Why do Indian people always ask for discounts?

[OS]

Originally posted by: sxr7171

Originally posted by: OS
Well, there is a time cost associated with it also. If the scenario is for real, trying to cut 1K off the asking price of a car gets you further than trying to get a $2 mousepad for free.

Hell, if I went to a store to haggle over a $2 mousepad, I'd lose no matter what based on the time I pissed away. It's not fun, you piss everyone off and the return is basically nothing.

I agree though, that retail prices are mostly bad jokes, but I don't haggle. I just wait for a sale or buy it online.

Culture I can understand though, my parents are from taiwan, they still give me a hassle over throwing away a little bit of food at the end of a meal. So what, I threw away maybe $.25 in food, like us americans need to eat any more. Hell I'll probably pay more in drugs and surgery down the line if I eat everything instead of throwing out what I don't feel like finishing.

I can really see people arguing over a mousepad because they fail to realize just how low the margins on this $1000 product actually are. They think that the store must be making at least a $100 on it so throwing in a mousepad shouldn't mean anything. The alternative explanation is that they fell that $1000 is a lot of money and if they're getting something that costs so much, they shouldn't have to buy a seperate mouspad, which at places like BB costs $10-15.

As for wasting food, I find it wierd how some people think it is beneath them to finish everything on the plate, as if to mean that someone who leaves a clean plate is a starvin marvin of some sorts. There are people who don't have the food they need and would kill for the food you just threw away, it's not about the money, it's about the principle.

If you can't finish what's on your plate, put less on your plate.

This is usually when I eat out, and I get fixed amounts of food in my order, especially if I don't like it. Of course I am not purposely wasteful.

As for the starving people point, this always has and always will be a retarded argument. There is enough food in the world to go around, but the problem is getting the food to the people who need it, it is not a supply problem. Many countries give food to north korea to feed the starving there, but the military/government gets it first and they keep it for themselves.

 

[The Pentium Guy]

Originally posted by: Amol
:music: Welcome to India where the cows eat hay and we drive auto rickshaw ev-e-ryday! :music:

:music:I lou my frooti gurrrrl:music:

 

[sxr7171]

Originally posted by: OS

Originally posted by: sxr7171

Originally posted by: OS
Well, there is a time cost associated with it also. If the scenario is for real, trying to cut 1K off the asking price of a car gets you further than trying to get a $2 mousepad for free.

Hell, if I went to a store to haggle over a $2 mousepad, I'd lose no matter what based on the time I pissed away. It's not fun, you piss everyone off and the return is basically nothing.

I agree though, that retail prices are mostly bad jokes, but I don't haggle. I just wait for a sale or buy it online.

Culture I can understand though, my parents are from taiwan, they still give me a hassle over throwing away a little bit of food at the end of a meal. So what, I threw away maybe $.25 in food, like us americans need to eat any more. Hell I'll probably pay more in drugs and surgery down the line if I eat everything instead of throwing out what I don't feel like finishing.

I can really see people arguing over a mousepad because they fail to realize just how low the margins on this $1000 product actually are. They think that the store must be making at least a $100 on it so throwing in a mousepad shouldn't mean anything. The alternative explanation is that they fell that $1000 is a lot of money and if they're getting something that costs so much, they shouldn't have to buy a seperate mouspad, which at places like BB costs $10-15.

As for wasting food, I find it wierd how some people think it is beneath them to finish everything on the plate, as if to mean that someone who leaves a clean plate is a starvin marvin of some sorts. There are people who don't have the food they need and would kill for the food you just threw away, it's not about the money, it's about the principle.

If you can't finish what's on your plate, put less on your plate.

This is usually when I eat out, and I get fixed amounts of food in my order, especially if I don't like it. Of course I am not purposely wasteful.

As for the starving people point, this always has and always will be a retarded argument. There is enough food in the world to go around, but the problem is getting the food to the people who need it, it is not a supply problem. Many countries give food to north korea to feed the starving there, but the military/government gets it first and they keep it for themselves.

Firstly, it is not a retarded argument because it could be viewed as a moral argument as well. Let's not go that route, however, as everyone has a different sense of morality.

The argument can also stand on it's own legs as a logical argument. Forget about North Korea, there are people starving right here in our own back yard. School kids who are undernourished because their parents can't afford to feed them properly. If everyone stopped wasting any food at all just by basic supply and demand prices would go down a little. That would help people who need the food better afford it.

North Korea may be the only situation you are aware of, but there are places in the world where food is in the store and people can look at it but can't afford to buy it. That can't be a very good feeling. Then imagine being in that situation and watching people throw food away. Every little decrease in demand makes a difference.

http://www.fhfh.org/hunger.html

 

[bootymac]

Originally posted by: GoodToGo
Let me tell you something about the Indians in America. Now I am an Indian myself and so my opinion is definitely unbiased. More than 90% of Indians are either Gujrati or Tamilian. Between both of them, Gujratis are ~75% and Tamilians are ~25%. In any case, both these sects are the....wait for it.....WORST among all the rest.

Gujratis are known for being the very stingy but yet being the most showy. They will try everything to impress others like dressing up, buying imitations of branded items, fake american accents etc etc but ....yup...still cheap bastages. They own most the motels around but in academics, they are the most dumb fvck ignorant POS's. I went to undergrad and met lots of guju's but none in grad...hmmm..wonder why? :shocked: These guys as you may know, own most the motels around town and their last name is either Shah or Patel. They are also renowned for being completely oblivious of anyone who is not guju and would rather DIE than helping a non guju.

Tamilians are on the other hand more simple but thats about the only positive adjective. They are the generic stinky guys who go around without taking showers and giving other guys a bad name. If you think Gujratis are bad, these guys are the grand daddies. They wont cough up anything....even a dollar. I was living with some and god it was a nightmare. Every time for monthly bill setllement, it used to be a nightmare. The monthly bill used to come as the same but of course the grocery and other utility bills always meant a little plus and minus. But nooooooooooooooooooo, how the hell did the bill come as five dollars more???!11!!!!1?? They used to act as if it was a big deal. OMG, just pay the frigging bill and get on with it. Of course they are very smart in academics. I think in my Grad lab, I was the only Non Tamilian. I knew many Tamilians who doing PHD's in several different topics. But then I also knew a Tamilian who saved up $45,000 in his PHD of 5 years at a monthly stipend of $1800. He never ate out, he never went to the movies and wore the same clothes. At the end of PHD if someone asked him what he did in college, I would dread to hear him answer. He ate the same POS (sambhar which is a popular dish). This guy had enough sambar powder (bought in retail from India by packing in suitcases) to last him a lifetime. OBTW, many of them are vegetarian for religious reasons :roll: If ever a Tamilian comes to eat with you, run out screaming or make an excuse ("Yes I think I am coming down with testicular cancer"). These guys are vegetarian freaks ("Why are you killing the innocent chickens?") I used to love telling them that my favorite dish a medium rare 20 oz Applebees Porterhouse with mashed potatoes just to get a rise out of them.

If you belong to any of the above 2 categories, then fvck you. You are worst of the worst and deserve to back to your POS shanty town in the middle of nowhere. If you are not, then good job on being a person who has a decent opinion of living and doesnt put money above everything else.

winnar

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: sxr7171
Firstly, it is not a retarded argument because it could be viewed as a moral argument as well. Let's not go that route, however, as everyone has a different sense of morality.

The argument can also stand on it's own legs as a logical argument. Forget about North Korea, there are people starving right here in our own back yard. School kids who are undernourished because their parents can't afford to feed them properly. If everyone stopped wasting any food at all just by basic supply and demand prices would go down a little. That would help people who need the food better afford it.

North Korea may be the only situation you are aware of, but there are places in the world where food is in the store and people can look at it but can't afford to buy it. That can't be a very good feeling. Then imagine being in that situation and watching people throw food away. Every little decrease in demand makes a difference.

http://www.fhfh.org/hunger.html

I have serious doubts about pure supply and demand affecting food prices. Many supermarkets and restaurants throw out a lot of expired/unsold food, particularly produce/dairy products. This implies there is more supply than demand for food, and yet prices seldom go down in supermarkets. In a purely and perfectly supply/demand driven model, there will be no waste because prices would be self adjusting. Even if food were sold near cost may still very well be above what the very poor can pay.

Partially because food sold in the US is generally very high quality and heavily regulated. Alot of food is thrown out simply for cosmetic reasons and unfortunately there isn't really a secondary low cost market for less than perfect food. When you are talking about food cheap enough for the very poor, you need new/different channels more than anything else and eating everything that comes your way does not establish new channels.

Sorry, but eating everything on your plate does not make hungry people less hungry. If anything, it just clogs your arteries and gives you cancer of the colon.

 

[OS]

SUPERMARKET FACTS

Net profit after taxes, 2003/2004 0.88%

link

So supermarkets barely cover their own costs at current prices, everyone using less food in an attempt to cause prices to go lower would mean that supermarkets would have to sell at a loss. That's not sustainable obviously. Which means you'll have to find another way to feed the very poor.

 

[sxr7171]

Originally posted by: OS
SUPERMARKET FACTS

Net profit after taxes, 2003/2004 0.88%

link

So supermarkets barely cover their own costs at current prices, everyone using less food in an attempt to cause prices to go lower would mean that supermarkets would have to sell at a loss. That's not sustainable obviously. Which means you'll have to find another way to feed the very poor.

I don't think you've taken any economics so here goes, prices go down due to less pressure on suppliers to produce. Hence they can operate at a more efficient point in their production curves while delaying additional capital costs for increased capacity. Less demand always makes prices go down, the extent depends on the slope of the supply curve (price vs. supply).

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: sxr7171

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: jbloggs
Ah Bashing indians on an Indian run website/forum, now thats freedom.

Also amazing how the ABCDs come out the woodwork to bash the FOBs, unity is obviously not a strong point.

Back on topic....If you don't ask, you don't get. I saved $600 when buying HDTV at HiFi-Buys. Circuit City and Sears were also willing to give discounts. The thing is not to talk to a regular sales rep who really does not have the authority or the power to make things happen, but instead to someone who does. Also shop during Business Quarter-End when store managers are trying to make their numbers.

This 'unity' you speak of is the reason at a 'diverse' college such as mine, there is no diversity....indians hang out only with indians, asians only with asians, blacks only with blacks, etc. Yer holdin back progress!

It's a little more complex than that. India is country of many langauges and cultures, and certain groups among them tend to just stick like glue. Gujus really tend to stick together and most of the time don't like to befriend other people including other Indians. You might see them with another kind of Indian or someone of another ethnicity, but they will always consider them outsiders. You will be treated differently and if push comes to shove and there is time when it's between you and one their guju friends, the guju friend always comes first.

Punjabis also tend to only care about themselves and see everyone else as an outsider but a little less so.

I find that Malayalees (from the southen state of Kerala) and Bengalis tend to be the most accepting and broad-minded as well as on average more intellectual and cultured.

I'm german/english, my one roommate is italian, my other roommate is from pakistan. All 'culturally rich' heritages. I don't see why you have to isolate yourself from the other 95% of society just because you are from a different place.

 

[sxr7171]

Originally posted by: OS

Originally posted by: sxr7171
Firstly, it is not a retarded argument because it could be viewed as a moral argument as well. Let's not go that route, however, as everyone has a different sense of morality.

The argument can also stand on it's own legs as a logical argument. Forget about North Korea, there are people starving right here in our own back yard. School kids who are undernourished because their parents can't afford to feed them properly. If everyone stopped wasting any food at all just by basic supply and demand prices would go down a little. That would help people who need the food better afford it.

North Korea may be the only situation you are aware of, but there are places in the world where food is in the store and people can look at it but can't afford to buy it. That can't be a very good feeling. Then imagine being in that situation and watching people throw food away. Every little decrease in demand makes a difference.

http://www.fhfh.org/hunger.html

I have serious doubts about pure supply and demand affecting food prices. Many supermarkets and restaurants throw out a lot of expired/unsold food, particularly produce/dairy products. This implies there is more supply than demand for food, and yet prices seldom go down in supermarkets. In a purely and perfectly supply/demand driven model, there will be no waste because prices would be self adjusting. Even if food were sold near cost may still very well be above what the very poor can pay.

Partially because food sold in the US is generally very high quality and heavily regulated. Alot of food is thrown out simply for cosmetic reasons and unfortunately there isn't really a secondary low cost market for less than perfect food. When you are talking about food cheap enough for the very poor, you need new/different channels more than anything else and eating everything that comes your way does not establish new channels.

Sorry, but eating everything on your plate does not make hungry people less hungry. If anything, it just clogs your arteries and gives you cancer of the colon.

Just put less food on your plate instead making this ridiculous argument: "eating everything on your plate does not make hungry people less hungry. If anything, it just clogs your arteries and gives you cancer of the colon." Your parents must be ashamed of your assertions. At a restaurant there's nothing you can do sometimes, and I understand that but sometimes I refuse certain items I won't be eating.

Sure there are wastages in terms of products expiring, but that's just the nature of any perishible commodity. You have to realize that there are people working for the big grocery chains whose job it is to find ways to minimize that cost of their business. If people wasted less and bought less at the supermarket, the supermarket buys less from its producers. If you've taken even Econ 101, you would recognize that every market is supply and demand except for few exceptions like monopolies, oligopolies, and when there is illegal market collusion. You would also recognize that just because there is wastage as a part of doing business it does not affect supply and demand pressures.

If people bought less, then even the wastage at the store would reduce as wastage is a percentage of goods sold.

Your argument is that even if food were sold at cost the very poor might not be able to afford food? So if the price of wheat flour was $1.25 a pound and now it is $1 a pound, they won't be eating better? Also you are forgetting about food stamps. In addition by saying that the very poor may not be able to afford food despite prices falling you go against your original argument that hunger is all a distribution problem. You basically are saying what I am: that people can see the food in store but cannot afford it (or rather as much as they need).

If you think US food is high quality, you clearly have never left the US. Everyone who has an international perspective on things or who has travelled always tells me that the US has the worst food but it is cheap compared to other first world countries. I can tell you that from my own travels I find this to be true. There is no place that overuses processed garbage like the US in their food. Even half-way decent restaurants use mostly Sysco garbage for their ingredients. Nowhere in the world will you find a 99cent can of chilli like here in the US.

As for secondary market for food, I don't think you've been in an IGA, or a Super Kmart, or something like that. There is food in there I would be scared to touch, leave alone eat. Not everyone can afford Kroger and Pathmark. It's like a situation where I had to explain to a friend who made the assertion that normal everyday Americans can afford to shop at Abercrombie and Fitch. I had to set him straight by telling him that most American can only afford to buy clothes at Kmart ot Meijer. While we can't blame ourselves for having a privileged life, we should try to at least understand how most people really live. People sometimes have to choose between rent and food, if I were ever in that boat, my parents would pay my month's rent and come with bags of food as I'm sure your's would. Some people don't have that luxury.

At the end of the day you can keep saying that what you're doing has no effect on the supply and demand of food and on other people's ability to buy food, but it's your own conscience you have to answer. We all waste food sometimes, even I do, but at least acknowledge that doing it hurts people.

 

[Chode Messiah]

is this a parody of that frekin senior citizen discount thread?

 

[sxr7171]

nm

 

[DVad3r]

Thread is too long to read, and if someone said this already sorry:

Why do Indian people ask for discounts?

Because they can.

If you possess the simple knowledge that almost everything can be sold below the sticker retail price, then you will always ask for a discount because really, who wants to pay more for something they can get for less? I'm not indian but I never buy anything retail without bringing the price down or getting a discount. Just because the sales person wants a big commission cut, its not my problem. I either get my discount or walk out of the store and go to the next one

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: sxr7171

Originally posted by: OS

Originally posted by: sxr7171
Firstly, it is not a retarded argument because it could be viewed as a moral argument as well. Let's not go that route, however, as everyone has a different sense of morality.

The argument can also stand on it's own legs as a logical argument. Forget about North Korea, there are people starving right here in our own back yard. School kids who are undernourished because their parents can't afford to feed them properly. If everyone stopped wasting any food at all just by basic supply and demand prices would go down a little. That would help people who need the food better afford it.

North Korea may be the only situation you are aware of, but there are places in the world where food is in the store and people can look at it but can't afford to buy it. That can't be a very good feeling. Then imagine being in that situation and watching people throw food away. Every little decrease in demand makes a difference.

http://www.fhfh.org/hunger.html

I have serious doubts about pure supply and demand affecting food prices. Many supermarkets and restaurants throw out a lot of expired/unsold food, particularly produce/dairy products. This implies there is more supply than demand for food, and yet prices seldom go down in supermarkets. In a purely and perfectly supply/demand driven model, there will be no waste because prices would be self adjusting. Even if food were sold near cost may still very well be above what the very poor can pay.

Partially because food sold in the US is generally very high quality and heavily regulated. Alot of food is thrown out simply for cosmetic reasons and unfortunately there isn't really a secondary low cost market for less than perfect food. When you are talking about food cheap enough for the very poor, you need new/different channels more than anything else and eating everything that comes your way does not establish new channels.

Sorry, but eating everything on your plate does not make hungry people less hungry. If anything, it just clogs your arteries and gives you cancer of the colon.

Just put less food on your plate instead making this ridiculous argument: "eating everything on your plate does not make hungry people less hungry. If anything, it just clogs your arteries and gives you cancer of the colon." Your parents must be ashamed of your assertions. At a restaurant there's nothing you can do sometimes, and I understand that but sometimes I refuse certain items I won't be eating.

Sure there are wastages in terms of products expiring, but that's just the nature of any perishible commodity. You have to realize that there are people working for the big grocery chains whose job it is to find ways to minimize that cost of their business. If people wasted less and bought less at the supermarket, the supermarket buys less from its producers. If you've taken even Econ 101, you would recognize that every market is supply and demand except for few exceptions like monopolies, oligopolies, and when there is illegal market collusion. You would also recognize that just because there is wastage as a part of doing business it does not affect supply and demand pressures.

If people bought less, then even the wastage at the store would reduce as wastage is a percentage of goods sold.

Your argument is that even if food were sold at cost the very poor might not be able to afford food? So if the price of wheat flour was $1.25 a pound and now it is $1 a pound, they won't be eating better? Also you are forgetting about food stamps. In addition by saying that the very poor may not be able to afford food despite prices falling you go against your original argument that hunger is all a distribution problem. You basically are saying what I am: that people can see the food in store but cannot afford it (or rather as much as they need).

If you think US food is high quality, you clearly have never left the US. Everyone who has an international perspective on things or who has travelled always tells me that the US has the worst food but it is cheap compared to other first world countries. I can tell you that from my own travels I find this to be true. There is no place that overuses processed garbage like the US in their food. Even half-way decent restaurants use mostly Sysco garbage for their ingredients. Nowhere in the world will you find a 99cent can of chilli like here in the US.

As for secondary market for food, I don't think you've been in an IGA, or a Super Kmart, or something like that. There is food in there I would be scared to touch, leave alone eat. Not everyone can afford Kroger and Pathmark. It's like a situation where I had to explain to a friend who made the assertion that normal everyday Americans can afford to shop at Abercrombie and Fitch. I had to set him straight by telling him that most American can only afford to buy clothes at Kmart ot Meijer. While we can't blame ourselves for having a privileged life, we should try to at least understand how most people really live. People sometimes have to choose between rent and food, if I were ever in that boat, my parents would pay my month's rent and come with bags of food as I'm sure your's would. Some people don't have that luxury.

At the end of the day you can keep saying that what you're doing has no effect on the supply and demand of food and on other people's ability to buy food, but it's your own conscience you have to answer. We all waste food sometimes, even I do, but at least acknowledge that doing it hurts people.

heh, I wish I had the time to go through all your tirades, but I think I'll just throw away more food just to spite you now.

 

[handoverfist]

Originally posted by: shilala
Because they're smart shoppers?
My first guess was that they were Jewish Indians, but I was afraid to say that for fear I'd be persecuted. There aren't any Jewish Indians, are there?

sure there are... they are hinjews

 

[Mani]

Originally posted by: bootymac

Originally posted by: GoodToGo
Let me tell you something about the Indians in America. Now I am an Indian myself and so my opinion is definitely unbiased. More than 90% of Indians are either Gujrati or Tamilian. Between both of them, Gujratis are ~75% and Tamilians are ~25%. In any case, both these sects are the....wait for it.....WORST among all the rest.

Gujratis are known for being the very stingy but yet being the most showy. They will try everything to impress others like dressing up, buying imitations of branded items, fake american accents etc etc but ....yup...still cheap bastages. They own most the motels around but in academics, they are the most dumb fvck ignorant POS's. I went to undergrad and met lots of guju's but none in grad...hmmm..wonder why? :shocked: These guys as you may know, own most the motels around town and their last name is either Shah or Patel. They are also renowned for being completely oblivious of anyone who is not guju and would rather DIE than helping a non guju.

Tamilians are on the other hand more simple but thats about the only positive adjective. They are the generic stinky guys who go around without taking showers and giving other guys a bad name. If you think Gujratis are bad, these guys are the grand daddies. They wont cough up anything....even a dollar. I was living with some and god it was a nightmare. Every time for monthly bill setllement, it used to be a nightmare. The monthly bill used to come as the same but of course the grocery and other utility bills always meant a little plus and minus. But nooooooooooooooooooo, how the hell did the bill come as five dollars more???!11!!!!1?? They used to act as if it was a big deal. OMG, just pay the frigging bill and get on with it. Of course they are very smart in academics. I think in my Grad lab, I was the only Non Tamilian. I knew many Tamilians who doing PHD's in several different topics. But then I also knew a Tamilian who saved up $45,000 in his PHD of 5 years at a monthly stipend of $1800. He never ate out, he never went to the movies and wore the same clothes. At the end of PHD if someone asked him what he did in college, I would dread to hear him answer. He ate the same POS (sambhar which is a popular dish). This guy had enough sambar powder (bought in retail from India by packing in suitcases) to last him a lifetime. OBTW, many of them are vegetarian for religious reasons :roll: If ever a Tamilian comes to eat with you, run out screaming or make an excuse ("Yes I think I am coming down with testicular cancer"). These guys are vegetarian freaks ("Why are you killing the innocent chickens?") I used to love telling them that my favorite dish a medium rare 20 oz Applebees Porterhouse with mashed potatoes just to get a rise out of them.

If you belong to any of the above 2 categories, then fvck you. You are worst of the worst and deserve to back to your POS shanty town in the middle of nowhere. If you are not, then good job on being a person who has a decent opinion of living and doesnt put money above everything else.

winnar

Of what, most obnoxiously retarded post of the thread award? This dipsh*t is so insecure in the image of his race, he has resorted to inaccurate stereotyping and fingerpointing to isolate behaviors Indians of certain descent.

Here's some experiences of my own. The cheapest Indians I know are Bengali, despite being a 2-doctor household, one a cardio surgeon. I had 2 gujurati roomates in college and we never once had an expense dispute. The stinkiest Indian dude I have ever met was Marati - he shared the communal bathroom of our dorm and I had to leave him a note along with a stick of Right Guard for him to get the message. Being Tamil descent, the last time I ate Sambar or Rasam was late 2004, and in fact I just got back from Prime Steakhouse here in the Bellagio after having downed the greatest 18oz Ribeye god has ever put on this earth. All but one of my closest friends is non-Indian, and my girlfriend of 8 months is Taiwanese. Got any more stereotypes to try?

 

[Mani]

Originally posted by: sxr7171

Originally posted by: OS
LOL, this thread is awesome.

Originally posted by: Mani
Anyways on topic, yea Indians are known to be this way. Believe it or not though, it's not a way to arrogantly throw a 2$ mousepad in the face of retail employees in order to make their lives a living hell. The fact is, a lot of Indians are just that cheap. That combined with the fact that they are used to haggling on EVERYTHING as is customary in India, it's in their blood. Given time living in the US though, they unlearn the behavior.

Someone used an example of the $2 mousepad. A similar example is my (Caucasian) friend who bought a car at MSRP because demand was high and dealers would not budge on price. He was feeling pretty crappy that he had to pay the full price tag for the car, though he loved it and needed it for family transport. So he got the dealer to throw $100 wheel locks for free. This is a very similar situation and most people wouldn't give it a second thought or make judgements on the guy for asking for the wheel locks. Just something to put this in perspective.

Well, there is a time cost associated with it also. If the scenario is for real, trying to cut 1K off the asking price of a car gets you further than trying to get a $2 mousepad for free.

Hell, if I went to a store to haggle over a $2 mousepad, I'd lose no matter what based on the time I pissed away. It's not fun, you piss everyone off and the return is basically nothing.

I agree though, that retail prices are mostly bad jokes, but I don't haggle. I just wait for a sale or buy it online.

Culture I can understand though, my parents are from taiwan, they still give me a hassle over throwing away a little bit of food at the end of a meal. So what, I threw away maybe $.25 in food, like us americans need to eat any more. Hell I'll probably pay more in drugs and surgery down the line if I eat everything instead of throwing out what I don't feel like finishing.

I can really see people arguing over a mousepad because they fail to realize just how low the margins on this $1000 product actually are. They think that the store must be making at least a $100 on it so throwing in a mousepad shouldn't mean anything. The alternative explanation is that they fell that $1000 is a lot of money and if they're getting something that costs so much, they shouldn't have to buy a seperate mouspad, which at places like BB costs $10-15.

Bingo. It's all a matter of perspective. To the retail employee, the customer is haggling on a worthless item. To the customer, they just spent $1500 and they are asking for one tiny concession.

Regardless, most of the retail employees b*tching here could probably easily get around the problem by balling up and explaining to the customer in no uncertain terms that they a.) are uncommissioned and/or b.) that company policy explicitly forbids any adjustment on the price. Instead, these folks just feel compelled to b*tch about it anonymously on a message board.

 

[sxr7171]

Originally posted by: OS

Originally posted by: sxr7171

Originally posted by: OS

Originally posted by: sxr7171
Firstly, it is not a retarded argument because it could be viewed as a moral argument as well. Let's not go that route, however, as everyone has a different sense of morality.

The argument can also stand on it's own legs as a logical argument. Forget about North Korea, there are people starving right here in our own back yard. School kids who are undernourished because their parents can't afford to feed them properly. If everyone stopped wasting any food at all just by basic supply and demand prices would go down a little. That would help people who need the food better afford it.

North Korea may be the only situation you are aware of, but there are places in the world where food is in the store and people can look at it but can't afford to buy it. That can't be a very good feeling. Then imagine being in that situation and watching people throw food away. Every little decrease in demand makes a difference.

http://www.fhfh.org/hunger.html

I have serious doubts about pure supply and demand affecting food prices. Many supermarkets and restaurants throw out a lot of expired/unsold food, particularly produce/dairy products. This implies there is more supply than demand for food, and yet prices seldom go down in supermarkets. In a purely and perfectly supply/demand driven model, there will be no waste because prices would be self adjusting. Even if food were sold near cost may still very well be above what the very poor can pay.

Partially because food sold in the US is generally very high quality and heavily regulated. Alot of food is thrown out simply for cosmetic reasons and unfortunately there isn't really a secondary low cost market for less than perfect food. When you are talking about food cheap enough for the very poor, you need new/different channels more than anything else and eating everything that comes your way does not establish new channels.

Sorry, but eating everything on your plate does not make hungry people less hungry. If anything, it just clogs your arteries and gives you cancer of the colon.

Just put less food on your plate instead making this ridiculous argument: "eating everything on your plate does not make hungry people less hungry. If anything, it just clogs your arteries and gives you cancer of the colon." Your parents must be ashamed of your assertions. At a restaurant there's nothing you can do sometimes, and I understand that but sometimes I refuse certain items I won't be eating.

Sure there are wastages in terms of products expiring, but that's just the nature of any perishible commodity. You have to realize that there are people working for the big grocery chains whose job it is to find ways to minimize that cost of their business. If people wasted less and bought less at the supermarket, the supermarket buys less from its producers. If you've taken even Econ 101, you would recognize that every market is supply and demand except for few exceptions like monopolies, oligopolies, and when there is illegal market collusion. You would also recognize that just because there is wastage as a part of doing business it does not affect supply and demand pressures.

If people bought less, then even the wastage at the store would reduce as wastage is a percentage of goods sold.

Your argument is that even if food were sold at cost the very poor might not be able to afford food? So if the price of wheat flour was $1.25 a pound and now it is $1 a pound, they won't be eating better? Also you are forgetting about food stamps. In addition by saying that the very poor may not be able to afford food despite prices falling you go against your original argument that hunger is all a distribution problem. You basically are saying what I am: that people can see the food in store but cannot afford it (or rather as much as they need).

If you think US food is high quality, you clearly have never left the US. Everyone who has an international perspective on things or who has travelled always tells me that the US has the worst food but it is cheap compared to other first world countries. I can tell you that from my own travels I find this to be true. There is no place that overuses processed garbage like the US in their food. Even half-way decent restaurants use mostly Sysco garbage for their ingredients. Nowhere in the world will you find a 99cent can of chilli like here in the US.

As for secondary market for food, I don't think you've been in an IGA, or a Super Kmart, or something like that. There is food in there I would be scared to touch, leave alone eat. Not everyone can afford Kroger and Pathmark. It's like a situation where I had to explain to a friend who made the assertion that normal everyday Americans can afford to shop at Abercrombie and Fitch. I had to set him straight by telling him that most American can only afford to buy clothes at Kmart ot Meijer. While we can't blame ourselves for having a privileged life, we should try to at least understand how most people really live. People sometimes have to choose between rent and food, if I were ever in that boat, my parents would pay my month's rent and come with bags of food as I'm sure your's would. Some people don't have that luxury.

At the end of the day you can keep saying that what you're doing has no effect on the supply and demand of food and on other people's ability to buy food, but it's your own conscience you have to answer. We all waste food sometimes, even I do, but at least acknowledge that doing it hurts people.

heh, I wish I had the time to go through all your tirades, but I think I'll just throw away more food just to spite you now.

I don't care if you do. I'm not an activist, but I'm not alone in believing that food shouldn't be wasted. You can continue to justify what you do with baseless arguments because you can't open your eyes to the effect your actions have. If you had an understanding of what wasting food means to others and then said "I'm going to do it anyway," I'd have more respect for you than you not even having a proper understanding of how your actions affect others because you choose to be ignorant to justify your actions. Making an informed decision is expected of someone with an education. You choose ignorance, and your knowledge of basic economics remains dismal.

 

[chrisms]

I used to work at a pizza palce and they'd try to get my to throw in another pizza with their orders 90% of the time. At least the Polish people only stole our cardboard boxes and bags of pepperoni.

 

[Deeko]

mani read my conversations with them. I tell them the store policy.

 

[GoodToGo]

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: bootymac

Originally posted by: GoodToGo
Let me tell you something about the Indians in America. Now I am an Indian myself and so my opinion is definitely unbiased. More than 90% of Indians are either Gujrati or Tamilian. Between both of them, Gujratis are ~75% and Tamilians are ~25%. In any case, both these sects are the....wait for it.....WORST among all the rest.

Gujratis are known for being the very stingy but yet being the most showy. They will try everything to impress others like dressing up, buying imitations of branded items, fake american accents etc etc but ....yup...still cheap bastages. They own most the motels around but in academics, they are the most dumb fvck ignorant POS's. I went to undergrad and met lots of guju's but none in grad...hmmm..wonder why? :shocked: These guys as you may know, own most the motels around town and their last name is either Shah or Patel. They are also renowned for being completely oblivious of anyone who is not guju and would rather DIE than helping a non guju.

Tamilians are on the other hand more simple but thats about the only positive adjective. They are the generic stinky guys who go around without taking showers and giving other guys a bad name. If you think Gujratis are bad, these guys are the grand daddies. They wont cough up anything....even a dollar. I was living with some and god it was a nightmare. Every time for monthly bill setllement, it used to be a nightmare. The monthly bill used to come as the same but of course the grocery and other utility bills always meant a little plus and minus. But nooooooooooooooooooo, how the hell did the bill come as five dollars more???!11!!!!1?? They used to act as if it was a big deal. OMG, just pay the frigging bill and get on with it. Of course they are very smart in academics. I think in my Grad lab, I was the only Non Tamilian. I knew many Tamilians who doing PHD's in several different topics. But then I also knew a Tamilian who saved up $45,000 in his PHD of 5 years at a monthly stipend of $1800. He never ate out, he never went to the movies and wore the same clothes. At the end of PHD if someone asked him what he did in college, I would dread to hear him answer. He ate the same POS (sambhar which is a popular dish). This guy had enough sambar powder (bought in retail from India by packing in suitcases) to last him a lifetime. OBTW, many of them are vegetarian for religious reasons :roll: If ever a Tamilian comes to eat with you, run out screaming or make an excuse ("Yes I think I am coming down with testicular cancer"). These guys are vegetarian freaks ("Why are you killing the innocent chickens?") I used to love telling them that my favorite dish a medium rare 20 oz Applebees Porterhouse with mashed potatoes just to get a rise out of them.

If you belong to any of the above 2 categories, then fvck you. You are worst of the worst and deserve to back to your POS shanty town in the middle of nowhere. If you are not, then good job on being a person who has a decent opinion of living and doesnt put money above everything else.

winnar

Of what, most obnoxiously retarded post of the thread award? This dipsh*t is so insecure in the image of his race, he has resorted to inaccurate stereotyping and fingerpointing to isolate behaviors Indians of certain descent.

Here's some experiences of my own. The cheapest Indians I know are Bengali, despite being a 2-doctor household, one a cardio surgeon. I had 2 gujurati roomates in college and we never once had an expense dispute. The stinkiest Indian dude I have ever met was Marati - he shared the communal bathroom of our dorm and I had to leave him a note along with a stick of Right Guard for him to get the message. Being Tamil descent, the last time I ate Sambar or Rasam was late 2004, and in fact I just got back from Prime Steakhouse here in the Bellagio after having downed the greatest 18oz Ribeye god has ever put on this earth. All but one of my closest friends is non-Indian, and my girlfriend of 8 months is Taiwanese. Got any more stereotypes to try?

I am not insecure with my race, I hate what most of the Indians fvcking do in America which estalishes stereotypes about us. How many Tamilians do you know that eat beef? How about how bad they stink? How many of them eat sambar every fvcking day? You saw 2-3 examples and shat all over the thread. I have seen countless examples that conform to these stereotypes. I am not an ABCD or a FOB. I am just a guy who wants to have a fun and peaceful life. I wouldnt care less if you are a FOB or ABCD or DCBA, if you act like a fvcktard, then you are spoiling it for everyone.

 

[GoodToGo]

Originally posted by: logic1485

Originally posted by: GoodToGo
Let me tell you something about the Indians in America. Now I am an Indian myself and so my opinion is definitely unbiased. More than 90% of Indians are either Gujrati or Tamilian. Between both of them, Gujratis are ~75% and Tamilians are ~25%. In any case, both these sects are the....wait for it.....WORST among all the rest.

Gujratis are known for being the very stingy but yet being the most showy. They will try everything to impress others like dressing up, buying imitations of branded items, fake american accents etc etc but ....yup...still cheap bastages. They own most the motels around but in academics, they are the most dumb fvck ignorant POS's. I went to undergrad and met lots of guju's but none in grad...hmmm..wonder why? :shocked: These guys as you may know, own most the motels around town and their last name is either Shah or Patel. They are also renowned for being completely oblivious of anyone who is not guju and would rather DIE than helping a non guju.

Tamilians are on the other hand more simple but thats about the only positive adjective. They are the generic stinky guys who go around without taking showers and giving other guys a bad name. If you think Gujratis are bad, these guys are the grand daddies. They wont cough up anything....even a dollar. I was living with some and god it was a nightmare. Every time for monthly bill setllement, it used to be a nightmare. The monthly bill used to come as the same but of course the grocery and other utility bills always meant a little plus and minus. But nooooooooooooooooooo, how the hell did the bill come as five dollars more???!11!!!!1?? They used to act as if it was a big deal. OMG, just pay the frigging bill and get on with it. Of course they are very smart in academics. I think in my Grad lab, I was the only Non Tamilian. I knew many Tamilians who doing PHD's in several different topics. But then I also knew a Tamilian who saved up $45,000 in his PHD of 5 years at a monthly stipend of $1800. He never ate out, he never went to the movies and wore the same clothes. At the end of PHD if someone asked him what he did in college, I would dread to hear him answer. He ate the same POS (sambhar which is a popular dish). This guy had enough sambar powder (bought in retail from India by packing in suitcases) to last him a lifetime. OBTW, many of them are vegetarian for religious reasons :roll: If ever a Tamilian comes to eat with you, run out screaming or make an excuse ("Yes I think I am coming down with testicular cancer"). These guys are vegetarian freaks ("Why are you killing the innocent chickens?") I used to love telling them that my favorite dish a medium rare 20 oz Applebees Porterhouse with mashed potatoes just to get a rise out of them.

If you belong to any of the above 2 categories, then fvck you. You are worst of the worst and deserve to back to your POS shanty town in the middle of nowhere. If you are not, then good job on being a person who has a decent opinion of living and doesnt put money above everything else.

No, fvck you (I'm Guju)

Anyways, if you are Indian, then where you from? Obviously not from Gujrat, or from Tamil Nadu, or Sri Lanka, or whereever else you have "Tamilians".

Hehe, from Delhi.

 

[compuwiz1]

LOL,

In the car business, two great mysteries:
Where do Indians buy and where do Elephants die?

Personally, for years, I've never sold anything to anyone from India, simply because I could never get to their price without losing money. They must be great business people and someone must meet their price, as they do own products, but how is a mystery to me.

 

[BriGy86]

i honestly hate people that try to haggle at retail stores, in my case they get mad at me if i can't reduce the price even though i have no authority over it

then i have to get a manager and waste his time so he can make less money

either pay the price with or with out the deals/coupons that are provided or don't buy at all

 

[globalcitizen]

Originally posted by: handoverfist

Originally posted by: shilala
Because they're smart shoppers?
My first guess was that they were Jewish Indians, but I was afraid to say that for fear I'd be persecuted. There aren't any Jewish Indians, are there?

sure there are... they are hinjews

lol. All the hate going into this thread was wiped out with this reply.:laugh:

 

[DT4K]

Originally posted by: fs5

Originally posted by: DT4K

Originally posted by: Deeko

Circuit City? If they're giving you a discount, they can be fired.

Hmmm, that's funny. I was just looking at a Samsung DLP at CC. I told the salesperson that I was thinking about buying it online because I could get a $180 rebate from fatwallet. He offered to give me $100 discount on an extended warranty and $50 off the price of a home theater system. Neither of these were advertised deals, they were discou...

Like I mentioned before, high ticket items like a DLP, you can get discounts on. Asking for one on a $900 laptop already marked off $300 with $100 rebates is not one of those items.

Depending on the store/manager, they will "pack-in" extended warrenties. That is, lower the price of the item enough to get you to buy the extended warrenty. The extended warrenty is important to them if they're struggling with their percentage (warrenties to sales). This is what all managers care about.

I don't see the big distinction. It was a tv with a regular price of 2199 and it was on sale for 1799. So it already had a $300 discount on the sale and they were still offering to take another $150 off if I bought a warranty and home theater system. I was specifically responding to Deeko's post that CC employees could get fired for offering any discounts.

Oh, and back on topic, the reason lot of Indians ask for discounts is because that is standard practice in their culture. I don't think there's anything racist about pointing out a common behavior in another race of people that is due to them being raised in a different culture with different practices.