Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Danish supermarket chain is setting up "Emergency Stores"

swiss.social

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 385 posts

Re: Danish supermarket chain is setting up "Emergency Stores"

#351

Post by xp84 »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #255
xp84 wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, in my humble opinion anyone in Europe that considers wider war breaking out to be farfetched is not paying enough attention. You can be forgiven however if you're a millennial (as I am) or younger, because the long peace has been so long that it seems crazy that Russia might start dropping bombs, say, on Copenhagen or London. "They wouldn't dare attack NATO" we would have said 10 years ago. But today, NATO is a…

Actually, those who remember the 90s and, before that, the Cold War see and understand that Europe is much safer now that it was then. The USSR was much stronger relative to Western Europe then. Now Russia is probably at its weakest relative to NATO (it might have been weaker in the early 90s but NATO had also not expanded to its current footprint). Rememeber also that there was a hot war in the middle of Europe (for…

> Russia is probably at its weakest relative to NATO

What NATO? The one that included the US? Have you not been paying attention to Trump directly stating that he might not honor Article 4 if he doesn't feel like it?

And let's be completely honest, I'd be willing to bet any amount of money that European governments would for their part completely decline to send any significant manpower to intervene if the US were attacked by China or North Korea. In spite of Article 4, public opinion would be that the US "deserves it" for its poor diplomacy and for electing Trump.

NATO is no longer relevant, sadly, unless the US makes a huge turnaround in its commitment to it. NATO is in 2 parts: America, and everybody else, and neither side any longer has a firm commitment to actually go to war for the other. So the relevant part of NATO is "all NATO countries except the US":

https://www.reddit.com/r/Infographics/comments/1cud48e/nato_...

Re: Danish supermarket chain is setting up "Emergency Stores"

#352

Post by HankStallone »

walthamstow wrote: post #273
jon-wood wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can only speak for myself here but I don't bother rummaging around for longer expiries because generally I'm buying food that I'm going to eat within the next 2-3 days. It just doesn't make any difference to me.

Even if you're eating it tonight surely you want the freshest item? Most foods deteriorate after harvest.

It would feel socially rude of me to take the freshest item from the back, knowing I don't need it, leaving the older ones to someone who might not have time to cook as soon. Someone has to take take the one in front, or the store has to throw it out, creating waste and ultimately raising prices for everyone.

Seems kinda like farting in a crowded room and then slipping out the door.

Re: Danish supermarket chain is setting up "Emergency Stores"

#353

Post by toast0 »

freedomben wrote: post #342
toast0 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have a six month food supply, and survivable disasters really only need a week or two tops, you will have no reservations helping out your neighbors, which helps you be a positive influence on your community in time of need. If you've only got two days supply, you may not be so generous.

Exactly. There are surely some people that will be stingy (as Mormons are humans after all) but there's a huge emphasis on being able to help out the neighbors and the unprepared in a bad situation. Depending on the area too, they even have rough distribution/response plans in place so they aren't starting from scratch during an emergency. You'll occassionaly see comments like "I'm stocked up so my family is fine whi…

They may begrudge the 'city people', but they probably won't begrudge their neighbors. It's also nice to have someone to help eat your disaster food :) I've done small preparations before, and you've got to cycle it out for freshness every so often[1], which means someone has to eat it... might as well be you and your neighbors. If you're in a community of like minded, well prepared neighbors, maybe you can get some variety at least.

[1] My elementary schools had a good program of bring in canned food at the start of the school year in case of emergency, have a picnic to eat it in the last month of school. I also did have a disaster can when I lived in California; I'm less prepared at the moment.

Re: Danish supermarket chain is setting up "Emergency Stores"

#354

Post by jamesblonde »

impossiblefork wrote: post #346
chvid wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your government is probably just as shit scared of the US as our is.

They do as they do. We do as we have said we will. There's no reason to be afraid. We get what we get and if they come we'll fight.

Not if they come for the Danes, we won't!

Re: Danish supermarket chain is setting up "Emergency Stores"

#355

Post by estimator7292 »

zrobotics wrote: post #101
throwawayqqq11 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> stock shelf-stable products in these stores and at some point in their shelf life, transfer them out to other stores for actual consumption Back in my days in retail, we were ordered to put resupply as FILO into the shelfs. It makes sense to sell the oldest products first. So why the transfer shuffle?

It's still FILO, the shuffle is needed for multiple locations. The emergency store keeps (for example) 5x the stock of canned beans, and feeds an area with 4 regular stores. They have 5x more stock then they could regularly sell, so if stock wasn't transferred then the canned beans would expire before they were sold. They need to transfer their surplus inventory to the 4 regular stores they feed before that stock age…

This is a pretty common mechanism in several markets. I worked in the big paint store chain in the US and the local setup was a lot like this. Every store had as much stock as they can physically hold, and no two have the same capacity. It was a daily occurrence to shuttle stock to and from nearby locations, and very common for a small store to have a nearby large store order and hold stock for a job too big for the origin store to handle.

We also had commercial stores spread out which were in essence local warehouses. Those stores spent a large part of their time handling stock transfers. They held specialty products small stores rarely need and couldn't justify the minimum order quantity.

It's a lot more efficient and much faster than having product shipped across the country.

Re: Danish supermarket chain is setting up "Emergency Stores"

#356

Post by mopsi »

throw310822 wrote: post #338
mopsi wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There simply isn't an "enormous amount of modern weaponry", otherwise it would have been given to Ukraine a long time ago. Russia’s war against Ukraine has underscored the importance of air defence, as Kyiv begs the west for additional systems and rockets to protect its cities, troops and energy grid against daily bombing raids. But according to people familiar with confidential defence plans drawn up last year, Nato…

Are you saying that if we had them , we would have given all our weapons to Ukraine? Lol. Europe's aid to Ukraine is also limited by the fact that it doesn't want to be seen as an active part in the conflict, so it provides only arms with a limited range and that can be used only defensively. All this of course would not apply if it were attacked directly.

> Are you saying that if we had them, we would have given all our weapons to Ukraine?

No - I am saying that this "enormous amount of modern weaponry" that you speak of doesn't exist anymore. The large Cold War era stockpiles were simply destroyed. Even basic weapons, like artillery shells, are now in short supply.

Re: Danish supermarket chain is setting up "Emergency Stores"

#357

Post by Izikiel43 »

lm28469 wrote: post #152
amarant wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Technically North America! But people don't tend to think of Mexico that way. It's not trouble free, not by a long shot. I have family connection to here though and I recon Mexico is not very likely to partake in WW3 in any meaningful way, so should be safe from what I worry is coming soon for Europe. For now tho, I'm definitely less safe than my friends and family back in Sweden. In the short term at least. I don't…

How would you feel if ww3 never happens and you moved from Sweden to Mexico for nothing? It seems like a major step down except if you have Mexican relatives

> Sweden to Mexico for nothing

Unless you like to ski, and the long dark winters, weather in mexico is an upgrade, except for the occasional hurricane.

Re: Danish supermarket chain is setting up "Emergency Stores"

#358

Post by bxsioshc »

ambicapter wrote: post #35

Wait, so we're now approaching risk levels high enough that's its economically feasible for businesses to prepare for situations where their stores lose power, telecom, and resupply? Are we already preparing for land war across western Europe?

[dead]

Re: Danish supermarket chain is setting up "Emergency Stores"

#359

Post by mrguyorama »

ReptileMan wrote: post #251
ochrist wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The distance between Kalilingrad (Russia) and the island of Bornholm (Denmark) is only about 300 km (or 200 miles). They don't have to go to 'many many countries' to get to Denmark. Please look at a map.

Ahh yes. The military powerhouse that is Kaliningrad - which to make any kind of buildup or resupply you have to trample trough two NATO countries. Or to sail Russia's nonexistent or pathetic (in best of times) fleet trough a lot of hostile waters.

The west always assumed Russia would (attempt to) close the gap between Belarus and Kaliningrad at Poland's corner.

>The military powerhouse that is Kaliningrad

Kaliningrad actually does have a sizable (for Russia) military investment, which is why the west would expect them to defend it in that way.

I don't think Russia COULD do that anymore, unless it was entirely a Belarus operation. But if they succeed at rushing that gap, current war "meta" is extremely defensive-sided. Russia may not have a meaningful "fleet" but they certainly have enough working and pretty good submarines to make hell for anyone trying to then supply Lithuania.

Re: Danish supermarket chain is setting up "Emergency Stores"

#360

Post by mrguyorama »

mopsi wrote: post #335
throw310822 wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Compared to Ukraine, Europe has enormous amounts of money and modern weaponry, including nuclear weapons, nuclear submarines, hundreds of f-16s, f-35s, and twelve times the population of Ukraine for twenty times the size. For God's sake.

There simply isn't an "enormous amount of modern weaponry", otherwise it would have been given to Ukraine a long time ago. Russia’s war against Ukraine has underscored the importance of air defence, as Kyiv begs the west for additional systems and rockets to protect its cities, troops and energy grid against daily bombing raids. But according to people familiar with confidential defence plans drawn up last year, Nato…

>The same applies to tanks, artillery, and pretty much everything else.

It literally does not.

US built 6700 Bradleys. US built 10,000 Abrams. Thousands of these machines are already stationed in Europe just waiting to shoot Russians.

Germany built 3600 Leopard 2 tanks. They built 2k Marder IFVs.

Saab built 300 Grippens.

The Brits alone built over 400 main battle tanks. France alone built 800 of theirs.

You should divide all these numbers by half or more to estimate ones with modernization upgrades, but Russia ran out of modernized equipment a while ago, and NATO 80s equipment has demonstrably outclassed Soviet leftovers.

The US is bad at producing Artillery shells because we utterly refuse to use State power to induce business nowadays, because of stupid "Capitalism good, gubermint bad" ideology, but Europe ramped up shell production. Manufacturers have openly said that all they need is a commitment, and they will build capacity.

The anti-air missile problem is because NATO always intended to rely on US air power (and our thousands of aircraft) to utterly own the skies and deny any air attack. Also the Shahed situation is somewhat novel. The US once produced 40,000 HAWK Anti-air missiles, which would be perfectly sufficient against something like Shahed.

Nobody wants to disarm themselves to give everything they have to Ukraine, but there is substantial arms that are just waiting for use, while Ukraine suffers. US alone could arm Ukraine twice over and not even feel the pain. Most of our equipment is considered not useful against China and is slated to be replaced, but we STILL refuse to sell it.

Post reply on HN