• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

It's illegal in France for supermarkets to throw away edible food.

le bouffon said:
There is no sale. It's for charity.
Click to expand...

Right, but saying, "out for sale", is much easier than saying, "out into the area designated for those needing charity to make their selections".


The term "sales floor" applies to any area that is perused by customers, be they paying or not. It's just jargon.


It's just one more way those of us in the business can tell when those who are NOT in the business are making comments about things they know little to nothing about.
 
le bouffon said:
There is no sale. It's for charity.
Click to expand...

Also, forgot to add, sale or no sale, there is still a check out, and a register. Because items leaving the building need to be removed from the on hands.



I take it you've never actually been to a food bank ever?
 
poweRob said:
What? Itz a tax write off if they don't donate it because its seen as a business loss.
Click to expand...

Hmmm....not 100% SURE about this, but....no tax write of for GROCERS for product loss, that's more for farms. And even then, it's not a tax thing, it's an insurance thing. Yes, grocers have insurance for product loss, too, but typically, that coverage only accounts for things like power outages and such. Food loss due to expiration, or poor quality? That's on the grocer to stay on top of. By ordering less, or by demanding a refund for poor quality product. THAT, by the way, is an area of 100% food loss.


For instance. A meat manager at a BJ's Wholsesale club receives an entire case of beef inside round (average weight of 80 pounds) with a bunch of popped cryos (the meat comes in vacuum sealed, but if the cryo is popped, threat of bacterial infection is high due to oxygenation), then said manager contacts the buyer, the buyer contacts the supplier, and a refund is issued...but ONLY if the entire case is accounted for, IE, he has not cut up or used ANY of the 80 pounds of meat. They get credit for it. At that point, that entire case is designated to be shipped back, where it WILL be destroyed, all 80 pounds. THAT'S waste, and it won't be addressed by a law that would require grocers to donate all food deemed edible.
 
Gaius46 said:
Why has it no place in this discussion? Is it not their property?
Click to expand...

Sort of. I mean, the government has only given....GIVEN....BILLIONS in subsidies to the suppliers of that product in order to ensure such cheap prices. The property owners owes a large chuck of their gross margin to uncle sam, because WITHOUT those subsidies, that property would cost a LOT more.



So.....yeah, expecting them to treat that stuff with a modicum of respect is not out of the question.
 
le bouffon said:
Sigh. They won't hold "this stuff". It will simply go to the local charity, usually on the day. These are done regionally in France.
Click to expand...

Uh huh. So, those charities have their own trucks to go and get the stuff?


Again, how many food banks have you visited before? I'm guessing.....0.
 
le bouffon said:
I never said Scotty beams it there. In France and many European countries, charities will pick up the food at the distribution facilities and will hand the food to the homeless that night.
Click to expand...

And France has a very very very very very very very very very very VERY different food industry than the US does. For so many reasons that I can't even list. Maybe after a couple of beers, I'll feel up to going over the thousands of reasons why they can doe this, and we can't really, in a wall of post. But for now, this should tide you over.
 
poweRob said:
No. They tend to field scrap it. Meaning it had better be destroyed.
Click to expand...

Eh, you're wrong. Most grocers are the PRIMARY sources of donated food in their areas.
 
KevinKohler said:
Uh huh. So, those charities have their own trucks to go and get the stuff?


Again, how many food banks have you visited before? I'm guessing.....0.
Click to expand...

Many, as I've worked for one in the UK too. Many charities and food banks have their own trucks in Europe. Charities and government relief programs can run a loss, as they're not in the business to make profit. Economics 101.
 
KevinKohler said:
And France has a very very very very very very very very very very VERY different food industry than the US does. For so many reasons that I can't even list. Maybe after a couple of beers, I'll feel up to going over the thousands of reasons why they can doe this, and we can't really, in a wall of post. But for now, this should tide you over.
Click to expand...

Yes, and this article was in regards to France, not the US.
 
KevinKohler said:
Also, forgot to add, sale or no sale, there is still a check out, and a register. Because items leaving the building need to be removed from the on hands.



I take it you've never actually been to a food bank ever?
Click to expand...

Checkout and register isn't relevant to supply chain. Goods in and goods out are.
 
le bouffon said:
Checkout and register isn't relevant to supply chain. Goods in and goods out are.
Click to expand...

Right, but what I'm saying is, paying or not, the people perusing are still called customers, and the area they "shop" is still called the sales floor, etc.
 
le bouffon said:
Yes, and this article was in regards to France, not the US.
Click to expand...

I understand that, but often, people post links like that, and say, "See, WE should be held to that same standard!".



Truth is, we can't because our FDA has more or less RUINED food as we know it. I mean, the french can eat rare or even RAW ground beef. Doing so here would give you a disease. Because we have a governing body that has tolerance levels that are never actually checked or enforced. Literally, there is a percentage of **** (as in, actual animal feces) allowed into each package of ground beef you buy.
 
KevinKohler said:
I understand that, but often, people post links like that, and say, "See, WE should be held to that same standard!".



Truth is, we can't because our FDA has more or less RUINED food as we know it. I mean, the french can eat rare or even RAW ground beef. Doing so here would give you a disease. Because we have a governing body that has tolerance levels that are never actually checked or enforced. Literally, there is a percentage of **** (as in, actual animal feces) allowed into each package of ground beef you buy.
Click to expand...

The foods have expiration dates. Donations are usually canned and frozen and boxed, though. And I'm sure the food pantries have the pickup through distribution thing downpat.
 
JumpinJack said:
The foods have expiration dates. Donations are usually canned and frozen and boxed, though. And I'm sure the food pantries have the pickup through distribution thing downpat.
Click to expand...

Sort of. Pickup/distribution can be heavily affected by litigation. For instance, in some cases, a grocer can't simply donate DIRECTLY to a food bank, because doing so, leaves them open to liability, should someone get sick from the food donated by said grocer. So, if said grocer were to, say, donate to a CHURCH, who then donates to a food bank, the liability trail leads more to the church, than the grocer.


Truly, litigation has ****ed this country, in so many ways that it's simply incalculable to keep track of them all.
 
KevinKohler said:
Sort of. I mean, the government has only given....GIVEN....BILLIONS in subsidies to the suppliers of that product in order to ensure such cheap prices. The property owners owes a large chuck of their gross margin to uncle sam, because WITHOUT those subsidies, that property would cost a LOT more.



So.....yeah, expecting them to treat that stuff with a modicum of respect is not out of the question.
Click to expand...


The subsidies are going to the producers. If the government wants to attach strings to those that would be fine but that has nothing to do with downstream purchasers.

As to the margins of supermarkets my sense from people I know who've worked in that world is that the margins aren't all that large on things like produce in the 1-2% range and most of the cost savings is actually passed off to consumers.

That's not to say that supermarkets should toss edible but unsalable food. They shouldn't. They shouldn't be compelled by the government.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom