danciestlobster

Look guy I want to tear the thing down as much as you, but until that gets started this is what I got. In order to be successful in either will require some better commraderie than the tone you seem to have here

While what your saying is fundamentally true, it is worth noting that companies do notice declines in sales even very slight ones, and while there isn't ethical consumption there is certainly still a wide range of how unethical companies are. Just cause none are great doesn't mean they are all equally bad.

It is also worth noting that mass voting with dollars is one of the most effective peaceful tools currently available in a capitalist system to drive change (for non essential/non monopolized goods). Things like fair trade chocolate and sustainable packaging types exist because consumer demand for them is real, and if enough consumers demand and change spending habits for fair wage practices and bare minimum corporate ethics standards it will start to happen too.

Obviously this is all easier with more coordination among the consumers but even without it, we see companies change their practices due to consumer backlash that hits sales now. This is more effective than you may be giving it credit for, even if not as much as we would like

Actually it's usually closer to 5%, but to avoid consumers getting mad most companies have internal variance limits of less. Still, 2% is pretty tight for manufacturing equipment. Despite the mass prevalence of corporate greed, it does end up being better for most companies overall to be on the slightly heavy end of net weight rather than lower end and most manufacturing guardrails and in line weight checks are calibrated with that in mind.

This is entirely due to the risk of images like this going viral and causing blowback for the company. So, to keep products on average a little heavier, posting things like this is great

That's the really cheaper part

I don't know this blimp has me thinking some less than wholesome things....