San Francisco says no to cookie aroma at bus stops... - by Cookie Dough
PigLick on 6/12/2006 at 12:52
haha only you baby
fett on 6/12/2006 at 16:09
Who doesn't prefer the smell of bus exhaust to chocolate chip cookies? Hands please?
Turtle on 6/12/2006 at 17:27
It would sure beat the smell of vomit and crack smoke that you usually find at bus stops around here.
TheGreatGodPan on 7/12/2006 at 03:50
Bakery smells are usually considered a canonical example of a "positive externality", which are things that should be subsidized because the market will provide too little of it otherwise. However, nobody has seriously suggested subsidizing them or charging people who live near bakeries for the smell.
I think ads get more flack than they deserve. Not only do you not have to pay for them, they are usually subsidizing something you like (otherwise you wouldn't be exposed to the ad at all). I could understand some people really, really disliking cookie smells or billboards, whereas some other people would feel differently. It would be best if people could select between bus stops and roads that either have or don't have such things. Ones that people disliked would be cheaper (subsidized by the advertiser) and ones people liked would be more expensive (the road/bus companies would provide them). If you're one of those people who has different tastes than the majority you'd be rather lucky in that you'd have both the lower price and the better experience.
Cookie Dough on 7/12/2006 at 05:45
The sad part is that nobody's really likely to do all of that in the name of cookies. :(
Quote Posted by Scots_Taffer
Apologies. I actually figured you for a girly guy. :p
Haha, oh wow.
Actually I sort of thought the same of you a while back when some pirate pictures surfaced... ;)
Quote Posted by PigLick
haha only you baby
... should I feel left out? :erm:
Back on topic for a minute: Actually I believe it was the "officials" that pulled the cookie scent. Not the general public. Though sadly there
are probably people out there that would complain about it.
Cookie Dough on 7/12/2006 at 06:14
Even though in my opinion this would make a wonderful thread title, I know most of you would probably groan in dismay:
"Flatulence leads to flight diversion" ...
(
http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2006-12-05-flatulence-landing_x.htm?csp=28) http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2006-12-05-flatulence-landing_x.htm?csp=28
I can understand why they didn't appreciate her actions, but since her flatulence is a medical condition, I think her being banned was a little harsh.
That had to be horribly embarrassing. :erg:
