Swiss food giant Nestle (click here) announced Monday it will pay $7.15 billion in cash for the rights to market Starbucks products around the world, outside of the company’s coffee shops.
The agreement gives Nestle, which owns the Nescafe and Nespresso brands, a strong platform for continued growth in North America, the company said in a statement.
Nestle is focusing on coffee as a main growth area and has already made some acquisitions in the sector, including buying a stake in California’s Blue Bottle Coffee last September....
Given the amount of profit Nestle will make having an exclusive Starbucks franchise; it was only right the company took Flint under it's wing.
By Ron Fonger
Flint, MI -- Nestle Waters (click here) is restocking Flint's bottled water supply, agreeing to donate 4,200 cases a week for the next 16 weeks.
Mayor Karen Weaver announced the commitment in a news release, praising the donation as "generous' and thanking the company, and Nestle spelled out the extent of the help Friday, May 11.
"We've been working closely with the Flint community to understand their current needs, and how we can best help meet those needs," Jason Manshum, Ice Mountain community relations manager, said in a statement to MLive-The Flint Journal.
"Nestle Waters" sells bottled water under multiple brand names, including Ice Mountain in the Midwest....
..."We've been providing support to Flint since October 2015, and have been humbled to work with amazing local organizations supporting the city's students through financial and product donations," Manshum's statement says....
To estimate the retail cost to Nestles:
The cost of each pallet is $1618.60. The total donation to Flint by Nestle per seek is $3625.66. Nestle will provide the bottled waters for 16 weeks for a grand total of $58,010.64.
Now, ultimately, it won't cost Nestle that much to manufacturer that water, but, in a way it does. The Nestle waters going to Flint will never be sold on the retail market. This is a very generous gift from Nestle through the summer months to Labor Day when children return to school. This gift is very special.
...State officials maintain, and testing has shown, Flint's tap water meets all requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act and Lead and Copper Rule, but Weaver has threatened to sue the state over this and other issues related to the city's water crisis....
The State of Michigan should be grateful for this gift to Flint, but, it needs to return bottled water shipments to Flint until ALL the pipes are replaced. The idea Governor Snyder is still saying Flint's tap water meets all requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act and the Lead and Copper Rule is nonsense. It is nonsense because there is water in Flint that is still flowing through contaminated pipes. That means the tap water in ALL homes is not safe.
I also have to wonder if the US EPA under Pruitt has changed the acceptable limits of the Safe Drinking Water Act and the Lead and Copper Rule. What is not mentioned is The Clean Water Act. See, I don't trust the government either. Not since Trump took office.
The Clean Water Act was passed in 1972 and the Clean Drinking Water Act was passed in 1974. There is zero tolerance level of lead in drinking water. What is the question about providing bottled water to Flint residents, especially where the pipes are not yet replaced?
In 1974, (click here)) Congress passed the Safe Drinking Water Act. This law requires EPA to determine the level of contaminants in drinking water at which no adverse health effects are likely to occur with an adequate margin of safety. These non-enforceable health goals, based solely on possible health risks are called maximum contaminant level goals (MCLGs). The MCLG for lead is zero. EPA has set this level based on the best available science which shows there is no safe level of exposure to lead....
I don't ever recall HEALTH GOALS for drinking water so much as HEALTH STANDARDS. By stating the levels issues by the law of the USA is nothing more than goals defeats the law altogether. That is how the petroleum industry is getting away with contaminating the land. But, I digress.
The laws governing the water of the USA when it comes to contaminants and toxins has been in existence since the early 1970s. If the federal government hasn't gotten it's act together by now what does that say about the USA government at all? Anarchy? I don't think so.
