its not done because its silly. There's simple no way to put a pricing mechanism for the recycling of paper.

          The government already subsides it by giving you a recycling bin and collecting it. All it requires is people not to be stupid and lazy. That, unfortunately, is the hard part. Which is why education and information is the most useful policy instrument when it comes to recycling imo

        • Krizy on 07/06/2017 - 15:24

          @echelon6: The enforcement of pricing mechanisms costs more than the benefits of recycling. You just explained that 'the economic signal' tells us that literally forcing people to recycle 'shouldn't be done'. With the technological and political limitations of the current business environment, we can't turn a profit by keeping you from being a donkey.

          You're probably letting out a big sigh of relief at that last sentence.

        • Pacify on 07/06/2017 - 16:55
          +7

          @Gershom:

          So hilarious, given its blindingly obvious that its you that doesn't understand it.

          Its okay friend, go back reading your Murdoch newspapers and listening to talk show hosts who think its the 1950s still. Its nice live in a bubble.

          "the profit of doom". Oh god, those evil little scientists getting their massive grants to live a life of luxury, all those scientists who buy million dollar properties and new sports cars. They are so evil, I'm telling you. They are probably working for the Chinese government, because we all know global warming is just a Chinese hoax to hurt our economy!

        • Gershom on 07/06/2017 - 18:18
          -6

          @Pacify: > scientists who buy million dollar properties

          No, that would be Al Gore and Tim Flannel, both of whom bought waterside multimillion dollar properties. The gullible warm mongers out there sound just like Hare Krishna devotees giving their money to the Guru. I wonder why the British courts ordered 9 falsifications to be taken out of Gore's mockumentary before it could be shown in schools there. They do say ignorance is bliss, and just look how blissfully happy the gullible little greenies are.

        • erbasaki on 07/06/2017 - 20:49

          "Education and awareness is much more effective to get people to change their recycling habits."
          more effective than paying them to do it? really? really?

        • cathole on 08/06/2017 - 03:02

          @merba9: if you read his previous posts, he mentions that pricing schemes aren't as cost effective. Not sure about the accuracy of this, but since the scheme has not proliferated we can probably assume that it's the case.

          Pricing schemes and the behaviour of consumers are not as simple as you think.

        • johnno07 on 08/06/2017 - 07:30
          +3

          @Gershom: Global warming is happening. It doesn't cost me anything to know this. I'm not sure how my awareness of how we are (profanity) up our world for our descendants can be described as blissful?

        • Gershom on 08/06/2017 - 08:35
          -6

          @johnno07: > Global warming is happening.

          Of course it is. It's just not man made. There have been at least 10 ice ages, with interglacial warming between each. This is just another one. While there are several discredited computer models saying warming is man made, there is actually not a single shred of evidence. But I don't imagine you will research it for yourself, your kind never do.

        • echelon6 on 08/06/2017 - 09:55
          -1

          @Pacify:

          Why is it silly? They can put a price on aluminium cans, why can't they do it for glass, or recyclable plastics, or paper? Even if it's still not worth the householder to recycle for the few cents it's worth per bag, maybe downstream in the process a sufficient price will encourage private operators to filter the rubbish for recyclable material for profit. The net effect is you will increase recycling activity if you pyt a price on it.

          But the government so far has chosen not to. One can only speculate why.

          You can guilt people into recycling by ad campaigns and 'education' but that's just a feel good exercise - if it's really worthwhile to do, put a price on it.

          In the meantime I'm not going to bother separating my rubbish unnecessarily just to have it mixed together downstream anyway because, again for the reason above, there's currently no price for it, and it's cheaper for it all to go to landfill.

        • erbasaki on 08/06/2017 - 10:43

          @cathole:
          Of course they aren't cost effective. But instead of spending billions and billions in renewable energy research and all the other greenie initiatives…. Why not pay the people to recycle. Up it to a reasonable amount so people will actually do it.
          Who cares if it ends up costing instead if making a profit. That's not supposed to be the goal is it? Aren't we supposed to save the earth at all cost?
          It couldn't be much worse than spending billions on renewable energy only to let half the state of SA go without power every few weeks.

        • mattythecapybara on 08/06/2017 - 13:28

          @Pacify: While technically correct, it's a bit disingenuous to say SA is the only state that has container deposits, given NT is a territory, and NSW is starting this year.

        • macrocephalic on 08/06/2017 - 15:27

          @Gershom: Oh god, you're one of those. Do you realise that we're actually still coming out of the last ice age. That the temperature is increasing so rapidly has nothing to do with ice ages. Do you also think the earth is flat?

        • Gershom on 08/06/2017 - 15:29
          -1

          @macrocephalic:> Do you realise that we're actually still coming out of the last ice age. That the temperature is increasing so rapidly has nothing to do with ice ages.

          Do you realise you just contradicted yourself? Still no shred of evidence I see.

        • macrocephalic on 08/06/2017 - 15:36
          -1

          @Gershom: No I didn't, I mentioned the speed at which the temperature was increasing. Ice ages last tens of thousands of years, the warming that we're seeing has happened mostly in the last century.

          Here's some reading for you: https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/GlobalWarming/pag…

        • cantoangel on 09/06/2017 - 07:51

          @Gershom: Gross, all I'm seeing are sweeping generalised insults whereas the other are actually trying to reason with facts.. makes it so hard to try and read both sides.

        • Gershom on 09/06/2017 - 08:09
          -1

          @macrocephalic: Oh really? And the mediaeval warm period? The Roman warm period? Did these happen in the last century?

        • macrocephalic on 09/06/2017 - 09:49

          @Gershom: The medieval warm period was not a global phenomenon, it was region specific.

          I don't know much about the roman warm period.

        • Gershom on 09/06/2017 - 11:46

          @macrocephalic:

          The medieval warm period was not a global phenomenon, it was region specific.

          Yes, just that bit between the north and south poles.

        • FabMan on 09/06/2017 - 23:29
          -1

          @Gershom: Anti-vaxxer too?

      • [Deactivated] on 07/06/2017 - 17:47
        +13

        Holy shit I've read some dumb comments lately, but this takes the cake.

        • [Deactivated] on 07/06/2017 - 19:22
          +2

          Just remember that your vote counts for exactly the same amount as someone who believes that recycling anything bio-degradable is bad for the environment.

        • echelon6 on 08/06/2017 - 09:52

          Why? Everything he said is true.

          -What's the point of recycling paper? It's 100% renewable. True.

          -It's almost all from plantations. True.

          -The plantations cause CO2 to be locked up into useful paper that we can use. True.

          If we just kept pumping more money into plantations and just add used paper rubbish to landfill, the net effect is more and more CO2 is sequestered permanently away from the atmosphere in solid form (carbon in paper). Recycling will reduce feedstock needed, so less plantations are needed. It's economically inefficient (see above, I got downvoted but no one can provide a proper counterargument beyond calling me names).

        • macrocephalic on 08/06/2017 - 15:28
          +2

          @echelon6: You're not thinking of the entire system. I'll bet that the production of paper causes more carbon to be released into the atmosphere than the comparative weight of the paper - so it's carbon positive even if the paper never decomposes (which it does).

        • Gershom on 09/06/2017 - 16:15
          -2

          @macrocephalic:

          I'll bet that the production of paper causes more carbon ……

          Finally, an admission that you don't know, just guessing. That was obvious to a lot of us.

        • macrocephalic on 10/06/2017 - 13:22
          +1

          @Gershom: I really was going to reply constructively, but I overcame my urge to feed the trolls. Really, get a life.

  • Ughhh on 05/06/2017 - 21:51
    +41

    At least you can see it. I've seen people use roll on deodarants, mascaras (hello eye infection), makeups and place it back on the shelf.

    • tajid on 06/06/2017 - 13:53
      +13

      EWWWW

    • Meliodas on 07/06/2017 - 10:02
      +23

      everyday we stray futher away from god's light

    • dfaktz on 07/06/2017 - 12:14
      +1

      It just occured to me now, for the first time in my life, at 25.. that when I'm watching girls do that (rather catch it in the corner of my eye) that is indeed what they are doing. >.>

    • PictureMeBroken on 07/06/2017 - 14:45

      Rough stuff. Have seen a guy putting in-ear headphones into his ear and then back in the box, back in the shelf. Nasty !

      • Scrooge McDuck on 07/06/2017 - 15:44

        He probably didn't approve of the sound quality.

        • dfaktz on 07/06/2017 - 18:01
          +2

          He complained of their weird waxy/lubricated texture when he put them in his ear and shuffled them to the comfortable position.

        • rompastompa on 08/06/2017 - 10:07

          @dfaktz: so the extra ear waxiness isn't a feature??

    • AG2015 on 09/06/2017 - 16:54

      🤢🤢

    • Moose-au on 11/06/2017 - 17:49

      LOL, a few years back I was in a large, up-market department store in Bangkok, Thailand and saw a guy use roll-on deoderant and then put it back on the shelf. Then 2 other guys did the same thing - with other rollies.

      And they were ALL staff of the store !!!!

      4-5 other staff (men and women) watched these 3 (profanity) do it and just smirked. Was common practice.

      YEUCK !!! Needless to say, I did not buy anything and left.

  • EFC94 on 05/06/2017 - 21:53
    +14

    After working at Woolworths I'm not really surprised. People walk around and eat it because they don't care.

  • AdosHouse on 05/06/2017 - 22:00
    +39

    Nothing surprises me any more. I work in a pub and I see messed up things all the time, from people shitting in the urinals, to woman writing stuff on the walls with period blood, to people smoking used cigarette butts they find in ashtrays.

    • silverrat23 on 05/06/2017 - 23:15
      +3

      to people smoking used cigarette butts they find in ashtrays.

      Saw this the other day on a busy street in the heart of Melbourne CBD and yet, I was just walking by.

      People these days.

      • Charity on 05/06/2017 - 23:47
        +15

        Saw a dad getting his kids to help him find the "repairable" cigarette butts outside a shopping centre.

        • Scrooge McDuck on 07/06/2017 - 15:46
          +11

          Well they are closer to the ground…

        • daleyboy79 on 09/06/2017 - 13:50
          +1

          @Scrooge McDuck: dont forget about that perfect 20/20 vision either

        • Scrooge McDuck on 09/06/2017 - 15:13
          +2

          @daleyboy79:

          Or their small nimble fingers.

        • [Deactivated] on 09/06/2017 - 15:29

          @Scrooge McDuck: I blame the Chimney Sweepers Act of 1788. Kids are pretty much free to do as they like these days.

        • gimli on 09/06/2017 - 22:54

          @Mintynovember: didn't it get revoked in 1987

      • AdosHouse on 06/06/2017 - 02:07
        +3

        I see this all the time. Even one person I see quite regularly in the morning, goes through our outside ash bins, and finds some butts that aren't quite finished.

        • John Kimble on 07/06/2017 - 11:57
          +4

          @ggrant:

          considering it does less harm than many other activities people do

          Such as?

        • misterpotatomato on 07/06/2017 - 13:25
          +14

          @ggrant:

          Your last statement is debatable, considering a surgeon got king hit when he asked a man to stop smoking out the front of a hospital.

          I would 100% expect someone to get agro if I asked them to butt out, so I am forced to breathe their second hand smoke.

          Smoking harms both the people that choose to smoke and the people around them, which is sometimes children/infants. It's a stupid addiction and there is no compassion to be had for smokers.

          /Rant

        • jenkemjunkie on 07/06/2017 - 16:06
          -3

          @John Kimble:

          Smoking bongs mate! Which is ok

        • dfaktz on 07/06/2017 - 18:03

          @jenkemjunkie: wat

        • ggrant on 08/06/2017 - 16:16
          +2

          @John Kimble:
          Drinking alcohol, army, hard drugs, politics, religion… … skydiving, economic planetary rape, sex slavery (1/5000 people). Plenty more if you want the list extended.

        • ggrant on 08/06/2017 - 16:32
          +2

          @misterpotatomato:
          No real argument, but so does pollution, military, auto exhaust, infliction of law & order without concent/slavery, royalty, wealth, and adverely poverty, gambling and millions of other activities affect others adversely.

          Have a heart, many people need relief or a crutch.

          It's a stupid addiction and there is no
          compassion to be had for smokers.

          So is greed and power, but it doesn't get the attentin it deserves.
          No compassion for junkies, leppers, suicides or gambling addicts too?

        • secondstory on 08/06/2017 - 16:45

          @ggrant:

          I can't agree to some of those being listed as comparable deals.

        • ggrant on 08/06/2017 - 16:50

          @Myrtacaea:
          and electosmog.

          Thanks 4 reply. Do you agree to any?

        • TRENT86 on 08/06/2017 - 19:25

          @John Kimble: Drinking Alcohol

        • skillet on 09/06/2017 - 10:06

          @misterpotatomato:

          You would be surprised how many hypocrites there are. They tell you not to smoke but these medical personnels smoke like a chimney to elevate their stress during their breaks at the back of hospital alleys.

        • Suckerzpayretail on 09/06/2017 - 11:20

          @John Kimble:
          Eating donuts

        • KevinFine on 09/06/2017 - 12:55
          +5

          @skillet:

          to elevate their stress during their breaks
          think you mean alleviate
          — I had to login to comment 'cos that's what we Ozbees do

        • [Deactivated] on 09/06/2017 - 15:43
          +2

          @KevinFine: Depends on what they are smoking?

        • montorola on 09/06/2017 - 17:46
          +2

          @misterpotatomato:

          It's such a turn off anyway, especially if you see women smoking, deal breaker right there

        • bigpallooka on 09/06/2017 - 18:58
          +2

          @ggrant: I gave up smoking 25 years ago so (typically and probably irrationally) I have the worst kind of hate on for inconsiderate smokers (like those that sit under No Smoking signs at shopping centers and light up.) I gave up because it caused me bad asthma attacks and second hand smoking still does. On top of that my son has 70% reduced lung function so having to wade through smoke is unpleasant and dangerous for him.

          Nobody cares if people smoke (except maybe their loved ones) however the need to light up frequently means that only old hermits can do it without poisoning others. I stayed with my father (a heavy smoking hermit) in his country home once a few years ago. The layers of chemicals in his house from the cigarettes nearly killed me during the night. I would have never made it to a hospital if I had forgotten my Ventolin.

          The non-argument regarding letting people have the vice is typical misdirection. The reason it's taxed to such a degree (at least from a social perspective) is to make it less attractive to kids and young people.

        • ggrant on 10/06/2017 - 15:35

          @bigpallooka:
          I noticed that big insurance company payouts, coincided with consistent government propagandy against tobacco use.
          Anyhow, profit seemed the main factor here IMHO.

        • pull the lever on 10/06/2017 - 15:43

          Crap, people do this?

        • bigpallooka on 10/06/2017 - 17:31
          +1

          @ggrant: I see profit as a motivating factor for governments. There has been a massive public and health industry campaign against big tobacco and the huge cost to health and the financial burden that brings for decades yet packaging, media spots and taxation are the most that governments will do. Let's not forget the tobacco industry is still extremely wealth due to their successful forays into Asia and Africa. Their lobbyists still have some impact despite knowing they sell something that contributes significantly to disease and early death (I reject your use of the word propaganda as… propaganda). Governments aren't known for doing much unless they get votes or income out of it so I don't see the taxation side as anything except business as usual for government.

        • MessyG on 10/06/2017 - 21:06
          +1

          @ggrant: I do and don't agree. Smokers over a certain age get a free pass because they come from a time that doesn't exist anymore. But by god any fool who picks up smoking in this day and age with all the knowledge we have now, the warnings, the tax hikes…shakes stick

        • Scrooge McDuck on 11/06/2017 - 00:00

          @MissG:

          We currently have anti-smoking education, the sin tax and unappealing packaging. The tax could be increased but this would make the financially and/or healthfully irresponsible poorer and increase black market sales.

          Perhaps it's time for a fourth measure, Medicare forfeiture for young people who take up smoking:

          Require retailers to check for a Medicare forfeiture card for anyone born on or after 1/07/1999 along with their ID check. So anyone turning 18 from 1/07/2017 onwards will need to apply for a Medicare forfeiture card if they wish to purchase tobacco legally.

        • GregMonarch on 25/06/2017 - 19:55

          @John Kimble: Inviting ISIS to your daughter's 16th birthday party, and then there's… nope, can't think of another one.

      • ankor on 07/06/2017 - 11:44
        +2

        Must be saving for that sweet smashed avo toast :p

      • John Kimble on 07/06/2017 - 11:58
        +2

        This is the bread and butter activity for many homeless folk. Sort of like dumpster diving, but not.

      • clubberlang on 07/06/2017 - 13:39

        Yeah I've seen this plenty of times as a smoker although it's something I would never do. I used to have a young guy that lived two doors down from me and he used to steal the cigarette butts out of the butt bucket of the guy living between us when he wasn't home and once that guy moved out he started doing it to me. Once I realised my cig butts were disappearing I poured water in the pot I kept them in to stop him doing it.

        It's a pretty gross thing to do but a lot of poor people do it.

        • Scrooge McDuck on 07/06/2017 - 15:49
          +6

          Once I realised my cig butts were disappearing I poured water in the pot I kept them in to stop him doing it.

          Why? What is the consequence to you if someone utilises your waste?

        • clubberlang on 07/06/2017 - 15:59
          +1

          @Scrooge McDuck: I didn't want someone skulking around my front door at night rifling through my pot of cigarette butts. Crazy I know.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join