Not signed in (Sign In)

Category Filter

Welcome, Guest

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

Vanilla 1.1.8 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

    •  
      CommentAuthorbrunop
    • CommentTimeJul 27th 2013
     
    so we're doomed now, huh? they took over johnnie's? ok.
    •  
      CommentAuthorbrunop
    • CommentTimeJul 27th 2013
     
    the white folks won.
    •  
      CommentAuthorbrunop
    • CommentTimeJul 27th 2013
     
    at least market basket is still holdin' down the fort.
  1.  
    Where've you been?

    Johnnie's went under, seems like WF and Shaw's are splitting up the locations.DFL and DTF :D:D:D:D
    •  
      CommentAuthorbrunop
    • CommentTimeJul 27th 2013
     
    i dunno. it seems like it's all fraught. which is what WF always brings to a neighborhood. just tryin' to sort my feelin's out. white folk stuff. . .

    i feel i hate them.

    so far. . .
    •  
      CommentAuthormrotown
    • CommentTimeJul 27th 2013
     
    They have vegan pizza and burritos with vegan meat substitutes.
    No complaintse-f-f-e-c-t a smooth operater operating correctly
    • CommentAuthorMJ
    • CommentTimeJul 27th 2013
     
    brunop:at least market basket is still holdin' down the fort.


    If there was one closer than Somerville, I'd be happier.

    That and I've been trying to find somewhere with flat iron steak that doesn't cost $10-15/lb, no luck so far :/
  2.  
    brunop:i dunno. it seems like it's all fraught...

    no argument there

    I like WF in general, not enough to go out of my way for it thoughDFL and DTF :D:D:D:D
  3.  
    surprisefries:Where've you been?

    Johnnie's went under, seems like WF and Shaw's are splitting up the locations.


    I believe Stop & Shop took the location on Rte 16.

    As for WF in Somerville... things change, the Somerville of today is not the Somerville of old.

    Damn I miss Market Basket (I have yet to find a decent supermarket in CT).
    •  
      CommentAuthorNandy
    • CommentTimeJul 28th 2013
     
    Yeah, it's not like there's another WF like 3 blocks away, they just have to gentrify and price out anyone who can't pay hilariously inflated prices for basic necessities wherever they can get away with it. Profits before people. Libertarians make the most exploitative business owners."life is hard, cats are soft." - surprisefries
  4.  
    Andy:Yeah, it's not like there's another WF like 3 blocks away, they just have to gentrify and price out anyone who can't pay hilariously inflated prices for basic necessities wherever they can get away with it.


    Welcome to Boston? Gentrification is reality, with upsides and downsides.

    Not to mention, on a lot of staples WF is cheaper than Shaws. And thus far MB isn't going anywhere.
    • CommentAuthorryan t
    • CommentTimeJul 28th 2013 edited
     
    Market Basket in Somerville is doing too well to ever go out of business. Have you seen it in there? As far as WF goes, I don't think there's any reason to bemoan one chain getting replaced by another, and that part of Somerville is already pretty middle-class. Although, you can't beat the homey carpeted feel of Johnny's.
    •  
      CommentAuthorjoeyfresh
    • CommentTimeJul 28th 2013 edited
     
    Reactionary hatred of Whole Foods because they're not a local farm stand is ridiculous.
    I wonder how the benefits were at Johnnie's? None, probably? Same with the Hi-Lo.
    Compare apples to apples and Shaws is even with WF on price.
    Etc etc. Yawn. Fucking boring conversation every time it comes up.
    Down with whitey.We'll get you a cat, don't worry -t-honks
    •  
      CommentAuthorNandy
    • CommentTimeJul 28th 2013 edited
     
    Still, I'd take a regional chain over an overly powerful national chain that won't allow unions, harasses workers, and drives the rent up. Not that I went to Johnnie's often, I'm in probably the last almost affordable part of Somerville. Also,whole food's ceo is an outspoken and selfish pile of awful. Not defending any other stores because they probably all suck to some degree, wf just seems particularly obnoxious, at least in what they stand for publicly, the physical stores aren't much worse than most of the other ones.

    Anyway, yeah, the whole foods on beacon is pretty old news."life is hard, cats are soft." - surprisefries
    • CommentAuthorryan t
    • CommentTimeJul 28th 2013 edited
     
    WF's CEO is interesting in that he makes less compared to his floor workers than any other CEO. And yeah, I think he spoke out against Obamacare or something.
    • CommentAuthorAlphonse
    • CommentTimeJul 28th 2013
     
    My beef with Whole Foods is that they put all the small health food stores out of business and then often force local farms and companies to accept low prices...but I'll still shop there.

    Also, they lobby hard against gmo labeling.
    •  
      CommentAuthormrotown
    • CommentTimeJul 28th 2013
     
    They can put a whole foods in my neighborhood as soon as they want to. Quality produce, friendlier than average employees, and plenty of vegan options. I don't get the complaint.e-f-f-e-c-t a smooth operater operating correctly
    • CommentAuthorryan t
    • CommentTimeJul 28th 2013
     
    I don't quite understand the hubub about GMO labeling, because if you're buying something that's labeled ORGANIC, that by definition does not contain GMOs.

    On a larger scale, I'm actually slightly to the pro side of the GMO debate, because as much as I like buying organic, it does not make sense to feed the world's population organically. This is because it would take twice as much land to do so, and would lead to a decrease in wildlife biodiversity.
    •  
      CommentAuthorNuggetross
    • CommentTimeJul 28th 2013
     
    ^sign me up for your mystical gmo future crop that uses half the land of organics, uses less energy, and has no deleterious effects.

    ...also, sign me up for 18 hoverboards.
    • CommentAuthorryan t
    • CommentTimeJul 28th 2013 edited
     
    Eh... yeah, it's a sloppy duct tape fix solution, but on the other hand the world's food supply might be kind of fucked by the end of the century.
    •  
      CommentAuthorratattack
    • CommentTimeJul 28th 2013
     
    Andy, do you know people personally who worked at Whole Foods and had issues with the company? I dated a Whole Foods employee and their benefits were amazing. We lived together and I got to have my own discount card and FREE health insurance. All we had to do was prove we lived together, they don't require you live with someone for a certain amount of time or that you're married and we both had great benefits. The work environment wasn't always the best, it was kind of petty and like high school, but then again so are a lot of jobs.

    The reason the employees are friendlier than average as Sean said is because they're paid a decent amount and have great benefits! I've never gotten time and a half for working on Sundays but they all do.

    Personally, I have a CSA and then supplement what else I need with Whole Foods. I don't buy much in the way of pre-packaged foods and the produce I do buy is usually worlds better than Shaw's or Stop & Shop.

    Also, Ryan, maybe we need to consider that our farming practices are unsustainable and work on our population size first. You just made the argument that we should preserve wildlife biodiversity by improving our methods for agricultural MONOCULTURE. I'd much rather we work on having reasonable population sizes and agricultural biodiversity than work on genetically engineered tomatoes that can withstand colder temps and probably have a shittier nutritional content. As it is a lot of the plants in traditional grocery stores don't have a great nutritional content b/c all of the herbicides, fertilizers, and insecticides prevent plants from producing nutrient-rich phytochemicals at the levels they normally would.
    •  
      CommentAuthorratattack
    • CommentTimeJul 28th 2013 edited
     
    ryan t:...because if you're buying something that's labeled ORGANIC, that by definition does not contain GMOs.

    Also, not necessarily true. Plants don't grow in a vacuum.

    Part of the problem with GMO crops that people who DON'T want to farm GMO crops but grow the same crop in a neighboring field will likely have some cross-pollination. I remember hearing outrage b/c Monsanto's Round-up Ready crops were unintentionally cross-pollinating local fields and then Monsanto was suing those farmers for copyright infringement or some bull when they didn't want GMO plants in the first place.

    ETA: There isn't much they can do with this in terms of labeling. I'm just pointing out that despite the fact that something is labeled organic and the farmer intended to grow GMO-free crops, that isn't guaranteed.
    • CommentAuthorryan t
    • CommentTimeJul 28th 2013
     
    ratattack:

    Also, Ryan, maybe we need to consider that our farming practices are unsustainable and work on our population size first. You just made the argument that we should preserve wildlife biodiversity by improving our methods for agricultural MONOCULTURE. I'd much rather we work on having reasonable population sizes and agricultural biodiversity than work on genetically engineered tomatoes that can withstand colder temps and probably have a shittier nutritional content. As it is a lot of the plants in traditional grocery stores don't have a great nutritional content b/c all of the herbicides, fertilizers, and insecticides prevent plants from producing nutrient-rich phytochemicals at the levels they normally would.


    I'm not sure that there's a great way to control population short of living in a military dictatorship. People that study this have said that the world's population is supposed to peak around 9 or 10 billion, and then slowly decline. This has more to do with decreased infant mortality, than people in poor countries having large families.

    As unsustainable and messed up as it is, it is pretty accepted that nitrogen fertilizer saved humanity, due to the fact that there's not enough naturally in the soil to feed everyone. I wish we could be all eating food grown from crop rotation instead of monoculture, but I don't think that's going to happen at this point.
    •  
      CommentAuthorjoeyfresh
    • CommentTimeJul 29th 2013
     
    I think you got cause and effect mixed up.
    Nitrogen fertilizer allowed the population to increase to our current numbers in the first place.
    Without the increased production, it wouldn't have happened.
    It's not like there were 7 billion people waiting to be saved by chemistry.
    There is plenty of nitrogen in the soil to feed people when the global population is at pre-1950s levels.We'll get you a cat, don't worry -t-honks
  5.  
    Nitrogen fertilizer destroyed the planet; too many people.All you white kids look alike when you're still covered in baby fat, so I was getting bored with the non-stop WASP parade.
    • CommentAuthorryan t
    • CommentTimeJul 29th 2013
     
    Probably. But unfortunately right now we're sort of locked into to a world of 9 billion people so just take comfort that it will never be 20 billion, and do things as sustainably as possible given the circumstances. Curbing growth by limiting the amount of food that is out there is not really an option.
    •  
      CommentAuthorNandy
    • CommentTimeJul 29th 2013
     
    I did know someone who worked at whole foods and was miserable, but that might have been because he was stuck behind the fish counter and was a vegan. I don't know personally, I just hear too many negatives to join the fan club.

    http://seattletimes.com/html/politics/2021488309_politicswholefoodsxml.html

    http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/3536919"life is hard, cats are soft." - surprisefries
    •  
      CommentAuthorjoeyfresh
    • CommentTimeJul 29th 2013 edited
     
    ryan t:Curbing growth by limiting the amount of food that is out there is not really an option.

    I fail to see how it's not an option. You might not want it to be willfully done due to your own moral or ethical qualms about humans killing humans, but it might happen anyway and outside of anyone's intention, my friend.
    Besides, we already DO willfully curb the amount of food that is out there. Most of it is locked up, guarded by men with guns, and not getting to people who are hungry, all so we can keep our economy somewhat stable.
    It's the same moral/ethical offense.We'll get you a cat, don't worry -t-honks
    •  
      CommentAuthorratattack
    • CommentTimeJul 29th 2013
     
    Chemical fertilizers contributed to our current population and the more band-aids we try to stick on the problem via GMOs or whatever other crap we come up with is only going to make it worse. It's simple ecological modeling, if you increase the food supply the population will increase. At some point we need to stop trying to increase the food supply and just let things even out. I would like to see the studies that you're referring to about the population peaking because I would be interested to see if they are based on our current production limitations and how that would be impacted if agricultural technology advances. My guess is it's just going to keep growing as long as we keep trying to make more (nutritionally lacking) food through technology. So no, I don't really take comfort in the fact that our population won't stop growing because I don't believe it's true until we change our attitudes.

    & I'm not advocating for a military dictatorship that denies people food. I'm advocating for a serious reconsideration of how we approach food production and consumption where we consider the limitations that a finite world imposes on us. We need to make the decision that agricultural biodiversity and eating good plants with high nutritional content and less meat consumption is better than mass producing nutritionally lacking food at the expense of biodiversity, humane treatment of animals, our own health, and to the detriment of our planet. I'm not delusional, I know it's not going to happen. But I'm not going to throw my hands up and say things are okay the way they are, bring on the GMOs, just because we have an unsustainable world population.
    •  
      CommentAuthorratattack
    • CommentTimeJul 29th 2013
     
    Also, the Green Revolution was bullshit. It was some arrogant imperialistic initiatives in South America and India where we came in and said, "Look, we know better, we'll save you!" and tried to model them in our image, contaminating their soil and water supply in the process after already contaminating our own country. It is arrogant and false to believe that chemical farming practices "saved" humanity. Have you read "Silent Spring"? It's horrifying, it's a hell of a lot more than the cute peregrine falcons that everyone focuses on. It talks about flocks of birds dropping dead in the streets and wells in valleys having highly toxic chemicals in them due to various chemical run-off reacting with each other once they all came together in the water supply.

    Read this article.
    "...many are also revolting against what they see as the environmental degradation that has come with the new farming techniques, particularly the serious pollution of drinking water that village residents blame for causing cancer and other diseases."
    • CommentAuthorben
    • CommentTimeJul 29th 2013
     
    A good friend has worked at Whole Foods for 7 years and fucking loves it. She's an assistant manager or something now, and makes more than I do at MIT. She gets great discounts, great benefits, and is literally in Brazil right now on a volunteer trip through work. She paid for airfare, they pay for everything else for like 10 days.

    I never shop there because it is ridiculously fucking expensive, but the idea that it's not a good employer (and especially the idea that it's worse than Johnny's or something) is totally bunk.I have DTF pants. They're crotchless. -surprisefries
    • CommentAuthorryan t
    • CommentTimeJul 29th 2013
     
    ^^^What you're saying about population growth is basically the Malthusiast argument that a population will grow indefinitely and exponentially if you keep putting food in front of it. I'll try to read up on it, but I don't think that that is a scientific consensus any more. Much of Europe is shrinking in population, and they're better fed than most of the world.
    • CommentAuthorryan t
    • CommentTimeJul 29th 2013
     
    Chemical fertilizer is fucking up a lot of things. A huge chunk of the gulf of Mexico has no fish in it, and if I remember correctly, it's because nitrogen breeds algae, which has been sucking up all of the oxygen. But the bottom line is that now you have to feed 7 billion people using nitrogen depleted soil, which is why I said that fertilizers saved us (whether or not fertilizers where responsible for the 7 billion people in the first place is a moot point). The other and better option to this model would obviously be to farm organically, but I don't have a good enough understanding of farming and the nitrogen cycle to argue the practically of that.
    •  
      CommentAuthorjoeyfresh
    • CommentTimeJul 29th 2013 edited
     
    ryan t:But the bottom line is that now you have to feed 7 billion people using nitrogen depleted soil, which is why I said that fertilizers saved us (whether or not fertilizers where responsible for the 7 billion people in the first place is a moot point).


    Again, fertilizers couldn't have "saved" us because fertilizers *were what was responsible* for the population growing to 7 billion people.
    You're getting cause and effect mixed up again.
    I wish you could see how basically flawed your logic is because you keep repeating it and it's frustrating to read.We'll get you a cat, don't worry -t-honks
    • CommentAuthorryan t
    • CommentTimeJul 29th 2013 edited
     
    Sorry... my logic is that it would be horribly shitty if all fertilizers were banned tomorrow.
    • CommentAuthorryan t
    • CommentTimeJul 29th 2013 edited
     
    I guess they're more keeping us going that "saving" but that's kind of just semantics.

    Edit: But yeah Joey, if fertilizers are actually the main perpetrator for population growth, they don't deserve the credit I was giving them.
  6.  
    read the first 2 chapters of Omnivores Dilemma. Fertilizer and corn are the main players in the book.'Cause i always say i love you when i mean turn out the lights.
  7.  
    ryan t:Chemical fertilizer is fucking up a lot of things. A huge chunk of the gulf of Mexico has no fish in it, and if I remember correctly, it's because nitrogen breeds algae, which has been sucking up all of the oxygen. But the bottom line is that now you have to feed 7 billion people using nitrogen depleted soil, which is why I said that fertilizers saved us (whether or not fertilizers where responsible for the 7 billion people in the first place is a moot point). The other and better option to this model would obviously be to farm organically, but I don't have a good enough understanding of farming and the nitrogen cycle to argue the practically of that.

    Algae doesn't suck up oxygen, plants use CO2 and expel oxygen - anyone who tells you that a type of plant is sucking up oxygen is a conspiracy theorist.

    Unless there's an algae that breathes oxygen and releases CO2 or something else, which I don't know about.Naaaah, too uncool for the #messlyfe. I just like to hang out in loading docks and pretend to talk on my radio so that people will like me. - Mfratt
    •  
      CommentAuthorjoeyfresh
    • CommentTimeJul 29th 2013 edited
     
    Craigglesofdoom:
    ryan t:Chemical fertilizer is fucking up a lot of things. A huge chunk of the gulf of Mexico has no fish in it, and if I remember correctly, it's because nitrogen breeds algae, which has been sucking up all of the oxygen. But the bottom line is that now you have to feed 7 billion people using nitrogen depleted soil, which is why I said that fertilizers saved us (whether or not fertilizers where responsible for the 7 billion people in the first place is a moot point). The other and better option to this model would obviously be to farm organically, but I don't have a good enough understanding of farming and the nitrogen cycle to argue the practically of that.

    Algae doesn't suck up oxygen, plants use CO2 and expel oxygen - anyone who tells you that a type of plant is sucking up oxygen is a conspiracy theorist.

    Unless there's an algae that breathes oxygen and releases CO2 or something else, which I don't know about.


    Craig, you're talking out of your ass.

    It's called a hypoxic zone and it's caused by a process called eutrophication wherein algae feed off of the added nitrogen and phosphorous introduced by fertilizer run off, which causes a population explosion of algae, which depletes the oxygen levels to the point where complex life can't survive anymore.

    Google "dead zone", "hypoxic zone", and "eutrophication" for more detail. I'm sure there are some well-written articles about it out there. Google image search too. It's pretty powerful stuff.

    There is historically a natural hypoxic zone in the Gulf due to the fertility of the soil the runs into the Mississippi River and it seasonally fluctuates in size, but the size has increased over the decades to the point where it's now the size of Connecticut.We'll get you a cat, don't worry -t-honks
    •  
      CommentAuthorFancy
    • CommentTimeJul 29th 2013 edited
     
    Craigglesofdoom:
    ryan t:Chemical fertilizer is fucking up a lot of things. A huge chunk of the gulf of Mexico has no fish in it, and if I remember correctly, it's because nitrogen breeds algae, which has been sucking up all of the oxygen. But the bottom line is that now you have to feed 7 billion people using nitrogen depleted soil, which is why I said that fertilizers saved us (whether or not fertilizers where responsible for the 7 billion people in the first place is a moot point). The other and better option to this model would obviously be to farm organically, but I don't have a good enough understanding of farming and the nitrogen cycle to argue the practically of that.

    Algae doesn't suck up oxygen, plants use CO2 and expel oxygen - anyone who tells you that a type of plant is sucking up oxygen is a conspiracy theorist.

    Unless there's an algae that breathes oxygen and releases CO2 or something else, which I don't know about.


    He's likely talking about an algae bloom which can deplete oxygen and cause "dead zones" in the water.

    edit: oops, didn't see Joe's comment.
  8.  
    I stand corrected - that's bizarre and I had no idea that was possible. I'll definitely read more about it. I knew algae blooms were a problem but I didn't understand the mechanics surrounding them.Naaaah, too uncool for the #messlyfe. I just like to hang out in loading docks and pretend to talk on my radio so that people will like me. - Mfratt
    •  
      CommentAuthorbrunop
    • CommentTimeJul 29th 2013 edited
     
    are they gonna sell beer there? cause johnny's did. if they sell beer? i'm good.
  9.  
    I doubt it, it's 3 licenses per business statewide, right? They're probably already using their 3. Or maybe it's changed, or maybe I'm making it all up.DFL and DTF :D:D:D:D
  10.  
    Nope it's 3.
    Source: IANALYO NOT EVERYBODY GOES TO EAR SCHOOL OK
  11.  
    YOU SAID ANAL^'Cause i always say i love you when i mean turn out the lights.
  12.  
    HEEHEEHEEYO NOT EVERYBODY GOES TO EAR SCHOOL OK
    •  
      CommentAuthorjoeyfresh
    • CommentTimeJul 30th 2013
     
    I Am Not A LardassWe'll get you a cat, don't worry -t-honks
    •  
      CommentAuthornerdo
    • CommentTimeJul 30th 2013
     
    I hate Massachusetts. Except for the healthcare. January can't come soon enough for us single-buyer peeps in NY.Worstcase I'll just zip tie on a seat... but i'd rather not. —Zev (who else)
    •  
      CommentAuthorratattack
    • CommentTimeJul 30th 2013 edited
     
    Algal blooms are also a big problem because they cover the surface of the water, blocking out sunlight to the plants underneath the surface and preventing them from being able to photosynthesize. Then they die, the fish and aquatic life that feed off of them die, the fish and animals that feed off of the tiny fish die...it ruins the whole ecosystem. This has been a big problem in waterways in North Carolina b/c of all the run-off from the giant nitrogen-rich livestock agriculture cesspools.

    There are two easy ways to get nitrogen in soil, by the way - animal droppings and nitrogen-fixing bacteria. If you rotate fields between livestock and different crops, particularly legumes that have nitrogen-fixing bacteria symbiotically living in their roots, you don't have a nitrogen problem.

    Instead, we have giant open shit cesspools full of nitrogen from industrial livestock agriculture in one area and are dumping tons of chemical fertilizers on our fields to grow vegetables in another. I don't care what got us to our current population size, if we don't start reconsidering how we do things we're just going to dig ourselves deeper and deeper into this hole. I'm not saying cut things off right now, but start reconsidering and changing how we do things.

    I second what Alex said - read Omnivore's Dilemna.
  13.  
    ^yes yes yes yes.

    I was living in Milwaukee when Lake Michigan had a pretty historic algae bloom from a collection of farms in northern WI. No one knew what was going on at first, there was just this week that all the fish started dying and washing up on shore. the Lake isn't the cleanest to begin with, but that was quite a sight to behold. Not to mention the smell.

    On that note, i worked at Whole Foods for all of 2 days and during my training they were explaining their fishing sustainability bullshit. How they label a fish 'green' if its population is okay, 'red' if its populations are in danger. So the consumer can decide for themselves if they want to eat a fish with a hurting population. My question on that was always, what does it matter at that point? The fish is already dead if its in store. Why not remove the option and entirely and not fish for it?'Cause i always say i love you when i mean turn out the lights.