3 ms·
> I want those two bananas and if the scale says its 2.19, and im fine with that, do I really care whether the scale showed the correct weight? Seriously? You
by rlpb 10y ago
> I want those two bananas and if the scale says its 2.19, and im fine with that, do I really care whether the scale showed the correct weight? Seriously?
You might not care for that individual transaction, but you're benefiting from the scale having been validated nonetheless.
If scales weren't validated, stores would be in an armageddon about how far they can cheat you in order to appear cheaper than other stores. The grocery market wouldn't be functional. Rather than competing on giving buyers value, they'd be competing on how far they can cheat buyers instead. Honest grocers wouldn't be able to compete. You'd effectively be paying a corruption tax on all your groceries; not just those two bananas.
- tyingq 10y agoI think that's less of a risk these days than it used to be. In this day of ubiquitous communications, camera phones, online reviews, and so forth, it would be easy to get caught and suffer a wave a bad PR that won't go away. Also, a fair amount of the produce in my area is sold by piece now, instead of weight. Oranges are 50 cents a piece for example. Or pre-bagged and/or packaged for a fixed price.
- malandrew 10y agoScales mattered when almost all of the products at the grocery store were weighed, but now 90% or more of the typical grocery cart is prepackaged or pre-bundled in someway, including produce. Regulating scales are an anachronism.
- wayn3 10y agoI'd be paying a corruption tax, instead of an actual absurd amount of taxes. The horror. I'm being facetious but seriously. A world in which people believe that a supermarket scale has to be regulated by federal government or else - is a weird world. Life as we know it would NOT break down just because government doesnt dabble in one tiny stupid little thing.