Uh Oh: Costco May Be Considering Ditching Bud Light

This is 100% a self-inflicted wound

Costco just planted the ‘death star’ on Bud Light cases — a sign that it won’t restock the beer amid controversy, plummeting sales. Wild speculation or 1 more devastating blow to the brand?

Shoppers at Costco have noticed an asterisk on the price tag for Bud Light beer across the beverage aisle. Experienced Kirkland members have seen the sign before and call it the “death star.” It could be an indication that one of the largest retailers in the country may be considering not restocking the troubled beer brand.

Here’s a closer look.

Casual shoppers would barely notice a small asterisk on a price display above a shelf. These days most of the attention is on the price. However, Kirkland members believe the asterisk has special significance for Costco’s supply chain decisions. The asterisk is often associated with items that are being discontinued.

These items are usually marked down to get rid of supply on the shelves. It’s a subtle sign to Costco employees not to restock an item after the inventory is depleted. Devoted shoppers look for the asterisk to spot deals and have even nicknamed it the “death star” on the Facebook page Costco Fans.

Now the star is being spotted over cans of Bud Light. “Is it just me…Or am I the only one who noticed that Costco has applied their infamous ‘Star of Death’ on Bud Light being sold!” said one Twitter user.

Why would they keep it on the shelf if it fails to sell? Why would they restock something that with poor sales? Something that will sit so long it “goes skunk”? Something like beer depends on volume sales. Without volume, it goes goodbye. Why would they stock something consumers do not really want?

A former Anheuser-Busch exec has become one of the Bud Light maker’s fiercest critics

Meanwhile, former Anheuser-Busch sales and distribution president Anson Frericks, a vocal critic of corporate ESG, or environmental, social, and governance policies, is now calling for Whitworth to resign. (snip)

Frericks’ comments added to the barrage of criticism he’s leveled at the beer brand since April. Frericks wrote an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal, opining the brand was focused on “stakeholder capitalism,” which he wrote “prioritizes broad social issues over shareholder value.” He’s made appearances on Fox News, and he recently wrote a column for the Daily Mail, in which he called for Whitworth to step down.

Frericks was president of sales and distribution at Anheuser-Busch from October 2021 until he left the company in April 2022 after nearly 11 years there. He is now the president of Strive Asset Management. Strive is an anti-ESG investing firm whose stated mission is “to restore the voices of everyday citizens in the American economy by leading companies to focus on excellence over politics.”

Again, the problem is not Bud Light’s support of LGBT: it started with the one can for a wackjob denigrating real women, then the comments of the idiot marketing head who denigrated the core base of Bud Light. Then Bud’s wishy washy yammerings which pissed of the LGBT folks, not they were probably buying a lot of Bud Light. And Bud’s continued failure to address this, stupid ads, they just kept digging their own grave. Seriously, Alissa Heinerscheid and the marketing department for Bud Light deserve an award for how much they’ve killed a brand.

Read: Uh Oh: Costco May Be Considering Ditching Bud Light »

Third Of Student Borrowers Spent Money They Didn’t Have, Expecting Loan Relief

Now, let’s say the federal government was going to give you $10k or $20k, depending on your type of mortgage, to help reduce you loan amount. You owed $100k, now you owe $90k. You still have your monthly payment, though, so, you don’t actually have $10k/$20 (regular student loan/pell grant loan) to spend, right? That money is never in your hands, right?

A third of student borrowers spent money they thought would be forgiven: poll

More than a third of student loan borrowers spent money they otherwise would not have when they believed a portion of their debt would be forgiven by the Biden administration, according to a new poll.

Most borrowers surveyed by Intellingent.com were confident they would receive some student debt relief as part of the Biden administration’s plan to forgive at least $10,000 for federal borrowers and up to $20,000 for those who received a federal Pell Grant while in school.

The Supreme Court struck down the president’s forgiveness plan at the end of June.

You mean Brandon’s bribery for votes scheme, which would be paid for on the backs of the working and middle class for upper middle class and rich folks

The survey conducted from July 6 to July 10 measured the responses of 977 respondents who qualified for Biden’s student loan forgiveness program

Among borrowers who spent additional money expecting some debt relief, 9 percent spent between $5,000 and $7,501 extra, while another 17 percent spent $5,000 more than they would have had they not expected forgiveness, the poll found.

Borrowers used what they believed would amount to extra money in their pockets on a range of items, though 37 percent said they paid off other debts. Others used the funds on home repairs and rent payments. The survey conducted from July 6 to July 10 measured the responses of 977 respondents who qualified for Biden’s student loan forgiveness program

About 20 percent of borrowers polled said they spent the money on vacation, while fewer than 10 percent said they spent it on alcohol and drugs or gambling.

So, they spent money they didn’t know if they would actually get it, and wouldn’t actually get it if Brandon’s plan was allowed to stand because it would go directly to the loan companies on other things, including vacations and other debt, which is why they’re in this bad situation in the first place. They would not have had extra money now, just maybe in the future.

Read: Third Of Student Borrowers Spent Money They Didn’t Have, Expecting Loan Relief »

If All You See…

…is horrible ice cream created with milk from carbon spewing moo cows, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Da Techguy’s Blog, with a post on US troops being called up over Ukraine.

Read: If All You See… »

Learn To Code: Hollywood Actors Join Writers Strike, Say They Can’t Make Money

So the actors guild have joined the writers strike, and many have failed to learn the lesson from the fast food folks who pushed for $15 an hour (then $18, $21, $25)

‘It’s a constant hustle’: Hollywood actors join writers on the picket line

It’s been a hot, frustrating summer on the picket lines in Los Angeles, where film and TV writers have been striking for more than two months, no deal in sight.

But outside of the Netflix building on Sunset Boulevard on Thursday, the striking writers finally got some news they wanted to hear. “Sag is going on strike!” someone called, and the crowd of picketing writers roared their approval.

Both writers and actors say that technological changes in the industry are forcing them to negotiate hard for major changes in their contracts. The new era of digital streaming has led to a dramatic decrease in how much money they make, they say. The rise of new artificial intelligence technologies is only adding to their concern.

“You really can’t make a living any more,” said actor Felicia Day, who has been working in the industry for more than two decades. Day, who showed up at the Sag-Aftra headquarters for the official announcement of the strike on this sweltering Thursday, said she gets bigger checks for television residuals for roles she played back in 2004 than she does for much more recent performances. “People are having a harder and harder time just supporting themselves and staying in the industry,” she said.

Well, looks like it’s time to take up coding. This is an industry they chose, and, like many, times change and measures will come into place that reduce the need to pay workers as much. And if they continue demanding more money, well, it means there will be fewer hired and more technology used. Just like fast food has replaced so many workers with automation and touchscreens for ordering.

As pay for individual roles declines, Day said, actors have to secure twice as much work just to make rent – even though auditioning for and obtaining roles has not become any easier. A few years ago, four to five guest star roles on television shows would be enough to get an actor through a year, she said. Now, it takes double that number of roles to make the same amount of money: “It’s a constant hustle and it’s very demoralizing,” she said.

OMG, have to work more? That’s awful! All the average citizens working 50+ hours a week 52 weeks a year feel sorry for you.

Inside Sag-Aftra’s headquarters, union president Fran Drescher made it clear that actors were fed up and fired up, saying, “We are the victims,” and telling studio executives: “You’re sitting on the wrong side of history.”

Perhaps the highly paid actors like Fran can take less money per role and give it to the low level actors.

With artificial intelligence, [Danny Hogan, actor] added, “Are you going to take my image and my voice, replicate that, and then I’m expendable?”

Yes, yes, that is what they’re going to do. Otherwise the companies are going to have to charge more for their services. And AI created characters are less temperamental and can hit their lines on the first take.

There has to be some sort of middle ground to this, but, I love these folks being primadonnas, when so many need to learn to write better stories, because Hollywood really doesn’t have many ideas these days.

Read: Learn To Code: Hollywood Actors Join Writers Strike, Say They Can’t Make Money »

Hey, All We Need To Stop Climate Doom Is 139 Billion Gallons Of White Paint

As far as ideas go, this is not the worst

Turns out all we may need to stop climate change is 139 billion gallons of super-duper white paint

I hope Purdue University is ready for this incoming order.

In 2021, researchers at Purdue University announced that they had developed the whitest paint on Earth. The color is so white that it can reflect over 98% of light. This is particularly useful because light generates heat — and we here on Earth are running a bit hot these days.

If used on a building, the researchers say, the paint would reduce the temperature on the surface, lowering the temps inside and decreasing the need for air conditioning. But what if there was an even bigger application, like reducing the temperature of the entire planet?

According to Jeremy Munday, a professor of electrical and computer engineering at the University of California, Davis, who researches clean technology, if a material like Purdue’s paint covered 1-2% of the Earth’s surface, the amount of light being bounced back into space would reduce the amount of heat being absorbed by the planet enough to stabilize global temperatures. In other words, it could do a lot to solve climate change. Plus, Munday told the New York Times, the amount of light being bounced back into space wouldn’t harm the cosmos very much. “It’d be like pouring a cup of regular water into the ocean,” he told the Times.

Essentially, it means 139 billion gallons. The most interesting part here is that it is painting (sorry) any man-caused global warming as an issue of land use and urban heat island effect. Which are real. I do not have to explain why, right? You know this. If more dark colored asphalt could be painted white, paint dark shingles white, and so forth, mostly in urban and suburban areas, it could significantly reduce the temperatures in those areas. Of course, you’re still left with heat trapping buildings and the inability of the ground to soak up heat. It would help.

But, how long would the paint last? How often would it require re-application? Better would be roadways made with very light colors going forward.

Oh, and then this schmuck

Yeah, about that

Read More »

Read: Hey, All We Need To Stop Climate Doom Is 139 Billion Gallons Of White Paint »

Surprise: Secret Service Also Found Marijuana In Biden’s White House

This comes after

All those cameras and such, and absolutely nothing. But, hey, it’s not the first time

Not just cocaine: Secret Service reveals another banned substance was found in Biden’s White House

The Secret Service found marijuana twice in the White House in 2022, long before cocaine was located in the West Wing.

The Secret Service revealed the information to members of Congress during a classified briefing on the investigation into cocaine found in the West Wing over the Fourth of July weekend, and confirmed the pot discoveries to Fox News Digital.

Possessing less than two ounces of marijuana is not a crime in Washington, D.C., but the substance is still not allowed on federal property — including the White House.

A spokesperson for the Secret Service told Fox News Digital that agents had found “small amounts of marijuana” on two separate occasions, in July and September of last year.

Um, it’s the District Of Columbia, an area set aside to be the seat of the U.S. federal government. Per federal law, regardless of D.C. “law”, marijuana is a Schedule I drug. It matters not at all the amount size. And it damned shouldn’t be in the White House. Imagine the furor if it had been found while Trump was in the WH. The news media would be in an uproar. It’s not that big a deal in today’s society, but, it is interesting that they covered it up. And how the Secret Service has been compromised.

“No one was arrested in these incidents, because the weight of the marijuana confiscated did not meet the legal threshold for federal charges or D.C. misdemeanor criminal charges, as the District of Columbia had decriminalized possession,” the Secret Service spokesperson said. “The marijuana was collected by officers and destroyed.”

Are the agents aware of federal law superseding state and local laws in this? Really, as long as it is grown in a state and stays in a state, it should be a state issue, per the 10th Amendment, however, this is D.C., and federal law is primary.

Read: Surprise: Secret Service Also Found Marijuana In Biden’s White House »

Your Fault: ‘Climate Change’ Is Making Oceans Greener

I had been meaning to discuss this wacko man-child

and some other loony gender confused stuff (say, what’s the carbon footprint of a trip to Peru?), but, this

Climate Change Is Literally Changing the Ocean’s Color

“Ocean blue” may no longer be the most accurate way to describe the planet’s waters. A new study published in Nature on Wednesday finds that the color of the ocean has changed significantly over the last 20 years—all due to climate change.

The color shifts, according to the new study, can’t be explained by natural factors alone. These changes have occurred across 56 percent of the world’s ocean, turning the waters greener over time (especially near the equator).

That color change seems to be the result of changes in the marine ecosystems—driven by climate change.

“I’ve been running simulations that have been telling me for years that these changes in ocean color are going to happen,” study co-author Stephanie Dutkiewicz, a scientist at MIT, said in a press release. “To actually see it happening for real is not surprising, but frightening. And these changes are consistent with man-induced changes to our climate.”

How horrible!

Greener waters occur when there’s more life in the ocean—particularly phytoplankton, which grow abundantly in the upper ocean depths. That might sound good, but it’s actually a grim indicator. Phytoplankton play an essential role in capturing and storing carbon dioxide—so increases in carbon dioxide inevitably give rise to phytoplankton blooms. These explosions in population mean greener waters.

Got that? It’s bad to have more plankton, which is actually the number one thing for photosynthesis, more than ground based plant life. It’s actually a good thing, as it means there is less ocean pollution, which had gotten bad during the 20th Century, but, started getting cleaning in the 1990s. But, you know anything and everything is Bad in Climate Cult world. And they continue to scaremonger in the article, and all the other articles in various Credentialed Media outlets because they got their talking point memos. Nothing can ever be good, and it’s always 100% the fault of Mankind

Read: Your Fault: ‘Climate Change’ Is Making Oceans Greener »

If All You See…

…is a rising sea because Other People take fossil fueled vehicles, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Climate Depot, with a post on the deadly heatwave of 1936.

Read: If All You See… »

Dementia Joe Makes Many Bad Gaffes In Lithuania

I, like many, wondered how Biden would embarrass the U.S. on his European trip. Well, here you go

WATCH: Biden confuses Ukraine with Russia, Zelenskyy with Putin during gaffe-filled trip to Lithuania

President Biden committed multiple speaking gaffes during his trip to Lithuania this week to shore up support for Ukraine amid its war with Russia, including confusing the two nations, as well as their leaders.

While speaking to the NATO summit in Vilnius, Lithuania on Wednesday Biden referred to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy as “Vladmir,” seemingly confusing Zelenskyy with Russian President Vladmir Putin.

Appearing to not realize his mistake, Biden went on to say he “shouldn’t be so familiar,” and referred to Zelenskyy as “Mr. Zelenskyy.”

Putin and Zelenskyy each hold a different version of the same name, with “Volodymyr” being the most commonly used version in Ukraine.

At a later speaking event following the summit, Biden confused the two nations, referring to Ukraine as Russia.

“Russia could end this war tomorrow by withdrawing its forces from Ukraine and recognizing its international borders and ceasing its attacks – its inhumane attacks – on Russia – I mean by Russia on Ukraine,” Biden said, correcting himself.

He’s just lost, and it’s rather sad to watch.

And

Read More »

Read: Dementia Joe Makes Many Bad Gaffes In Lithuania »

Rich Guy Plans To Sell His Private Jet To Save The Planet

Uh huh

Obviously, the CNN reporter forgot to ask some pointed, tough questions

Amid these concerns, one private jet owner has decided to scale back. Stephen Prince, vice-chair of the Patriotic Millionaires – a group of wealthy Americans pushing for higher taxes which also contributed to the report – is giving up his Cessna 650 Citation III.

He decided to ditch the plane – a mid-size, long range corporate jet with room for up to nine passengers – after he learned how much more carbon-intensive flying private is compared to commercial.

“I was gobsmacked by the fact that by being so in love with private air travel, I was willing to ignore what a horrible travesty I was perpetrating on the environment and on future generations,” he tells CNN. “I’ve got to change. I just can’t continue to do this.”

Prince was born in 1955. How long has he been taking private, fossil fueled flights? Is it simply no longer necessary for him? Will he be giving up fossil fueled flights?

Prince has owned half a dozen private jets before the Citation III, which is the largest and most expensive to operate he’s ever had – the running costs alone work out at about $275,000 to $300,000 per year. He says flying private is so good, it becomes addictive.

“It’s just absolutely the best way to travel. But I’m going to give it up. I’m just going back to flying commercially, as much as I despise the process after having flown privately for the last six or seven years,” he says. “TSA, long lines, canceled flights, lost luggage – I despise all the things that go along with it. And when you fly first class, it’s not cheap, either. But I made my decision back in March this year. And I’m sticking with it, I’m selling it, I’m going to aggressively get rid of it.”

Well, that’s his problem. Stop trying to force your Beliefs on Other People

The Cessna is currently worth about $1 million and in the current market it should find a buyer pretty quickly.

I bet he’s taking a nice write-off on it. They haven’t been sold new in quite some time, were originally about $8 million.

There’s just one catch. Prince, an entrepreneur in the gift card and payments industry, may be ditching his jet – but he’s not going to give up private air travel entirely.

“I have a friend who’s going to let me lease his smaller aircraft,” he says, “It’s a twin turbo, which burns about a fourth of the amount of fuel of the Cessna – and I’m only going to use it two or three times a year to go out to a pheasant hunting preserve in the northwest corner of Nebraska.”

So, still private flights, just with a prop plane, which he can incur some nice tax breaks by leasing. Oops!

Read: Rich Guy Plans To Sell His Private Jet To Save The Planet »

Pirate's Cove