Excuse me, what & Go?
Leave no kid hungry, mate
I went to Colorado Springs a little while ago and had to do a double take when I saw that a gas station was advertising that as its name. Absolutely blew my mind when I realized it is a huge chain there.
blew your what m8
Yep all over here and most of CO in general. I’ve seen a few in Arkansas as well.
They started in 1959, and are from Iowa. K&G is okay, but Maverick is far better in every way.
Oh not even close. Maverick is a little cleaner but have nowhere as much stuff and their food, while having more selection, is garbage.
I’m probably biased because I worked in Utah long before they ever came to Colorado and I’ve been to most of their “flagship” stores. If there’s a choice I’ll pick Maverick every time.
Also, I was pretty sure I was going to be jumped by a mob because I wore a K&G hat to a restaurant in OCC in the early-mid 2000s. The anti-Kum&Go sentiment was insane back then.
Jeez, people will tribalize anything. Yeah the Mavericks around here are big but all the shelves are way spaced out and at angles so it fills the room but there’s just not much there. My ex worked at one for a bit preparing food and it was just terrible. I used to Door dash and I would stop at K&G multiple times a day and sometimes get food and it was always pretty good for gas station food. That said, Maverick bought K&G not long ago so they might all be Mavericks before too long.
People who name gas stations are different from you and I. There’s one in L’Anse Michigan called Dick’s Pump and Munch
The ol’ sperm n split
Ejaculate n Evacuate
Pump n Dump
Sploosh 'n Skadoosh
deleted by creator
Kuma, Kuma, Kuma, Kuma, Kuma Kumeleon
You kum and go, you kum and go
Kum & Go is such a dirty name.
I love seeing Kum & Go on social media because no matter what the discussion always turns to the name. I live in Colorado and they are everywhere around here. But they are probably the nicest gas stations we have here. We also have Loaf n Jug which isn’t dirty but just makes me giggle.
Loaf n Jug is pretty funny! Also I love learning about grocery and convenience stores so I’m psyched they have wiki article. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaf_'N_Jug
Where I live we have a ton of hilarious Pho places and of course the best one is Pho-King, pronounced Fucking.
Lol, we have a pho-nomenal
Love it.
Good name for a whore house.
Same i just pronounce it as c*m and go
It’s a gas station. Do you expect them to be selling filet mignon and lobster thermador?
The two week old ceremonial fruit by the register is also a option.
does anyone even know what a thermador is
The lobster is removed from the shell, cooked in a wine and butter sauce, then stuffed back into the shell and browned in the oven. Often cheese is melted over the top.
Remember, when a corporation says they’ll donate something when you buy something, like rounding up to the nearest dollar or donating $0.25 for every purchase, they are doing it because they were going to throw their money at some 501©(3) for tax reasons anyways and they figured they’d make it a big opportunity to publicly launder their reputation as an ad campaign
If you want to donate, never let a grocery store round up for you and take your tax write-off so they can pay even lower taxes subsidized by you, just donate $10 every month or so and take the tax writeoff yourself.
If you pay the donation you get the tax write-off, regardless of whether you donate through a grocery store, directly through the charity, or through your paycheck. It’s on your receipt and you can claim it. The store cannot legally claim the tax write-off that you made because it is not income for them, they are simply holding the money.
https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-000329849244
Now in this case where they are donating a portion of the sales, this is what’s called a commercial co-venture, and it’s a regulated activity that usually has a written arrangement to protect the non-profut. While the business does get the tax benefit since it counts as income, if you were already planning on buying a Gatorade, it doesn’t benefit you or the non-profit to buy it elsewhere just to “stick it” to the store.
so they can pay even lower taxes subsidized by you
That… isn’t how it works. It’s a very common misconception.
If you pay a store $5, they pay some amount of income tax on that. If you pay them $5 plus an extra $2 for a donation, they can deduct income tax on the $2, but they still owe the same amount of tax on the $5.
It’s the same for personal income tax. If you earn $1000 and make a $100 tax-deductible donation, you can only deduct tax on the donation. Essentially you’d be taxed as if you only earned $900. You still owe the exact same amount of tax on the $900 though.
They can’t deduct the $2 donation if you made the donation at POS. It doesn’t count as income for them, and it shows up on your receipt, so they do not legally get to write off that $2.
t doesn’t count as income for them, and it shows up on your receipt, so they do not legally get to write off that $2.
Ahh, I didn’t know this! Thanks for the info. It means the “companies just want you to donate at checkout so they get a tax writeoff” thing that people keep saying is even less true. That viewpoint is so prevalent and I’m not sure why - I guess there’s a lot of people that don’t understand how taxes work.
…they are doing it because they were going to throw their money at some 501©(3) for tax reasons anyways and they figured they’d make it a big opportunity to publicly launder their reputation as an ad campaign
There is a big metal cage at the entrance of our store, where customers can “donate” stuff like dog food cans and blankets to a nearby animal shelter. You’re only allowed to put stuff in there that you JUST bought inside of the store (allegedly for “safety reasons” so that noone can put poisoned food in there or whatever) and the store then treats the contents of that cage as donations FROM the store even tho the items have been paid in full by customers already.
Shady AF but if you try to argue against it, people automatically assume that you’re a mean A-hole that wants shelter dogs to starve. No idea whether this is even legal TBH.
If you want to donate something, always donate cash or items DIRECTLY to a shelter.
Most people don’t have reason to itemize their deductions and will get more from the standard deduction. You probably won’t be able to deduct the donation either.
“So you don’t donate anything?”
“No, kid hungry! I should probably remove that 501c part, too…”
https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/521367538
The charity navigator ratings for the organization that runs the no kid hungry campaign don’t look terrible
The problem isn’t the charity, it’s the restrictive way a business handles charity donating.
Why a quarter? Why these select brands? Could’ve done so much better.
The business exists to make money. That’s why it’s a business. Having a co donation scheme with a charity is just a way to let people incentivize extra purchases.
If people simply didn’t buy those items and just donated directly that would be more efficient. That’s always an option
They could have done nothing.
Hey, I just pissed on you while you were on fire when I could’ve used water.
I could’ve done nothing.
Got it. Organizing a charitable drive, even if more limited in scope than going full 501© non-profit, is morally equivalent to pissing on people. GTFO.
I think the objection in this case is that they’re using a incredibly trivial amount of charity as advertising. Notice in the asterisk on the ad that total donations are capped at $43k, so not only are they donating an insultingly small amount of each purchase they’re also limiting their potential donations if they manage to generate enough excess sales.
This was advertsing masquerading as charity. Just writing a cheque to the charity for $43k would have done as much or more, but since their real goal is goosing sales numbers not donating to charity that would run counter to their goal.
Just writing a cheque to the charity for $43k would have done as much or more, but since their real goal is goosing sales numbers not donating to charity that would run counter to their goal.
This – it’s virtue-signalling to raise sales numbers. If I make a big public statement about my charitable giving, it’s seen very differently than when a big corporation does it.
Another question I have: is anyone changing their purchasing choices because of this? Would you choose a Pepsi fountain drink or a Gatorade instead of a bottle of Coke just because of this? Or add a share size Snickers bar to your gas purchase which you wouldn’t otherwise?
They’re betting that it will change behavior.
Someone found a way to piggyback charity on top of business operations. If that equation changes the charity is going away and the business operations are staying.
Kum & Go isn’t a charity, yet they found a way to go from zero charitable activity to nonzero. That’s a plus.
If you honestly see that as a negative, you should take it as a wake-up call that you’re using an irrationally pessimistic lens to view the world.
It’s just as much the case someone in marketing found a way to use their company for charity, as it is that a business found a way to use charity for marketing.
If a little girl‘s puppy needs to get to the vet and the only vehicle I have is an armored personnel carrier, I’m gonna drive that vehicle to take the puppy to the vet. Not because it’s the best vehicle for the job, but because it’s the vehicle I have.
For some people, their vehicle for helping charities is the company they work for. They have to find a way that works with the constraints of that vehicle. In a business, one of those constraints is “it has to help the bottom line”.
I just say no to the donation every time. No one cares where I live. It’s never caused me a problem.
There’s nothing wrong with a company having the goal of making money.
If someone can find a way to achieve that goal by donating to charity, that’s a win for literally everyone involved.
If someone pissed on me while I was on fire I’d thank them.
Better than what you’re doing
Oh but anger feels so good! Seriously Master Kenobi, why can’t I use anger to fuel my use of the Force? It’s such a potent source of energy!
They probably had to negotiate with the brands so the brands could cough up 10¢ of that 25¢. Only certain brands agreed.
What’s the deal with the up to 43k?
The people who wanted to divert money to charity had to negotiate with the people who didn’t, and there was a meeting where they said their fear was if it went too far and cost them too much.
The 25¢ is probably more than their profit on the thing, so they’re probably hoping to spend money and gain long-term customers.
deleted by creator
Sounds like a broken tax system then…
deleted by creator
Same here in the states, they only donate because then they don’t have to pay that money to taxes. They don’t give a shit about whoever the cause helps, it’s just a PR move for them
This just seems kind of nice. Why does it infuriate you?
this question pisses me off
Can you say why?
(no)
