- Status
F
Fiasco
Guest
“I write to you today with deep concern, a heavy heart…etc”
What a load of emotional drivel! Looks like he’s trying to imitate the beginning of the Sherlock Holmes short story “The Final Problem”:
“It is with a heavy heart that I take up my pen to write these the last words…”
What a load of emotional drivel! Looks like he’s trying to imitate the beginning of the Sherlock Holmes short story “The Final Problem”:
“It is with a heavy heart that I take up my pen to write these the last words…”
J
Jeanne_S
Guest
I don’t patronize Starbucks because they monetarily support a myriad of social issues antithetical to my moral beliefs.Besides,their coffees isn’t very good either
R
Robyn_p
Guest
McDonald’s coffee tastes better to me and it’s a lot cheaper.I don’t patronize Starbucks because they monetarily support a myriad of social issues antithetical to my moral beliefs.Besides,their coffees isn’t very good either
S
Saints_Alive
Guest
Where I live the hipsters, folkys , and hippies support the locally owned coffee shops anyway. Starbucks is considered corporate. They seem to reject Starbucks like they do Sports Bars.
T
Theo520
Guest
Starbucks always could have targeted hiring LEGAL IMMIGRANTS, if they felt it was their moral imperative and they made capable employees. Nobody would object to that imperitive.
That they adopted and publicized this policy only when the National discussion focused on ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS was just a lame attempt to pander to the left. It was a shallow PR move that deserves a hand slap.
That they adopted and publicized this policy only when the National discussion focused on ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS was just a lame attempt to pander to the left. It was a shallow PR move that deserves a hand slap.
S
St_Francis
Guest
This is too bad, because Howard Schultz has been doing a lot to help the people who work for him develop good work havits which spill out into the rest of their lives. I’ve been reading about this in a book called *The Power of Habit *by ? Dulhigg. The structure would probably be very helpful to refugees in terms of integrating, which would be a really good thing.
Schultz could hire 10,000 refugees and 10,000 veterans; Starbucks employs 157,000 people in the US, and almost that many again outside the US.
There are refugees here. Getting political about helping people seem self-defeating.
Schultz could hire 10,000 refugees and 10,000 veterans; Starbucks employs 157,000 people in the US, and almost that many again outside the US.
There are refugees here. Getting political about helping people seem self-defeating.
T
tawny
Guest
Absolutely agree on both accounts.I don’t patronize Starbucks because they monetarily support a myriad of social issues antithetical to my moral beliefs.Besides,their coffees isn’t very good either
A
adamhovey1988
Guest
The thing I find most offensive about Starbucks is the taste of its coffee
po18guy
Well-known member
Bear in mind where corporate profits go. Planned Parenthood. Same-sex unions. IIRC, the use of artificial flavors developed via aborted embryo research. Virtually everything which opposes the Church. As good as helping immigrants and vets would be, it comes at the cost of innocent human blood.
You want good coffee? Make it at home. Take it with you. Genuine Carmelite Monks in Wyoming at award-winning Mystic Monk Coffee.
A
adamhovey1988
Guest
The monks here in South Carolina, some brew beer, and some brew coffee. Those folks are some awesome busy people. I think I’d rather support monks anyway.
R
robertmidwest
Guest
Exactly.
S
St_Francis
Guest
Wow, what a shame. I don’t drink coffee, so I never paid any attention to them before reading about the programs they have in place for their employees in this book.
So frustrating!
P
pianistclare
Guest
Yes, Starbucks he done more for Dunkin Donut coffee sales than anything elseI don’t patronize Starbucks because they monetarily support a myriad of social issues antithetical to my moral beliefs.Besides,their coffees isn’t very good either
I really don’t care one single product of theirs, nor their marketing schemes.
H
Hoosier_Daddy
Guest
Wait, Shultz is left wing?
Nooooo. Impossible! Isn’t he a rich man in charge of a large company…
Aren’t all those people republicans?
I’m shocked!
Nooooo. Impossible! Isn’t he a rich man in charge of a large company…
Aren’t all those people republicans?
I’m shocked!
A
adamhovey1988
Guest
Being someone who is neither Democrat or Republican (until I run for office) this gave me a giggle.
B
Bruised_Reed
Guest
He indicated refugees, not illegal immigrants.
S
SuperLuigi
Guest
Actually, in America liberals make more than conservatives and give less than a quarter what their conservative brethren give to charity.
6, maybe 7 of the world’s 8 richest people wanted Clinton in office.
And look around— numerous techie gurus, CEO and Fortune 500 is lead by liberals, many of whom are jumpy around SJWs on twitter.
Fact is many of them can afford the nonsense.
Take Google for instance. By funneling their money through banks in Ireland and the Caymans, they avoided paying millions in taxes during Barack Obama and Joe Biden’s tenure in office.
L
Leo2014
Guest
You mean I am supposed to take information posted on some right-wing site as valid?
Zerohedge? They have a donation link on their site - which tells me a lot of the number of readers they attract.
What this article fails to indicate is that Starbucks was priced at 58.70 on January 25th. According to the described “dive” - they tumbled to 53.87 on February 2nd. However, if anyone noticed - they ended at 57.84 today - February 24th. The sudden drop was more likely due to the announcement of the latest quarterly earnings which financial reports stated; Starbucks shares tumble on lowest same-store sales growth since 2009.
I would like to know how this reporter arrived at his “roughly 50% disagree with his leftist political opinions” comment? He could not have extracted that from the price of the stock.
Truly just another dummy uploading his personal comments to his WordPress site.
R
Reuben_J
Guest
- Status