Starbucks CEO Schultz Plans to Hire 10,000 Refugees After Annoying Orange Ban

[TheArmyGuy]

what

that's illegal

what

you'd think starbucks would have lawyers or something

https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/nationalorigin.cfm

You can't just take people from Syria or other countries over Americans

[Ad Bot]

[Planr]

i agree too army, and plus hiring people because of their identity rather than their qualifications/skill level is handicapped in any universe

[Nonnel]

tim hortons???

go to hoser hell

[King Tøny]

Hiring people for their skin color is tribal.

[otto-san]

so i know it's a popular conservative opinion that businesses should have high discretion over their own procedures and engagements, such as who they serve, the way they serve, etc.

it's obvious why this could be a problem, but why is this particular instance one that is unacceptable? shouldn't an ideal conservative world be one where businesses get to decide who they hire, fire, and serve completely independently from government regulation? (edit: not trying to accuse hypocrisy or anything, i figure it might come across as that, but i'm really just curious about what the fundamental mindset here is)

[Planr]

most conservatives such as myself do believe that companies should not discriminate in their hiring practices (such as this "refugee" starbucks issue, though it is not merely this one particular instance that we are opposed to), but we also believe that businesses should have the right to hire whoever they want. id say leave it up to the businesses to decide. so while it may be stupid what starbucks is doing, i support their right to hire who they want.

[otto-san]

most conservatives such as myself do believe that companies should not discriminate in their hiring practices (such as this "refugee" starbucks issue, though it is not merely this one particular instance that we are opposed to), but we also believe that businesses should have the right to hire whoever they want. id say leave it up to the businesses to decide. so while it may be stupid what starbucks is doing, i support their right to hire who they want.

that makes sense

[beachbum111111]

so i know it's a popular conservative opinion that businesses should have high discretion over their own procedures and engagements, such as who they serve, the way they serve, etc.

it's obvious why this could be a problem, but why is this particular instance one that is unacceptable? shouldn't an ideal conservative world be one where businesses get to decide who they hire, fire, and serve completely independently from government regulation? (edit: not trying to accuse hypocrisy or anything, i figure it might come across as that, but i'm really just curious about what the fundamental mindset here is)

Starbucks has the right to hire whoever they want. I have the right to not drink their stuffty coffee

[RedGajin]

Starbucks has the right to hire whoever they want. I have the right to not drink their stuffty coffee

arent you not from the us
do they even have starbucks where you live (or freedom)?

[The Resonte!]

arent you not from the us
do they even have starbucks where you live (or freedom)?

i think hes in canada

[patton360]

How about hiring 10k homeless vets first?

[King Tøny]

How about hiring 10k homeless vets first?

Because we would rather have anti-homless laws.

For example cities spend millions of dollars putting lethal spikes under bridges so homeless people can't sleep under them. instead of spending millions for a shelter.

[Refticus]

Because we would rather have anti-homless laws.

For example cities spend millions of dollars putting lethal spikes under bridges so homeless people can't sleep under them. instead of spending millions for a shelter.

ok firstly spikes are cool, shut up dweeb
secondly, the shelter cost is not just in building the place, it also has maintenance costs, staff wages and the cost of feeding the hobos the finest gruel

[Rally]

Instead of putting spikes under bridges we should just put tons of syrian refugees under the bridges, it'll be uninhabitable in no time

[RedGajin]

Because we would rather have anti-homless laws.

For example cities spend millions of dollars putting lethal spikes under bridges so homeless people can't sleep under them. instead of spending millions for a shelter.

shelters are very expensive
tiny concrete spikes cost like .50 a piece lol