▲ 138 ▼ Surging Loblaw boycott shows customer anger with grocery giant, says Mount Pearl organizer (www.cbc.ca) submitted 2 years ago by lautan@lemmy.ca to c/canada@lemmy.ca 43 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] null@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Who said it was a legal requirement? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) They need continuous profit. The CEO swears an oath to shareholders to prioritize profit quarter after quarter ad infinitum. So root comment did. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] null@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Needs = laws? They'll oust a CEO who doesn't fill that need. No legal action required. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) Ah, I see you read the article. Now we're back at the start and you can continue to go in circles without me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] null@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 years ago Huh? You claimed that "need" = "law" -- which is clearly nonsense. That's where we are. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) They need continuous profit. The CEO swears an oath to shareholders to prioritize profit quarter after quarter ad infinitum. So root comment did. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] null@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Needs = laws? They'll oust a CEO who doesn't fill that need. No legal action required. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) Ah, I see you read the article. Now we're back at the start and you can continue to go in circles without me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] null@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 years ago Huh? You claimed that "need" = "law" -- which is clearly nonsense. That's where we are. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] null@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Needs = laws? They'll oust a CEO who doesn't fill that need. No legal action required. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) Ah, I see you read the article. Now we're back at the start and you can continue to go in circles without me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] null@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 years ago Huh? You claimed that "need" = "law" -- which is clearly nonsense. That's where we are. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) Ah, I see you read the article. Now we're back at the start and you can continue to go in circles without me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] null@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 years ago Huh? You claimed that "need" = "law" -- which is clearly nonsense. That's where we are. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] null@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 years ago Huh? You claimed that "need" = "law" -- which is clearly nonsense. That's where we are. permalink fedilink source parent