Comments | abrynne: The Truth About GS Cookies and What I'd Go Back In Time For

abrynne

The Truth About GS Cookies and What I'd Go Back In Time For

Feb 17, 2009 13:49

Girl Scout cookies are such a rip off! $4.00 a box! FOUR DOLLARS! Cecily calculated it off of the number of cookies that were in the box and for the Thin Mints its $1/7 Cookies.
It is scandalousYou want to glare down at the little girls who barely come up to your waist, holding their little order forms and wearing their little vests or sashes ( Read more... )

doctor who, food, movies, self, funny, tv, shakespeare, writing, richard armitage, firefly, star wars

Comments 12

goody_scrivener February 17 2009, 23:22:37 UTC

When I was a Girl Scout, we went in full uniform. Green pants or skirt, white with green stripes oxford blouse, sash with all our badges, and (if we had one) beret. Cookies were 1.90 a box my first year and up to 2.25 by the time my troop leader absconded with our membership money and left town (which we found that out when one of the moms that was acting as interim leader contacted Council about why we hadn't gotten any cookie order information yet).

Four bucks now and we get even fewer cookies??? I think I'm going with Grasshoppers after all. I need to find a decent substitute for my Samoas, though.

abrynne February 18 2009, 16:11:03 UTC

Samoas are good...they're not worth $4 a box though! Yeeeesh! I'm sure there's an adequate grocery store substitute out there somewhere. I haven't looked very hard so there probably is one.

I can't BELIEVE your troop leader did that to you guys! Way to teach little kids about being trustworthy and, you know, all that stuff.

(The comment has been removed)

abrynne February 18 2009, 16:11:30 UTC

He's just so wonderfully brilliant...it's almost scary. :D

soloreader18 February 18 2009, 02:29:12 UTC

Here's the problem, even if you did go back in time you would subjectively still be in the present of your life, aka you would already have experienced all those things. The only way you could do it is to go back in subjective time as well, but if you did that you would experience it exactly the same without knowing that you were supposed to savor it more because it was the first time. Stupid time travel! Did you ever see The Lake House with Sandra Bullok and Keanu Reeves? Talk about a movie that could drive you mad with its time travel anachronisms!

abrynne February 18 2009, 16:09:10 UTC

Yeah, I understand the factors about it. But if somehow my memories of those things were erased and I experienced them now as the person I am now the experience would be different.

It's not about savoring it more or anything like that. It's about savoring it for the first time again.
Whether or not the experience would be exactly the same, (I actually doubt it would be exactly the same...probability and all that. But it's too early in the morning for me to start thinking about that.) the first time experiencing it is always better than the second or third and beyond. That's why Cecily and I started thinking about it in the first place.

stargater February 18 2009, 05:34:23 UTC

Oooh, I love those mint gs cookies - freeze them and eat. Yum!

Star Wars OT - If I saw it for the first time now I think I would still love it but it wouldn't be as embedded in my brains as it is now.
I think I would definitely love it the same now if I were to just watch it for the first time. Of course, I might be a bit biased about this ;P

Doctor Who - Of course! DW is one of the most unique movie/television watching experiences I have ever had. I've never been so emotional with a TV show in my life.
I completely agree with this. No show has ever taken me on so many ups and downs and I love it for that.

abrynne February 18 2009, 16:15:27 UTC

Yeah, I think I'm biased with SW too. I'd like to think that I'd still love it if I watched it for the first time now rather than when I was a little kid. But it's hard to tell. I'm more picky now. lol

I guess we'll never know....

capemaynuts February 18 2009, 05:35:11 UTC

$4? Yikes! Where are you? My troop is selling for $3.50, and the price hasn't changed in 10 years. Although I will admit the box has gotten smaller. But you have to remember, this is a fundraiser for the Scouts. Grasshoppers cost $3.99 in my area and you only get slightly more.

abrynne February 18 2009, 16:14:15 UTC

I'm up in Portland, OR. It seems like they've been raising the price on them a little bit each year until we hit this eyepopping $4 mark. lol
It is a fundraiser but honestly, if the price goes any higher later on I don't know how much they'll actually be able to sell. It is getting a tad on the ridiculous side.

capemaynuts February 18 2009, 17:31:59 UTC

Yes, I agree that with this economy, the Scouts will have to rethink their prices. But as to the current ones, have you ever been hit up by a school fundraiser? My kids regularly bring home the wrapping paper one, the Gertrude Hawke chocolates and the Market Place one. Talk about over priced! A roll of paper for $12 and there's barely enough to wrap a monopoly game! The chocolates are $15 for 9 oz! Now that's overpriced! I hate fundraisers in general. I like what my son's pack does to raise money. They clean up the veteran's park before ceremonies and get $400 each time from the city. No dealing with irate customers, no problems with delivery, just spend a few hours working and done.

abrynne February 18 2009, 17:58:31 UTC

I've been involved in SO many school fundraisers and I have supported the ones my younger siblings have been involved in. If you're in choir or band it kind of goes with the deal.

I know. The only thing that is actually worth the money you pay for a fundraiser are the $1 candy bars that the kids go around selling. I sold big suckers for fifty cents and those were good too.
The catalogue stuff is usually crappy.