RonaldSchleifer

Is that the climate change activists that fly private planes around the world to exotic hot locations where new facilities were built with fully air-conditioned spaces where they eat $10,000 steaks while lecturing the commoners about eating meat and climate change?

When it comes down to is, the failure of Thomas Cook comes down to a single thing, the inability to have any kind of forward looking strategy and ability to adapt to changes.

This story has been told at least dozens of times now in the last two decades in particular and ever time it is some combination of a scapegoat excuse and ... of course, climate change done done it! ... when in reality it was an utter failure of leadership to not notice the shifting enemies on the battlefield or being able to adapt to those changes ...

Sears/Kmart, WalMart (even though they are trying), all the book stores (even though B&N is putting up a good fight), ToysRUS, Taxi services, etc.; even, arguably, the whole US economy that is now realizing that "holy shit, maybe we shouldn't have bet the farm and slaughtered that golden goose so the ruling class or fools could get rich quick by selling their own people out to China/India.

They are all cautionary tails of hubris ... nothing more, nothing less ... regardless of how little people want to learn from them.

On one hand I agree that it shouldn't be because government should require that both, sufficient reserves exist to deliver on contracts to consumers, and that consumers always have the first priority on any kind of claims against a bankrupt company. If, as a professional firm or even investor, you invested in a company; it should be considered part of your professional duty and due diligence that you make smart decisions and suffer the consequences for your actions ... not naive consumers.

On the other hand though, in the absence of and the externalization of the costs by not holding corporations and professionals responsible for their actions, it can be argued that it falls into the common good scope of government to provide such emergency services that are generalizable across the population and from which everyone will equally benefit and therefore can also not be extracted.

There is also an argument to be made though that this has been known and Thomas Cook has been on the skids for years now, even though a layperson really can't be expected to know that when they dish out their life savings to book family vacation of a lifetime.

Again, there reckless corporations need to be held to the fire on these matters, which is EVEN MORE the responsibility of government ... the core responsibility at that ... so that it doesn't have to do these types of things because the reserves existed that would allow emergency travel or relocation or whatever is needed to meet contractual obligations.

Thanks for the reply, even if you are seemingly being snarky about it. Yes, Australia has a similar tax burden overall, even though it is still higher, especially since it is way more heavily weighted towards the middle class with $37,001 AUD already breaking into the 32.5% tax bracket (for reference; in the USA you move from 12% to 22% tax bracket at $39,000 USD/ $57,000 AUD ... which would add up to a massive difference in take home pay difference ... and that on lower AUS salaries)

You may claim "is much cheaper", but reality is that you just don't know and are not being told the full cost of what you are being forced to pay for.

I don't know what you think you are explaining to me, the USA also has a public and private retirement planning system, and again, AUS is not exactly as bad off as Europe; but reality is that you don't see the freight train that is barreling down on you. The thing that makes the USA, AUS, and EU very very difficult to compare for even the supposed experts, is that there are so many modulating variables. Not only are they variables, but they qualitatively modulate things. For an example, you think your system works great in AUS and you have lower taxes and a public health care system that works ... what you don't consider, intentionally ignore, or are propagandized not to even be able to take in; are things like the fact that you don't have huge populations that drain the life, energy, focus, and money out of the USA by the billions. For example an estimate of the cost of various existing welfare programs in the USA ... not ones where you even get something at overpriced and inefficient rates like universal healthcare ... costs the American tax payer approaching the amount of the whole GDP of all of Australia. Think about that, the money equivalent of work, energy, and focus of the whole Australian economy, what every single man, woman, and child does in the economy; goes towards welfare programs to support people that are drains on society. They are even largely not only not contributors to society, spending a whole life of being a net overwhelming negative contributor, but increasingly they are not even American citizens that are draining the country.

The point is, you can sit there and chide big mean America for not providing health care, while also not having any idea what you pay for that, nor the overwhelming cost it would be to take care of everyone in the USA, in addition to the fact that you take for granted that the US tax payer funds the protection that keeps China from a full on invasion and even allows you to engage in free trade at the American tax payer's expense. And all that while you spit in American's face. Reality is that none of this math makes any sense or adds up in any manner when all the full accounting is done. Do you want to pay for the health care pampering of someone that chose to get morbidly obese while you lives healthy and saved your money instead of buying food with it? Reality is that if the USA were to adopt some universal healthcare system, it would bankrupt the USA and trigger a global economic collapse as all the fools don't realize just how dependent they are on the USA, and then they would also find themselves without the massive military that keeps them safe from others more than willing to conquer them when given the chance. Choices have consequences, my friend, and I do not think you have the ability to recognize the precarious situation the world is in as types like you keep sawing at the branch you are sitting on.

Thank you for your reporting on this, even if it just seems to chronicle the ever accelerating deconstruction of the Constitution. Even if American Constitutionalists were able to walk back these types of clear abuses on the social compact that keeps peace by two steps, it will only be without realizing that five steps were taken towards the progress of disassembling the Constitution.

An old, irrelevant, outdated document the Constitution is, they tell you as part of the psychological manipulation game they play to get people to foolishly abdicate their most fundamental rights through the con job of government's benevolence. But in the end, well beyond the point of way-too-late, people will unfortunately have to come to terms with the reality that freedom, liberty, self-governance, and that the government is no one's friend are not old, irrelevant, and outdated principles; they are universal principles that span time.

Just like many things in humanity have been discovered and crated, then forgotten and taken for granted and driven to being lost and collapsed, and then rediscovered or reinvented; so too, does it seem humanity is on course to bury this experiment with self-governance that was kicked off in 1775, for maybe another 1,000 years, if not permanently. Is there even an opportunity or chance for freedom to rise again when it is suppressed so thoroughly by way of technology and soulless robots and AI? I think not. I hope I am for once wrong. ... War or galvanizing event to rationalize ever more eradication of liberty, incoming, all to the cheers of adoring fans.

In memoriam the people who's voices have been squelched by the tech tyrants. They will not be the last victims of this evil that is descending on us with ominous persistence.

Let's recognize that the headline should read:

Amazon Will Cut Health-Care Benefits for Nearly 2k Whole Foods Employees

I am guessing that due to the food perspective of the blog they focused on the Whole Foods aspect of the story, but this is clearly a dystopian corporation story, not a grocer story.

That face when you thought the dystopian movies of the past were going to be sufficient warning to not go down that road, and instead is led to socializing and conditioning people to normalize and accept the dystopia in their minds.

On an aside, and I know this is a shot in the dark, but does anyone know where to find a copy of the seemingly impromptu talk Zuckerberg gave some several years ago now, where he explained that he wanted Facebook to replace the internet?

It is one of those rather notable regrets that I did not save that video, even though it clearly struck me to recall it all this time. If I recall correctly, it was a seemingly impromptu talk outside in the open either at a charity or corporate socializing event. It was definitely not in some venue, let alone in a large one where he's basically parroting corporate talking points. Which may also explain the candor and seemingly single mention of his intentions that has stuck with me all this time.

Once you look at the revised numbers and you then start unpacking all the lies contained in the CPI you start understanding that it's a literal con job, a trick of confidence.

There are some people who try to provide alternative accurate information to the government's data, and it consistently shows far less rosy numbers that also match the historical record far closer.