I suspect the only purpose of mentioning these "undead texts" is signaling. "See how much of an intellectual I am, I have even read these books which you probably couldn't even stomach".
I wouldn't personally need one, but it is great for kids imo.
Unfortunately afaik all replacements are worse than real teeth. For some reasons one of my dentists had a booklet about the replacements in his waiting rooms. They all have issue.
You mean indirectly paying because of the costs of pollution, that society pays for? But garbage disposal already costs money, doesn't it? Maybe it doesn't cost enough - but then rising prices for garbage disposal would…
Why would THEY have to pay the costs, and not their customers? Presumably, if the costs for packaging would go up, packaging industry would also rice the prices to make up for it?
But if multi use packaging would work just as well other single use packaging, wouldn't the packaging industry make the same profits?
I don't get the logic behind this? How can the packaging industry force companies to order superfluous packaging? And if it isn't superfluous, getting rid of it might be a net negative?
It's also bigger than any other US company, isn't it? (Head to head with Apple)
I suspect the only purpose of mentioning these "undead texts" is signaling. "See how much of an intellectual I am, I have even read these books which you probably couldn't even stomach".
I wouldn't personally need one, but it is great for kids imo.
Unfortunately afaik all replacements are worse than real teeth. For some reasons one of my dentists had a booklet about the replacements in his waiting rooms. They all have issue.
You mean indirectly paying because of the costs of pollution, that society pays for? But garbage disposal already costs money, doesn't it? Maybe it doesn't cost enough - but then rising prices for garbage disposal would…
Why would THEY have to pay the costs, and not their customers? Presumably, if the costs for packaging would go up, packaging industry would also rice the prices to make up for it?
But if multi use packaging would work just as well other single use packaging, wouldn't the packaging industry make the same profits?
I don't get the logic behind this? How can the packaging industry force companies to order superfluous packaging? And if it isn't superfluous, getting rid of it might be a net negative?
It's also bigger than any other US company, isn't it? (Head to head with Apple)