Tag: corporations

Go Figure: Walgreens CEO Admits Locking Up Merchandise Makes It Hard To Sell

What genius retail executive mind could have figured this one out – that locking up merchandise in stores actually makes its more difficult for honest, paying customers to get to, and buy what they want?

Walgreens – facing a significant drop in year-over-year earnings – just announced plans to close 450 more stores nationwide, according to Futurism/The Byte. These closures exhibit the broader challenges faced by Walgreens.

Efforts to curb “shrink” — losses from theft or fraud — included increased security measures, such as locking merchandise in containers requiring staff assistance at Walgreens.

However, these measures proved ineffective and counterproductive, frustrating customers.

CEO Tim Wentworth said on the company’s earning’s call: “It is a hand-to-hand combat battle still, unfortunately.”

Keep reading

Why Aren’t Hospitals Incentivized To Save Lives?

•Throughout COVID-19, abysmal hospital care and the suppression of effective off-patent therapies killed approximately a million Americans. Much of this originated from Obamacare pressuring hospitals to aggressively treat patients so they could quickly leave the hospital and reduce healthcare costs.

•More frail patients respond poorly to aggressive protocols, resulting in them frequently being pushed into palliative care or hospice. Sadly doctors are no longer trained to gradually bring their patients back to health, and hence view many of those deaths as inevitable.

•In this article, we will review some of the forgotten medical therapies that dramatically improve hospital outcomes and highlight some of the key strategies patients and lawmakers can use to reduce hospital deaths.

During COVID-19, we witnessed something previously unimaginable. A national emergency hospitalized thousands of Americans, where they were cut off from their loved ones and inevitably died. It soon became clear that the hospital protocols did not work, but regardless of how futile conventional care was, patients in our hospitals could not get the alternative therapies they needed.

This led to a sobering realization throughout America—what many of us believed about our hospitals was utterly incorrect. Rather than help patients, hospitals effectively functioned like assembly lines that ran disastrous protocols (e.g., remdesivir), denied patients access to their loved ones and refused to use alternative therapies even when it was known the patients were otherwise expected to die.

Keep reading

AT&T kills home Internet service in NY over law requiring $15 or $20 plans

AT&T has stopped offering its 5G home Internet service in New York instead of complying with a new state law that requires ISPs to offer $15 or $20 plans to people with low incomes.

The decision was reported yesterday by CNET and confirmed by AT&T in a statement provided to Ars today. “While we are committed to providing reliable and affordable Internet service to customers across the country, New York’s broadband law imposes harmful rate regulations that make it uneconomical for AT&T to invest in and expand our broadband infrastructure in the state,” AT&T said. “As a result, effective January 15, 2025, we will no longer be able to offer AT&T Internet Air, our fixed-wireless Internet service, to New York customers.”

New York started enforcing its Affordable Broadband Act yesterday after a legal battle of nearly four years. Broadband lobby groups convinced a federal judge to block the law in 2021, but a US appeals court reversed the ruling in April 2024, and the Supreme Court decided not to hear the case last month.

The law requires ISPs with over 20,000 customers in New York to offer $15 broadband plans with download speeds of at least 25Mbps, or $20-per-month service with 200Mbps speeds. The plans only have to be offered to households that meet income eligibility requirements, such as qualifying for the National School Lunch Program, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or Medicaid.

AT&T’s Internet Air was launched in some areas in 2023 and is now available in nearly every US state. The standard price for Internet Air is $60 a month plus taxes and fees, or $47 when bundled with an eligible mobile service. Nationwide, AT&T said it added 135,000 Internet Air customers in the most recent quarter.

AT&T has pitched Internet Air as a long-term replacement for DSL Internet in areas where it doesn’t plan to build fiber. AT&T has said it won’t build fiber home Internet in over half of its wireline footprint and will focus its fiber builds on more densely populated areas.

Keep reading

The Glaring Hypocrisy and Embedded Deceptions of the Global Food Giants

Bryce Martinez (18) from Pennsylvania is mounting a legal challenge against major food companies, alleging that their ultra-processed foods (UPFs) led to his development of Type 2 diabetes and fatty liver disease at the age of 16.

The 11 firms listed in the lawsuit are Kraft Heinz, Mondelez, Coca-Cola, Post Holdings, PepsiCo, General Mills, Nestle’s (US), WK Kellogg, Mars, Kellanova and Conagra.

UPFs have undergone multiple processing steps and often contain additives, preservatives and artificial ingredients. These UPFs have become staples in many households. Examples of UPFs are prepackaged soups, many breakfast cereals, sauces, frozen pizza, ready-to-eat meals, hot dogs, sausages, sodas, ice cream and store-bought cookies, cakes, candies and doughnuts.

Martinez’s legal team contends that the big food corporations have deliberately engineered their products to trigger addictive responses. His lawyers at Morgan & Morgan, a major US law firm, says the case is unprecedented and includes claims for conspiracy, negligence, fraudulent misrepresentation and unfair business practices.

Martinez had regularly consumed popular UPFs throughout his childhood. The lawsuit challenges the food industry’s argument that consumers have free choice in their dietary decisions. It argues that the notion of free choice is compromised by aggressive marketing tactics, especially aimed at children, and the addictive nature of these products.

UPFs are highly profitable for corporations. The same companies that dominate the UPF market are intertwined with investment firms like BlackRock and Vanguard, which also hold stakes in the pharmaceutical industry. This dual investment creates a cycle where investment firms profit from both the sale of harmful foods and the treatment of diseases associated with these products.

Furthermore, the prevailing economic system creates a paradoxical situation where workers, whose pension funds are often managed by these same investment giants, find themselves financially tethered to a cycle that undermines their own health and well-being.

There is a famous quote often attributed to farmer, poet and campaigner Wendell Berry:

People are fed by the food industry, which pays no attention to health, and are treated by the health industry, which pays no attention to food.”

For a long time, that has served both industry’s interests very well.

Keep reading

Corporate America Goes From Disowning Trump to Lavishing Him With Cash: Here’s What They Want

Donald Trump’s inauguration fund is set to top the $107 million it raised in 2017 – which was nearly double the $61 million raised by Joe Biden in 2021. Corporate America is lavishing the president-elect with cash, hoping he’ll support their interests, and let bygones be bygones regarding statements and actions against him over the past four years.

Major companies that walked lockstep with the establishment in denouncing Donald Trump after the 2020 election and the January 6, 2021 chaos at the Capitol have pulled a major about-face amid his comeback, giving generously to his inauguration fund and hoping he’ll forget their statements about the “threat to democracy” he and his supporters purportedly posed just four years ago.

Who are the biggest corporate flip-floppers, and what do they want from Trump? Here’s a breakdown:

Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America: Big Pharma trade group donating $1 million (which means access to exclusive VIP events, including black tie ball and personal “candlelight dinner” with the Trumps). In 2021, PhRMA CEO Steve Ubl said the events of January 6 “violate the values of our nation” and canceled donations to Republicans rejecting the 2020 vote’s outcome.

Ford and Toyota: Ford briefly froze political donations after January 6, and promised to vet politicians supporting Trump. Now they’re giving him $1 million. Toyota, also pledging $1 million, similarly halted donations to those refusing to certify Biden’s 2020 victory.

Stanley Black & Decker: Giving Trump $1 million this time around, up from a paltry $25,000 in 2017.

Keep reading

Which US Companies Receive The Most Government Subsidies?

This chart, via Visual Capitalist’s Pallavi Rao, ranks the companies which have received the most American taxpayer support (in the form of government subsidies) since the year 2000.

Government subsidies take a variety of forms: tax credits, abatements, training reimbursements and direct grants.

Ranked: Companies Receiving the Most Government Subsidies

Over the last quarter of a century Boeing has received nearly $16 billion in government subsidies, putting it at the top of this list.

RankCompanyIndustrySubsidy Value (2000–2024)
1BoeingIndustrial$15.5B
2IntelTech & Media$8.4B
3Ford MotorAutomotive$7.7B
4General MotorsAutomotive$7.5B
5Micron TechnologyTech & Media$6.8B
6AmazonTech & Media$5.9B
7AlcoaIndustrial$5.7B
8Cheniere EnergyEnergy$5.6B
9Foxconn Technology GroupTech & Media$4.8B
10Venture Global LNGEnergy$4.3B
11Texas InstrumentsTech & Media$4.3B
12VolkswagenAutomotive$4.1B
13Sempra EnergyEnergy$3.8B
14NRG EnergyEnergy$3.4B
15NextEra EnergyEnergy$3.4B
16SasolEnergy$2.8B
17TeslaAutomotive$2.8B
18StellantisAutomotive$2.8B
19Walt DisneyTech & Media$2.6B
20NucorIndustrial$2.6B

Most of the subsidies have come from Washington State, which has nine preferential tax rates that benefit the aerospace industry.

Boeing has an assembly plant in the city of Everett—reportedly the largest manufacturing facility in the world—where it makes the 747, 767, 777, and the 787 airplanes.

There’s more to this Boeing story—but we cover that in the next section.

Ranked second, Intel’s received more than $8 billion from the government since 2000.

Keep reading

Workers Can’t Sue Employers Who Violate New Jersey’s Marijuana Anti-Discrimination Law, Federal Court Says, Siding With Walmart

A federal appeals court panel sided with Walmart this week, ruling that although New Jersey explicitly forbids employment discrimination against marijuana users, private individuals are unable to sue employers under that law because it failed to create any specific remedies.

“The lack of an express remedy is better understood as a deliberate choice not to provide a remedy rather than an oversight of an intended remedy,” Judge Peter Phipps, a Trump appointee, wrote in the new opinion for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

That interpretation, Phipps continued, “is reinforced by the New Jersey Legislature’s comparative responsiveness in enacting safeguards against other forms of employment discrimination.”

The case stems from a 2022 lawsuit filed by Erick Zanetich, whom Walmart denied a job as a security guard after he tested positive for marijuana. Zanetich asserted that the drug screening policy was unlawful under New Jersey’s anti-discrimination law, which is included in the Cannabis Regulatory Enforcement Assistance and Marketplace Modernization Act (CREAMMA).

CREAMMA was passed by New Jersey lawmakers after citizens voted in 2020 to amend the state constitution to legalize marijuana.

At the district court level, Judge Christine O’Hearn, a Biden appointee, had dismissed Zanetich’s case, ruling that only a state cannabis board can enforce the law and that private individuals don’t have a right of action to sue. Zanetich appealed.

The appeals panel’s 2–1 ruling, handed down on Monday, also denied Zanetich’s request to ask the New Jersey Supreme Court to decide the issue.

Phipps wrote that sending the matter to the state’s high court “is an act of judicial discretion…and here none of the common considerations associated with the exercise of that discretion counsels strongly in favor of the certification.”

As for the importance of the case, he said the issues neither “involve questions of state constitutional law, nor are they particularly transcendental.”

Keep reading

DEI Fellows and the Weird Wish Lists of Literary Gatekeepers

As big companies like Walmart shuffle their DEI initiatives out of view, others are holding fast and keeping them out front. Last week, Penguin Random House, one of the world’s biggest book publishers, posted a job listing for a “DEI Fellow.” The notice reads:

For a one-year role, the Penguin Random House DEI team seeks a Research and Partnerships Fellow. [sic] to work on our Latinx Voices project in collaboration with One World.

Relaunched in 2017, One World is home to award-winning and bestselling authors who are collectively leading the cultural conversation. Our authors include Ta-Nehisi Coates, Karla Cornejo Villavicencio, Trevor Noah, Cathy Park Hong, Bryan Stevenson, Nikole Hanna-Jones, and Victor LaValle.

Our ideal Fellow will be a passionate advocate for Latinx authors and readers, responsible for researching, and then building connections with, Latinx organizations, influencers, media, and audiences. You’ll report into the Associate Director, DEI and work closely with both the DEI and One World teams on the Latinx Voices project, an initiative focused on connecting the company, authors, and titles with Latinx audiences and better supporting the publication of Latinx authors. One World, relaunched in 2017, is home to award-winning and bestselling authors who are collectively leading the cultural conversation.

Among the essential requirements listed are a strong “knowledge of Latinx audiences and community” and “proficiency in Spanish.” That’s not a statement of racial preference in hiring, but it’s close enough. Worse still is the fact that resources will be committed toward only assisting authors who belong to a specific minority group. It is outright unfair to everyone else, and any author who benefits from this effort will never be able to state with confidence that they were elevated based on merit rather than group membership.

Penguin’s DEI Fellow job listing is just one example of how deep the DEI problem goes in the publishing industry.

Keep reading

Utility Companies Are Run By Technocrats Obsessed With Control Over Energy

Starting in the early 1930s, the Technocracy movement was obsessed with control over energy. The first two requirements laid down for Technocracy in 1934 were (1) Register on a continuous 24-hour-per-day basis the total net conversion of energy and (2) By means of the registration of energy converted and consumed, make possible a balanced load.” You could easily see this exact wording on your modern energy bill.

As I wrote in Technocracy’s Necessary Requirements,

Conversion of energy means creating useable energy from stored energy like coal, oil or natural gas; when they are burned, electricity is generated. Hydroelectric and nuclear also convert energy. There were two reasons to keep track of useable energy: First, it was the basis for issuing “energy script” to all citizens for buying and selling goods and services. Second, it predicted economic activity because all such activity is directly dependent upon energy. (Note that Technocrats intended to pre-determine how much energy would be made available in the first place.)

Once available energy was quantified, it was to be allocated to consumers and manufacturers so as to limit production and consumption. Technocrats would have control of both ends, so that everything is managed according to their scientific formulas.

The modern Smart Grid, with its ubiquitous WiFi-enabled Smart Meters on homes and businesses, is the exact fulfillment of these two requirements. The concept of “energy web” was first revitalized in 1999 by the Bonneville Power Authority (BPA) in Portland, Oregon. A government agency, BPA had a rich history of Technocrats dating back to its creation in 1937. The “energy web” was renamed Smart Grid in 2009 during the Obama Administration. Note that Smart Grid was a global initiative that intended to blanket the entire world with this new energy control technology.

If America were to face this reality, these Technocrat charlatans would be thrown into the dustbin of history. Unfortunately, policy leaders like Heartland Institute are blind to it. — Technocracy News & Trends Editor Patrick Wood.

When electric power was a novel idea and just beginning to be adopted in urban centers, the industry had a Wild West feel to it as multiple companies strung wires, opened power plants, and sold electricity on an unregulated market. Competition was fierce, but state and local governments concluded that the inefficiencies and redundancies endangered the public and imposed higher costs.

So states set up service territories with monopolistic or oligopolistic service providers, who were entrusted with providing reliable power and sufficient reserve for peak periods in return for being guaranteed a profit on rates proposed by the utilities but approved or set by newly established state public utility commissions (PUCs). These commissions were charged with ensuring public utilities served the general public universally within their territory, providing reliable service at reasonable rates.

Much has changed since then. Politicians began to supplant engineers to decide, based on self-interested calculations, what types of power should be favored and disfavored, and what types of appliances and modes of transportation Americans could use. As the 21st century dawned, a new consideration entered the picture: Climate change.

Keep reading

Record labels unhappy with court win, say ISP should pay more for user piracy

The big three record labels notched another court victory against a broadband provider last month, but the music publishing firms aren’t happy that an appeals court only awarded per-album damages instead of damages for each song.

Universal, Warner, and Sony are seeking an en banc rehearing of the copyright infringement case, claiming that Internet service provider Grande Communications should have to pay per-song damages over its failure to terminate the accounts of Internet users accused of piracy. The decision to make Grande pay for each album instead of each song “threatens copyright owners’ ability to obtain fair damages,” said the record labels’ petition filed last week.

The case is in the conservative-leaning US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit. A three-judge panel unanimously ruled last month that Grande, a subsidiary of Astound Broadband, violated the law by failing to terminate subscribers accused of being repeat infringers. Subscribers were flagged for infringement based on their IP addresses being connected to torrent downloads monitored by Rightscorp, a copyright-enforcement company used by the music labels.

The one good part of the ruling for Grande is that the 5th Circuit ordered a new trial on damages because it said a $46.8 million award was too high. Appeals court judges found that the district court “erred in granting JMOL [judgment as a matter of law] that each of the 1,403 songs in suit was eligible for a separate award of statutory damages.” The damages were $33,333 per song.

Record labels want the per-album portion of the ruling reversed while leaving the rest of it intact.

Keep reading