Starbucks
on December 27, 2012 at 7:35 amIs it a cult?
“Fixing the debt” is hardly an uncontroversial imperative. There are, for example, economists who object to the “austerity” it requires. (Schultz could order baristas to write “F–k Krugman” on their cups–now that might have some impact.) There are also activists on both sides who argue, with varying degrees of sincerity, that going over the “fiscal cliff”– the “time-sensitive” part Schultz mentions– is better than “coming together” on one of the deals that’s being talked about. There are even those who note that going over the cliff is a way to “fix the debt,” since the “cliff” is made up of tax increases and spending cuts.
I’m not saying what Schultz did is or should be illegal, certainly not in a Citizen’s United world. If he wants to run a hybrid coffee-shop-political-organization, that’s fine with me. But maybe he should have made that clear to his workers when they signed up.
Why bother? What “right thinking” person would disagree?
If I were working there, I might try to get away with writing “Who is John Galt?” on each cup.
Really, a Coffee House being involved with political intrigue? Who would imagine
BTW exactly what is Starbucks CEO doing that is any worst than Papa John’s or Denny’s CEOs? Recall they were demanding their employees vote Republican or else. Except of course YOU happen to disagree with his politics
.
Or the FAA telling people to vote for Obama or unions seizing paychecks to give to Democrats.
Recall they were demanding their employees vote Republican or else.
How would one recall something that never happened?
And as usual, you completely miss the point.
“…our elected officials in Washington D.C. have been unable to come together and compromise to solve the tremendously important, time-sensitive issue to fix the national debt.”
I’d agree with this IF one side wasn’t using terms like, “…and our Plan B…”, “…then Plan C will have to include…”. That sounds like conversation, dialogue, capitulation and kowtowing to ME. So one side has Plan A, Plan B and Plan C, while the other side has Plan FO or Plan FU.
I’ll take ANY plan except the one where the most powerful man in the world tells one of the leading members of the national legislature he doesn’t want to compromise to “X” plan said member offers that leader a HUGE compromise, and the leader says there’s no compromise, he expected THAT part of the compromise offer FOR FREE, just because of who he is.
What a crock of crap.
The (D)’s don’t want a compromise, they want total and utter control. I’m just not sure what control of a destroyed economy, 15% to 20% of the workforce out of work and a devalued dollar gets them though.