# News & Current Events > U.S. Political News >  Starbucks in hot water for having cops remove two black men from Philly store

## Anti Federalist

I do love when the Bolsheviks eat their own.

Starbucks has spent years cultivating their SJW street cred, only to have it all blown away in a matter of five minutes because someone called cops.

Do not call cops. 

*Nothing* ever good comes from it.



*Starbucks C.E.O. Apologizes After Arrests of 2 Black Men*

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/15/u...en-arrest.html

By MATT STEVENSAPRIL 15, 2018 

Two black men walked into a Starbucks in downtown Philadelphia on Thursday afternoon and sat down. Officials said they had asked to use the restroom but because they had not bought anything, an employee refused the request. They were eventually asked to leave, and when they declined, an employee called the police.

Some of what happened next was recorded in a video that has been viewed more than eight million times on Twitter and was described by the chief executive of Starbucks as very hard to watch. Details of the episode, which the authorities provided on Saturday, ignited widespread criticism on social media, incited anger among public officials and prompted investigations.

The video shows the men surrounded by several police officers wearing bicycle helmets in the Center City Starbucks. When one officer asks another man whether he is with these gentlemen, the man says he is and calls the episode ridiculous.

What did they get called for? asks the man, Andrew Yaffe, who is white, referring to the police. Because there are two black guys sitting here meeting me?

Moments later, officers escort one of the black men out of the Starbucks in handcuffs. The other soon follows.

The men, who have not been identified, were arrested on suspicion of trespassing. But Starbucks did not want to press charges and the men were later released, Commissioner Richard Ross Jr. of the Philadelphia Police Department said in a recorded statement on Saturday.

The prosecutors office in Philadelphia also reviewed the case and declined to charge the men because of a lack of evidence that a crime was committed, Benjamin Waxman, a spokesman for the office, said.

The company apologized on Twitter Saturday afternoon. Later that day, while the hashtag #BoycottStarbucks was trending on Twitter, Kevin R. Johnson, the chief executive of Starbucks, released a statement in which he called the situation a reprehensible outcome.

Mr. Johnson said he hoped to meet them in person to offer a face-to-face apology.

He also pledged to investigate, and to make any necessary changes to our practices that would help prevent such an occurrence from ever happening again.

----------


## specsaregood

They were told they were trespassing and asked to leave, they refused.  The manage told them they were gonna call the cops and they said "I don't care."

$#@! em.  They could have just bought some overpriced coffee and made everybody's day easier.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> They were told they were trespassing and asked to leave, they refused.  The manage told them they were gonna call the cops and they said "I don't care."
> 
> $#@! em.  They could have just bought some overpriced coffee and made everybody's day easier.


It could have gone down a hundred different ways, that is one way, all better than dragging cops into it.

I find the justice deliciously poetic after Starbucks has made it a point for years now to try and ingratiate itself and position itself as the exclusive coffee suppliers of the perpetually aggrieved, Bolshevik, SJW left.

----------


## dannno

> I find the justice deliciously poetic after Starbucks has made it a point for years now to try and ingratiate itself and position itself as the exclusive coffee suppliers of the perpetually aggrieved, Bolshevik, SJW left.


*Starbucks Barista Fired for Getting Threats on Social Media*

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...n-Social-Media

----------


## Brian4Liberty

Hmmm. Something fishy about this. Seems very unreasonable by the Starbucks employee. Was this a set-up?

----------


## angelatc

> Hmmm. Something fishy about this. Seems very unreasonable by the Starbucks employee. Was this a set-up?


It's Philly.  They are all belligerent jerks, remember?

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> It's Philly.  They are all belligerent jerks, remember?


Never been there. But I've heard that is the stereotype.

Seems like everyone is sitting around working on their laptops at most Starbucks. Much longer than it would take to drink a cup of coffee.

----------


## specsaregood

> Hmmm. Something fishy about this. Seems very unreasonable by the Starbucks employee. Was this a set-up?


I would wager that the manager of a starbucks in center city Philly, has had to run off quite a few non-customers occupying space and non-customers trying to use the restrooms.      I'd have run them off too, either buy something or get out is a pretty ordinary request from a business.

----------


## angelatc

> I would wager that the manager of a starbucks in center city Philly, has had to run off quite a few non-customers occupying space and non-customers trying to use the restrooms.      I'd have run them off too, either buy something or get out is a pretty ordinary request from a business.


Yeah.  I do not think the cops did anything wrong even if the manager was a jerk.  I don't know PA but in most places, restaurants have the right to ask you to leave for any reason they choose.  The cops have the responsibility to enforce the law.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> I would wager that the manager of a starbucks in center city Philly, has had to run off quite a few non-customers occupying space and non-customers trying to use the restrooms.      I'd have run them off too, either buy something or get out is a pretty ordinary request from a business.


They might base that on the appearance of the people.

The given reason for them being there was a business meeting. Were they dressed for a "business investment opportunities" meeting? Doesn't seem like it.




> (JTA) — The two black men arrested at a Starbucks in Philadelphia were waiting for a local Jewish businessman, Andrew Yaffe.
> ...
> Yaffe, who runs a real estate development firm, was meeting the men to discuss business investment opportunities. In the video, he arrives at the Starbucks and tells police that they were waiting for him.
> 
> “Why would they be asked to leave?” Yaffe says on the video. “Does anybody else think this is ridiculous? It’s absolute discrimination.”
> ...
> Read more: https://forward.com/fast-forward/398...-local-jewish/

----------


## dannno

> They might base that on the appearance of the people.
> 
> The given reason for them being there was a business meeting. Were they dressed for a "business investment opportunities" meeting? Doesn't seem like it.

----------


## Schifference

Simple solution. Have less tables and less seating.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> I would wager that the manager of a starbucks in center city Philly, has had to run off quite a few non-customers occupying space and non-customers trying to use the restrooms.      I'd have run them off too, either buy something or get out is a pretty ordinary request from a business.


Twenty bucks says the manager is a POC.

----------


## Raginfridus

> Twenty bucks says the manager is a POC.


Prime Oriental Cucumber?

----------


## dannno

> Prime Oriental Cucumber?


Person of Character

----------


## Raginfridus

> Person of Character


I have a dream.

----------


## nobody's_hero

I had this happen to me once. I stopped at a gas station and the rule was you had to buy something to use the restroom. Okay, whatever, gotta piss and get back on the road. I bought a newspaper so I could pee with dignity. The restrooms could have been a bit cleaner though. 

Of course, I wasn't black so I couldn't cry foul. I just had to follow the rules, do my business, and leave. 

I know, cool story right? I'm waiting on a movie deal.

Starbucks is anti-gun though. I wouldn't so much as take a piss in one.

----------


## timosman

The CEO said the personnel didn't have enough training and he is going to address the issue by providing employees with more training. This is going to be fun for everybody.

----------


## tod evans

$#@! Starbucks!

$#@! the two black men.

And $#@! the cops!

----------


## Madison320

Reason #14,249 not to own a business in the US, and why we can't compete with China.

----------


## phill4paul

> I had this happen to me once. I stopped at a gas station and the rule was you had to buy something to use the restroom. Okay, whatever, gotta piss and get back on the road. I bought a newspaper so I could pee with dignity. The restrooms could have been a bit cleaner though. 
> 
> Of course, I wasn't black so I couldn't cry foul. I just had to follow the rules, do my business, and leave. 
> 
> I know, cool story right? I'm waiting on a movie deal.
> 
> Starbucks is anti-gun though. I wouldn't so much as take a piss in one.


  Your white privilege allowed you to make enough money to buy a newspaper. Quitcherbitchin'.

----------


## EBounding

It sounds like there were white patrons doing the same thing but they didn't have the cops called on them.  Bad behavior on behalf of this store, so now the company gets the grief.  Good.

----------


## juleswin

> I agree with you on the important part that there shouldn't be any govt sanctions and your right to boycott. Are you consistent on this? Are you against discrimination laws in general? Should Starbucks be permitted to sell to "whites only"?


I try my best to be consistent and yes I think starbucks should be permitted to sell to whites only. I am not going to like it but its not my business and they are free to run it the way they choose to.

----------


## juleswin

> Well when you say something intelligent maybe I will trust when you say somebody else doesn't say anything intelligent..
> 
> The guy laid it out, the manager asked them to buy something or leave, they refused to buy something. The cops came and said they were free to go, but they refused to buy something or leave. They were on private property, it had nothing to do with them being black. It had to do with their attitude, how they were acting, and the fact that they hadn't purchased anything. 
> 
> Starbucks doesn't mind people in their store who don't buy $#@! if they aren't bothering other people.


At least we can agree that neither one of us is saying anything intelligent or meaningful. The is the only time we have agree on anything in years now. This is good 

I know starbucks doesn't mind people coming to their store and not buying anything. I have done it myself in the past and wasn't kicked out. So I am still wondering why they decided to enforce this rule and kick them out.

----------


## juleswin

The black guy's story

----------


## dannno

> I know starbucks doesn't mind people coming to their store and not buying anything. *I have done it myself in the past and wasn't kicked out*. So I am still wondering why they decided to enforce this rule and kick them out.


...and you're black. Which sort of proves our point. 

Maybe it was because you acted like you belonged there, you weren't bothering other customers - you were helping their customers study.

----------


## juleswin

> ...and you're black. Which sort of proves our point. 
> 
> Maybe it was because you acted like you belonged there, you weren't bothering other customers - you were helping their customers study.


Or maybe the manager that day in Philadelphia was on her period . Just kidding. But usually most starbucks works are the hippie type, chill, tree hugging liberal, I think this one may have been cut from a different cloth, a no nonsense, by the books, straight laced ........ Trump supporter (j/k ). Which I why I am surprised they were kicked out.

Btw, there is no evidence that I have seen or heard(not counting you or Stefan) that showed that they were acting out in the time they were in the store. Just that one tried to use the restroom and was told he had to buy something to use it. He did not buy anything so the employee started the removal process leading to police being called.

According to the black guys.

----------


## Madison320

> I try my best to be consistent and yes I think starbucks should be permitted to sell to whites only. I am not going to like it but its not my business and they are free to run it the way they choose to.


I agree. I think the best response is an organized boycott if you think there was racism.

----------


## Madison320

> I think that is already part of their business plan, dunno if starbucks is run the same way here in Omaha as it is done in Philadelphia. Anyway, when I was in college, we would go to starbucks to do some school projects when we couldn't all meet in school. Ofc, we were all broke college students and the plan was always to just to use wifi and then go home. But and a big butt, most people ended up buying coffee or some pastry with the cc. Its not easy to resist the smell of starbucks coffee.
> 
> And actually, sometime nobody buys anything at all. I think the gamble(not dilemma) is that they must have calculated that not many people will come in and not buy anything. These were 2 people(even if you believe 100% that they weren't going to buy anything) in the restaurant for 10 mins waiting to meeting what I presume is a paying customer, there was no need to kick em out. It is one thing if they've been in the store for hours without buying anything and then you applying this very unknown rule on them.
> 
> My worry is that it seems like they acted a bit too quickly and applied this rule to them alone and that really worries me.


From what I've read each Starbucks has it's own policy. My guess is the ones in big cities and bad neighborhoods tend to have stricter rules.

----------


## Danke

> The black guy's story



Lawyer?  haha

Setup.

----------


## pcosmar

> Should Starbucks be permitted to sell to "whites only"?


And that is the bottom line..

The right to run a RACIST business. The right to refuse inferior races.

Open to the public is open to everyone... either that or go to a Whites Only Club.

----------


## Danke

I sure hope their long term "real estate" deal doesn't suffer because of this...

----------


## Danke

abc "News". did anyone listen to the language they used?  This is not about Starbucks or this phony incident.

----------


## pcosmar

> You just said your sisters owned bars/businesses and had to kick people out for misbehaving.


For reason... and  good reason before it came to that.  
They did not throw them out for being Black,, or Cuban or Haitian.. They were handled the same.

You don't make money in a bar by not selling drinks.  and you handle drunks..You manage the problem..

And the drunk buys more tomorrow. Losing customers is losing money.

----------


## Ender

> I know what a catch 22 is. What would have been the downside of not calling the cops?


Actually, I was talking about Starbucks' situation now.

If they apologize they lose; if they don't apologize they lose.

There is no way to fix this w/o a lot of backstabbing/name-calling/lies/innuendoes coming from either side, depending on how it's handled. Someone will always strive to be offended.

My personal experience with Starbucks has always been good- a performing group I was in as a kid performed there a lot & we were always treated well- and we were a mixture of races.

----------


## Danke

> What a moron. The guy says hes all for fairness and then is OK with the fact that they kicked out a potential customer 10 mins after their arrival because they choose to enforce a rule that they rarely enforced.


Do we know that it was really only 10 minutes?  Do we really know any facts in this case?  What we seem to know, they were asked to leave repeatedly, and they didn't.

----------


## Ender

> Yes, because you're not exactly splaining your position. I just took a guess.


LOL- thanks for understand my humor/sarcasm.

----------


## Ender

> Oh, and based on your avatar: Your hair wants cutting.


But that's why you have the hots for me & follow me around.

----------


## dannno

> For reason... and  good reason before it came to that.  
> They did not throw them out for being Black,, or Cuban or Haitian.. They were handled the same.
> 
> You don't make money in a bar by not selling drinks.  and you handle drunks..You manage the problem..
> 
> And the drunk buys more tomorrow. Losing customers is losing money.


Not the point.. the point is, if your sister kicked a black person out, not for being black, but for bad behavior - and they were accused of kicking them out for being black and your sister was murdered for that, how would you feel about that?

The fact is it is hard to know why somebody kicks somebody out of their place of business, unless you start policing people's thoughts - unless of course they say that is why they did it or it is a regular occurrence and they built up a track record maybe.. But this was a single occurrence.

----------


## Danke

I have been involved in throwing people off aircraft.  It was the Captain's call not mine.  But I understood their reasoning. Me personally, I am fairly lenient.  Travel these days can be stressful...and people drink, or on meds, etc.  

Problem is a catch 22 sometimes, don't intervene after a flight attendant brings it to our attention, take no action, then it becomes a problem inflight...who are they gonna look at for brushing it off as innocent juvenile behavior?  Plus  not backing up your crew?  That can have safety consequences later too.  Federal Regulations are we are not to allow anyone "impaired". , drunk, etc. on our aircraft.

A longtime ago, a very drunk passenger was in the gate area on another airline I was trying to hitch a ride on.  I brought it up to the Captain.  He didn't seem to care.  Now think of the jeopardy he just put himself in if anything happened later and he was told about that passenger by a fellow pilot.  I kinda look the other way now if it is not my company.  Sargent Schultz, unless it is too obvious to ignore, or it is AF, an Injun or a Nigerian.

----------


## RJB

> I have been involved in throwing people off aircraft.


Hmm.  I didn't know that you are a racist.

----------


## pcosmar

> But this was a single occurrence.


No,, it is not.
If it was a single occurrence it would have no legs regardless of hype and Starbucks would have shrugged it off.

It is several problems converging,,, and the concept of race is center stage.,, like it or not. (I don't personally)

----------


## pcosmar

I keep seeing this so called free world looking more and more like the prison I got out of...


Right back to fighting with Aryan crowd.

----------


## Danke

> Hmm.  I didn't know that you are a racist.


Mulattos are always a conundrum for me.

Sometimes they seem to have more white heritage than black.  Those are difficult situations,  am I justified in kicking off the obviously more white ones?  Keeps me up late at night many times doubting.

----------


## dannno

//

----------


## dannno

I feel like AF

----------


## Swordsmyth

Have we wasted enough time on this distraction yet?

----------


## dannno

> I keep seeing this so called free world looking more and more like the prison I got out of...
> 
> 
> Right back to fighting with Aryan crowd.


This is your idea of the Aryan crowd??




I have never, to my knowledge, met a white supremacist in my entire life.. and my friend circle, since I was very young, until now, has been overly represented by minorities. 

Starbucks is not the "borg". They are coffee shops. I know people who have worked there. When I said that was the first incident, I meant at that store. That manager had never had a prior incident or a history of making these decisions solely based on race. The one you pointed out wasn't very good evidence because there was no camera at the store when everything went down, only after the fact. Stores are under no obligation to allow you to use the restroom unless you are a customer acting in a reasonable manner. They may choose to allow people who are seem conducive to the atmosphere to use the restroom if they are unsure of their present or future customer status, regardless of their race, but may not allow people who are not conducive, regardless of their race. So a black guy could walk in and they might let him use the restroom,  and then a scraggly white guy who looks homeless might walk in and maybe  they don't. Which sucks, but it isn't their responsibility to take care  of all the homeless in town. And it's really unfair to judge their  individual decisions without all of the evidence or without some sort of  history.

----------


## dannno

// dude something is wrong with edit posts

----------


## Madison320

> And that is the bottom line..
> 
> The right to run a RACIST business. The right to refuse inferior races.
> 
> *Open to the public is open to everyone*... either that or go to a Whites Only Club.


Bullcrap. In a free society the owner of the business retains the right to decide who he does business with. The correct term for what you are describing is fascism. That's where private parties are supposedly allowed to "own" a business but the government tells them how to run it.

----------


## oyarde

> I have been involved in throwing people off aircraft.  It was the Captain's call not mine.  But I understood their reasoning. Me personally, I am fairly lenient.  Travel these days can be stressful...and people drink, or on meds, etc.  
> 
> Problem is a catch 22 sometimes, don't intervene after a flight attendant brings it to our attention, take no action, then it becomes a problem inflight...who are they gonna look at for brushing it off as innocent juvenile behavior?  Plus  not backing up your crew?  That can have safety consequences later too.  Federal Regulations are we are not to allow anyone "impaired". , drunk, etc. on our aircraft.
> 
> A longtime ago, a very drunk passenger was in the gate area on another airline I was trying to hitch a ride on.  I brought it up to the Captain.  He didn't seem to care.  Now think of the jeopardy he just put himself in if anything happened later and he was told about that passenger by a fellow pilot.  I kinda look the other way now if it is not my company.  Sargent Schultz, unless it is too obvious to ignore, or it is AF, an Injun or a Nigerian.


I have been intoxicated while flying but nobody would know . I like to nap . I did not know they let Nigerians on , I assumed they were all on the no fly list .

----------


## Swordsmyth

> I have been intoxicated while flying but nobody would know .


Because you always act that way?

----------


## oyarde

> Because you always act that way?


Yeah , pretty much I always look just the same .

----------


## NorthCarolinaLiberty

Yawn.  Booorrrringgg!!! 





These encounters are much more interesting!


3:45.
Fast food employee: "I'll call the $#@!in' cops on your mother $#@!in' ass!
Customer: "Gimme my $#@!in' money, you dumb mother $#@!in' Mexican!"




And in case you thought this stuff only happens at Walmart.  This one is at Wells Fargo:

13:00. "I want my God damn money!  You Bank of America!  You Chinese Mother $#@!er!"

----------


## EBounding



----------


## specsaregood

> Ya, until you walk into a stall that has poop all over the walls.


No, that's part of what helps you remain humble.  knowing there is always somebody that has to clean the $#@! off the walls, and sometimes that person is you.

----------


## pcosmar

> Homeless people are most likely to have mental issues, be on drugs therefore they are most likely to poop on the floor. That is just reality


Some,, no doubt and no argument.

Some however are quite well mentally,,  but either by circumstance or choice  do not have a domicile.

For some a temporary situation and for others a conscious choice.

Blanket statement that they are all this or that makes one seem really $#@!ing ignorant.

----------


## dannno

> Done that... Managed a Restaurant..


Still doing that?

----------


## specsaregood

> Places that start allowing homeless people to use their restrooms soon find that some homeless people are alcoholics and drug addicts, they $#@! everywhere, leave needles, try and take showers in the sink and leave the bathroom a complete mess (yes, sometimes leaving $#@! on the walls, because some homeless people are crazy). 
> 
> As a business owner, you now have to either deal with having really dirty bathrooms that your customers don't want to use and so they go somewhere else and you lose business, or you have to make your employees clean $#@! off the walls every day and eventually they quit to go work somewhere that doesn't allow homeless people in their bathrooms.


I hate to break it to you, but I'd wager more $#@! gets on walls everyday in America from non-homeless people.   Especially people that "hover" over a public toilet and have explosive $#@!s.    I used to have to clean the michaels bathrooms, which the largest demographic was old white women.  Not a week would go by without $#@! on the womens bathroom wall -- the mens bathroom was generally in pristine condition.

----------


## pcosmar

> Still doing that?


Nope.
I'm Homeless(again).  and unemployed.

----------


## juleswin

> Wow, you really don't get it. 
> 
> Every place in the country lets you use the restroom if you aren't a customer, *if you come into the store LOOKING AND ACTING like a customer* and not a homeless person or a gang banger - doesn't matter what color your skin is. 
> 
> Places that start allowing homeless people to use their restrooms soon find that some homeless people are alcoholics and drug addicts, they $#@! everywhere, leave needles, try and take showers in the sink and leave the bathroom a complete mess (yes, sometimes leaving $#@! on the walls, because some homeless people are crazy). 
> 
> As a business owner, you now have to either deal with having really dirty bathrooms that your customers don't want to use and so they go somewhere else and you lose business, or you have to make your employees clean $#@! off the walls every day and eventually they quit to go work somewhere that doesn't allow homeless people in their bathrooms.
> 
> Sorry you don't understand the reality of living in a big city, but this is pretty basic stuff.


Are we talking about homeless people or regular individuals who just didn't buy any good or services from the store? cos those are 2 different groups of people

----------


## Valli6

> No, that's part of what helps you remain humble.  knowing there is always somebody that has to clean the $#@! off the walls, and sometimes that person is you.


You can tell that the Starbucks chairman never had a job cleaning toilets. 




> *Starbucks Chairman Howard Schultz* said Thursday that the company will now open its bathrooms to everyone, regardless of whether a purchase has been made, following the arrest of two African American men who had asked to use the bathroom at one of its downtown Philadelphia coffee shops.
> 
> Schultz, speaking at the *Atlantic Council* in Washington hours before he was slated to receive a business leadership award, said the company is changing its policy, after weeks of controversy, because it wants everyone — customer or not — to feel welcome at Starbucks.
> 
> “We don’t want to become a public bathroom, but we’re going to make the right decision a hundred percent of the time and give people the key,” Schultz said, “because we don’t want anyone at Starbucks to feel as if we are not giving access to you to the bathroom because you are less than.”


I can't wait to see what happens to Starbucks next.

----------


## juleswin

> Some,, no doubt and no argument.
> 
> Some however are quite well mentally,,  but either by circumstance or choice  do not have a domicile.
> 
> For some a temporary situation and for others a conscious choice.
> 
> Blanket statement that they are all this or that makes one seem really $#@!ing ignorant.


I have limited experience interacting with homeless people and one thing I noticed is that sadly a good number of them have mental illness(alcoholism, schizophrenia, bi polar etc etc). When I worked at burger king, they would come in and buy stuff all the time. One misconception about them is that they do not patronize the businesses they visit because they do buy loads of drinks and food when they came in.

Also, in my time working for burger king, not one day did I come in to find poop on the floor from them or regular customers. One kid pooped on the floor once, but her mom cleaned it up.

----------


## dannno

> No, that's part of what helps you remain humble.  knowing there is always somebody that has to clean the $#@! off the walls, and sometimes that person is you.


Oh ya, I understand the dynamic of doing manual labor and demeaning jobs, I had all sots of different jobs when I was younger.. but if you're a person who has never $#@! on a wall sometimes there is a line.

----------


## dannno

> Are we talking about homeless people or regular individuals who just didn't buy any good or services from the store? cos those are 2 different groups of people


Exactly.

----------


## dannno

> I have limited experience interacting with homeless people and one thing I noticed is that sadly a good number of them have mental illness(alcoholism, schizophrenia, bi polar etc etc). When I worked at burger king, they would come in and buy stuff all the time. One misconception about them is that they do not patronize the businesses they visit because they do buy loads of drinks and food when they came in.
> 
> Also, in my time working for burger king, not one day did I come in to find poop on the floor from them or regular customers. One kid pooped on the floor once, but her mom cleaned it up.



Have you ever been outside Omaha? Spent much time in a real city? Or, should I say, a progressive city?

----------


## pcosmar

> I have limited experience interacting with homeless people and one thing I noticed is that sadly a good number of them have mental illness(alcoholism, schizophrenia, bi polar etc etc).


Have you met many homeowners?
The same could be said.

Ever use the bathrooms at an event center during a concert?

I have found public bathrooms,, generally better maintained. 

And there would be less issue for businesses if there were Public Restrooms commonly available.

It may even be in their Best Interest to provide such.

----------


## pcosmar

> Have you ever been outside Omaha? Spent much time in a real city? Or, should I say, a progressive city?


I lived on Venus Beach/Santa Monica for a month in the late 80s. and all the way to Tacoma.  Portland after that,,  Then Florida living on an alias. 

I don't really care for cities,, but there is enough waste to support me fine.

----------


## dannno

> And there would be less issue for businesses if there were Public Restrooms commonly available.
> 
> It may even be in their Best Interest to provide such.


I totally agree, if I had a business in a downtown district where there were homeless people I would help organize an effort among local businesses and individuals to build bathrooms for homeless people and maintain them if it was an issue. It is better than having to deal with the problem yourself and near your customer base. 

I think they have some pretty good designs in Portland where people can $#@! anywhere they want and they can come in and hose it at some point.

----------


## navy-vet

Automated sanitation system with easily refilled tissue paper dispensers. Who now exactly is going to be paying for this?

----------


## dannno

> Automated sanitation system with easily refilled tissue paper dispensers. Who now exactly is going to be paying for this?


Mexico

----------


## RJB

> I hate to break it to you, but I'd wager more $#@! gets on walls everyday in America from non-homeless people.   Especially people that "hover" over a public toilet and have explosive $#@!s.    I used to have to clean the michaels bathrooms, which the largest demographic was old white women.  Not a week would go by without $#@! on the womens bathroom wall -- the mens bathroom was generally in pristine condition.


I had a similar job at a department store, brother.  I can vouch for you.  Once a week...  Women's rooms were nasty.  I would clean the toilet with a mop, stick the mop in the toilet and flush until clean.  I wouldn't touch that.

----------


## pcosmar

> Automated sanitation system with easily refilled tissue paper dispensers. Who now exactly is going to be paying for this?


Who paid for street sweepers before governments claimed ownership of the roads?

You pay for street lighting? 

Dude basic sanitation has been around for centuries,,* it is not an issue till it is denied people.*

----------


## timosman

https://www.sfchronicle.com/news/cri...g-12906558.php




> May 11, 2018
> 
> 
>  In this March 22, 2017 file photo, Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz speaks at the Starbucks annual shareholders meeting in Seattle. Schultz says the company will now allow people to use bathrooms at its coffee shops even if they dont buy anything, as it continues to take a closer look at its operations following the arrest of two black men at a Philadelphia shop. Schulz discussed the new policy while he spoke at the Atlantic Council in Washington, Thursday, May 10, 2018. Schultz said the company previously had a loose policy that only paying customers be allowed to use bathrooms, but that it was up to each store manager to decide
> 
> 
> 
> NEW YORK (AP)  Starbucks has told employees to let anyone use the restroom, even if they haven't bought anything, as it reviews its policies and tries to restore its reputation after the arrest of two black men at a coffee shop in Philadelphia.
> 
> ...

----------


## Schifference

After the new training, 80,000 homeless people should go to Starbucks, use restrooms, stay there all day and not purchase anything.

----------


## enhanced_deficit

*Starbucks drops ADL from bias training amid protests*
TOI  May 1, 2018



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XR87OaaKYpE

----------


## dannno

> "We don't want to become a public bathroom," said Schultz, "but we're  going to make the right decision a hundred percent of the time and give  people the key."


I want to find a really sexy girl who looks like a model to marry and who has a constantly throbbing libido so we have sex all the time and who is still a virgin.

----------


## jmdrake

> After the new training, 80,000 homeless people should go to Starbucks, use restrooms, stay there all day and not purchase anything.


Starbucks shouldn't advertise itself as a place to hang out for free wifi and buy overpriced coffee when you feel like it if that is no longer the business model.  And the men who got arrested weren't homeless.  But never let facts get in the way of a good rant I suppose.

----------


## Danke

> I want to find a really sexy girl who looks like a model to marry and who has a constantly throbbing libido so we have sex all the time and who is still a virgin.



If you ever find her, clone her.

----------


## Danke

> Starbucks shouldn't advertise itself as a place to hang out for free wifi and buy overpriced coffee when you feel like it if that is no longer the business model.  And the men who got arrested weren't homeless.  But never let facts get in the way of a good rant I suppose.



Why does its matter whether these two were homeless or not?   The fact being, now anyone can hangout in Starbucks without being a customer.  Homeless definitely will be there when it is cold outside.

----------


## jmdrake

> Why does its matter whether these two were homeless or not?   The fact being, now anyone can hangout in Starbucks without being a customer.  Homeless definitely will be there when it is cold outside.


Every time I've been to a Starbucks there have been people hanging out who weren't customers.  That's what  happens when you have free wifi and plenty of places to plug in a laptop.  These men hadn't been there but for a few minutes.  I'm all for Starbucks having stupid business practices, but making your restaurant and inviting hangout space and then getting butthurt because people actually take you up on it is silly.

----------


## Danke

> Every time I've been to a Starbucks there have been people hanging out who weren't customers.  That's what  happens when you have free wifi and plenty of places to plug in a laptop.  These men hadn't been there but for a few minutes.  I'm all for Starbucks having stupid business practices, but making your restaurant and inviting hangout space and then getting butthurt because people actually take you up on it is silly.


Never been to a Starbucks outside of airports.

A McDonalds in downtown Denver had homeless, but they had to buy something.

----------


## dannno

> Never been to a Starbucks outside of airports.
> 
> A McDonalds in downtown Denver had homeless, but they had to buy something.


Every Starbucks I've been to, if people are just sitting around they always have one thing: a laptop or tablet or something. That means they can probably afford a coffee at some point so they don't get bothered.

----------


## Schifference

Would white smelly homeless people be allowed to stay inside Starbucks for extended periods of time without purchasing anything? Would the homeless people with their carts parked outside or inside deter good paying customers from frequenting the establishment? Are black people that are not homeless but not paying customers more protected than homeless people?

----------


## jmdrake

> Never been to a Starbucks outside of airports.


Okay.  I've had a lot of meetings in Starbucks.  Business meetings.  Tutoring sessions.  (I was the tutor).  Sometimes the person I was meeting was late.  Sometimes I was late.  I might buy something if I felt like it but I never felt obligated to do so.  




> A McDonalds in downtown Denver had homeless, but they had to buy something.


At the McDonalds that I have waited at when driving for Uber/Lyft they had various ways of dealing with homeless like "no sleeping" (that's at the downtown library too) or simply checking if someone had been there for hours.  These guys had been there for literally minutes.




> Every Starbucks I've been to, if people are just sitting around they always have one thing: a laptop or tablet or something. That means they can probably afford a coffee at some point so they don't get bothered.


So you've never seen someone in Starbucks reading a book?  Or what about on a cell phone?  There are homeless with them.  




> Would white smelly homeless people be allowed to stay inside Starbucks for extended periods of time without purchasing anything? Would the homeless people with their carts parked outside or inside deter good paying customers from frequenting the establishment? Are black people that are not homeless but not paying customers more protected than homeless people?


Except these two men weren't smelly and hadn't been there for hours.  The man who had set up the meeting was white.  He obviously didn't think it was unseemly to go to Starbucks for the primary purpose of having a meeting as opposed to the primary purpose of buying some overpriced coffee.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/15/u...en-arrest.html
_The video shows the men surrounded by several police officers wearing bicycle helmets in the Center City Starbucks. When one officer asks another man whether he is “with these gentlemen,” the man says he is and calls the episode ridiculous.

“What did they get called for?” asks the man, Andrew Yaffe, who is white, referring to the police. “Because there are two black guys sitting here meeting me?”_

Starbucks has the right to have stupid business practices, but creating an atmosphere where people are likely to want to come and do business regardless of whether or not they want to buy your service and then freaking out when the "wrong people" actually take you up on that is simply not good business.

----------


## H_H

> These guys had been there for literally minutes.  These two men weren't smelly and hadn't been there for hours.  The man who had set up the meeting was white.  He obviously didn't think it was unseemly to go to Starbucks for the primary purpose of having a meeting


 Oh yeah.  That was the primary purpose.

Actually, I heard they were just buying Skittles.

Just trying to find some Skittles to buy.

What a world we live in, where some Innocent, Wide-Eyed boys -- business boys -- cant' just share a bag of Skittles in peace.
_




			
				 “What did they get called for?” asks the man, Andrew Yaffe, who is white, referring to the police. “Because there are two black guys sitting here meeting me?”
			
		

_ What an unbelievable coincidence!  Good thing he just happened to show up at the perfectly opportune moment.




> then freaking out when the "wrong people" actually take you up on that is simply not good business.


  YES!  YYYEEEESSS!!!   YEEEEEEESSSSSSSS!!

Starbucks is incredibly racist and this incident was all about RACE!  All baristas HATE black people!

Boycott Star Bucks Now!  Stir up that usefully stupid mob!  Ha, ha, so easy.

----------


## jmdrake

> Oh yeah.  That was the primary purpose.
> 
> Actually, I heard they were just buying Skittles.
> 
> Just trying to find some Skittles to buy.
> 
> What a world we live in, where some Innocent, Wide-Eyed boys -- business boys -- cant' just share a bag of Skittles in peace.
> _
> _ What an unbelievable coincidence!  Good thing he just happened to show up at the perfectly opportune moment.
> ...


Are you trying to be an ignorant and incoherent a$$hole or does that just come naturally?  Just curious.

----------


## timosman

> Are you trying to be an ignorant and incoherent a$$hole or does that just come naturally?  Just curious.


What are you trying to be?

----------


## jmdrake

> What are you trying to be?


Myself.  That's who I always am.  Take it or leave it.  I really don't care.  I have consistently said in this thread Starbucks has the right to have what I believe are to be stupid business practices.  I haven't delved into identity politics the way H_H was.  I didn't call anyone racist.  The guilty flee when no man pursues.

----------


## pcosmar

> Oh yeah.  That was the primary purpose.
> 
> Actually, I heard they were just buying Skittles.
> 
> Just trying to find some Skittles to buy.
> 
> What a world we live in, where some Innocent, Wide-Eyed boys -- business boys -- cant' just share a bag of Skittles in peace.
> _
> _ What an unbelievable coincidence!  Good thing he just happened to show up at the perfectly opportune moment.
> ...


It is as systemic as your predictable response.
Like calling Police on a Student in her own Dorm.. for being Black.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/09/us/ya...rnd/index.html

And the Homeless issue is a red herring since it has nothing to do with any of these incidents.

----------


## jmdrake

> It is as systemic as your predictable response.
> Like calling Police on a Student in her own Dorm.. for being Black.
> https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/09/us/ya...rnd/index.html
> 
> *And the Homeless issue is a red herring since it has nothing to do with any of these incidents.*


_I do not have enough +rep to give this post._

I hope you see it  @dannno and  @Danke and  @timosman and @Schifference.

----------


## Suzanimal

I've kicked people out of the bar for not buying anything and I've told them they couldn't use the restroom but I've never called the cops on anyone. I've somehow managed to make people leave without help.  

Black, white, homeless, gainfully employed....I didn't discriminate. You buy something or you GTFO. 

Since I avoid Starbucks at all costs, I don't know their policy on squatters but calling the cops was excessive, unnecessary, and just plain dumb.

----------


## Suzanimal

Oh, and I got kicked out of a Chinese restaurant after I bought something for sitting too long, lol. I ordered Mongolian Beef, ate it, and was waiting for Mr A to pick me up when the mean little Asian lady who owned the place yelling at me, "You eat. You pay. You leave. No sitting." It was so funny, I couldn't even be mad.

----------


## jmdrake

> I've kicked people out of the bar for not buying anything and I've told them they couldn't use the restroom but I've never called the cops on anyone. I've somehow managed to make people leave without help.  
> 
> Black, white, homeless, gainfully employed....I didn't discriminate. You buy something or you GTFO. 
> 
> Since I avoid Starbucks at all costs, I don't know their policy on squatters but calling the cops was excessive, unnecessary, and just plain dumb.





> Oh, and I got kicked out of a Chinese restaurant after I bought something for sitting too long, lol. I ordered Mongolian Beef, ate it, and was waiting for Mr A to pick me up when the mean little Asian lady who owned the place yelling at me, "You eat. You pay. You leave. No sitting." It was so funny, I couldn't even be mad.


LOL.  Great story!  And yes, if a place has a consistent policy and uniformly enforces it, on the white/black/brown man/woman/undecided with the laptop/tablet/book/newspaper it's unlikely there will be any problems asking someone to leave who is violating the policy.  I'm curious though.  As a bartender did you never get someone who actually just wanted to order his/her drink once his/her friend arrived?  I'm not a bar goer and never have been.  But there have been plenty of times I waited at a restaurant for my friend to arrive before ordering.

----------


## Suzanimal

> LOL.  Great story!  And yes, if a place has a consistent policy and uniformly enforces it, on the white/black/brown man/woman/undecided with the laptop/tablet/book/newspaper it's unlikely there will be any problems asking someone to leave who is violating the policy.  I'm curious though.  *As a bartender did you never get someone who actually just wanted to order his/her drink once his/her friend arrived?  I'm not a bar goer and never have been.  But there have been plenty of times I waited at a restaurant for my friend to arrive before ordering.*


Absolutely. If someone said they wanted to wait for their guest, I would bring them a water and tell them it was to keep other bartenders from bugging them. Someone sitting at a bar with nothing in front them makes it look like no one has helped them and, if you have decent staff, people start stopping and asking them if they need anything. And, btw, I worked in downtown Atlanta. I had every kind walk through those doors. Hell, I even had Grady patients wander in still wearing their hospital gowns.o_O

I watched an interview with the guys and a couple of things bugged me... 

1) I was left with the impression the Starbucks employee didn't ask them to leave but just called the cops. That's $#@!ed up.
2) The guys brought in their own water. WTF? Don't bring outside food or drink into a restaurant. It's $#@!ing rude.

----------


## specsaregood

> I watched an interview with the guys and a couple of things bugged me... 
> 
> 1) I was left with the impression the Starbucks employee didn't ask them to leave but just called the cops. That's $#@!ed up.


When the story came out, it was told/not disagreed:  that the manager told them to buy something or leave, they refused, manager asked them to leave, they refused, the manager told them she was calling the cops then, they guys replied "I don't care".     meh

----------


## dannno

> _I do not have enough +rep to give this post._
> 
> I hope you see it.


She was not sleeping in her dorm room, she was sleeping in a common area where apparently there are rules against sleeping. That lady would have called the cop on a white person sleeping in there too if they looked shady. 




> "This sorta incident breaks my heart everytime..." wrote one man. *"Why do white folks always call police on black folks all the time why?!!!"*




Hmm, I dunno, I wonder why..

----------


## Suzanimal

> When the story came out, it was told/not disagreed:  that the manager told them to buy something or leave, they refused, manager asked them to leave, they refused, the manager told them she was calling the cops then, they guys replied "I don't care".     meh


Okay, I was watching an interview and their lawyer was sitting there. Maybe I didn't get the story. 

I'm gonna call this one a draw. 
Starbucks manager was a giant douche for calling the cops. Assuming they were asked to leave and didn't, they were douches. Just goes to show ya, $#@!s are everywhere.

----------


## Danke

> _I do not have enough +rep to give this post._
> 
> I hope you see it  @dannno and  @Danke and  @timosman and @Schifference.



WTH?

What do these two incidents have somehow me not knowing that they were not homeless people?  I just brought up the point that now homeless will find it easy to find shelter in Starbucks with their policy change.

----------


## dannno

> Okay, I was watching an interview and their lawyer was sitting there. Maybe I didn't get the story. 
> 
> I'm gonna call this one a draw. 
> Starbucks manager was a giant douche for calling the cops. Assuming they were asked to leave and didn't, they were douches. Just goes to show ya, $#@!s are everywhere.



People choose their own attire and their own attitude. There are pro's and cons to going around looking and acting like a thug (no matter what color your skin). One of the pro's is that people are scared of you and tend not to mess with you. One of the cons is that people are scared of you and so you don't get to go into places like Starbucks and just "hang out" without buying anything. 

If "Derek" walks into Starbucks, nobody is denying him the restroom key. "Pookie" on the other hand.. this has nothing to do with race.

http://www.cc.com/video-clips/p87njw...tuff-can-t-win

----------


## jmdrake

> Every Starbucks I've been to, if people are just sitting around they always have one thing: a laptop or tablet or something. That means they can probably afford a coffee at some point so they don't get bothered.





> She was not sleeping in her dorm room, she was sleeping in a common area where apparently there are rules against sleeping. That lady would have called the cop on a white person sleeping in there too if they looked shady.


 Not sure what someone sleeping in a dorm room has to do with whether or not someone without a laptop looks homeless.

----------


## dannno

> Not sure what someone sleeping in a dorm room has to do with whether or not someone without a laptop looks homeless.



I was responding to the article you posted about the girl sleeping "in her dorm" who had the cops called on her. She was not sleeping in her dorm room, she was sleeping in a common area that has rules against sleeping.

And in Starbucks people sitting around reading a book have bought something. People with a laptop, probably have, but maybe not, maybe they are using the wifi. But maybe they will get tired or thirsty or hungry, so no reason to kick them out especially if the place isn't full.. as long as they are being quiet and are fitting in with the atmosphere. If they are dressed up like thugs and putting off a thug vibe then they will probably get kicked the $#@! out.

----------


## jmdrake

> WTH?
> 
> What do these two incidents have somehow me not knowing that they were not homeless people?  I just brought up the point that now homeless will find it easy to find shelter in Starbucks with their policy change.


Under the old system all a homeless person had to do was dumpster dive for a broken laptop to take into Starbucks based on the @dannno rule.  Or maybe panhandle until he got 5 bucks to buy some overpriced coffee and then just stay the rest of the day.

----------


## timosman

Should Starbucks provide free laptop rentals in exchange for clicking on ads? You've clicked on 100 ads, here is your free latte and a code to the restroom.

----------


## jmdrake

> I was responding to the article you posted about the girl sleeping "in her dorm". She was not sleeping in her dorm room, she was sleeping in a common area that has rules against sleeping.


I didn't post the article.  You must be thinking about  @pcosmar.

Edit: Just went back and read the article Pete linked to.  You made assumptions not in the article.  Just because one student claimed there was some rule against sleeping in the common area doesn't mean that's true.  And likely it's not true.  A rule against where a college student can fall asleep?  Do you *seriously* believe that to be true?

----------


## dannno

> I didn't post the article.  You must be thinking about @pcosmar.


You replied to the article and what pcosmar said, and told me I should watch it!!!

Sorry, that sounded like a ringing endorsement of what pcosmar said to me. You can go back and read it yourself.

----------


## jmdrake

> Should Starbucks provide free laptop rentals in exchange for clicking on ads? You've clicked on 100 ads, here is your free latte and a code to the restroom.


Whatever rule Starbucks has should be enforced consistently regardless of whether or not you have a laptop or have on a suit or whatever.  Don't give the world over the impression that you are a meeting space if you are not.

----------


## jmdrake

> You replied to the article and what pcosmar said, and told me I should watch it!!!
> 
> Sorry, that sounded like a ringing endorsement of what pcosmar said to me. You can go back and read it yourself.


It was a ringing endorsement of the point he was making that the issue isn't about homelessness.  That said, your assessment of the article is lacking.  There is no evidence in the article other than a statement made by the idiot that called the cops that there was an actual rule against falling asleep in the common area in the dorm.



Quick!  Call the cops!  A college student fell asleep without proper authorization!

----------


## H_H

> your predictable response.


 You actually predicted this response?

I dare you to predict my next response!

Been called many things, but predictable isn't even... plausible!

----------


## timosman

> Whatever rule Starbucks has should be enforced consistently regardless of whether or not you have a laptop or have on a suit or whatever.  Don't give the world over the impression that you are a meeting space if you are not.


What a frigging nazi you are. 100% consistency!

----------


## H_H

> I haven't delved into identity politics the way H_H was.  I didn't call anyone racist.




Oh!  I guess I mis-stunder-ud.




> [Starbucks] then freaking out when the "wrong people" actually take you up on that is simply not good business.


"Wrong People."  Wrong people.  Hmm.  Wonder what you meant by that.

----------


## jmdrake

> What a frigging nazi you are. 100% consistency!


Okay.....not sure if you are serious but okay.  Just to be clear I think Starbucks has a right to make stupid business decisions.  I'm not demanding free coffee or "sensitivity training" or whatever.  I just think it's stupid to give one impression about your business but then operate it in a different way.  You disagree?  If so, why?

----------


## jmdrake

> "Wrong People."  Wrong people.  Hmm.  Wonder what you meant by that.


You tell me.  Why did you feel the need to bring up "skittles" in a thread that didn't mention them?  Triggered perhaps?

----------


## dannno

> I didn't post the article.  You must be thinking about  @pcosmar.
> 
> Edit: Just went back and read the article Pete linked to.  You made assumptions not in the article.  Just because one student claimed there was some rule against sleeping in the common area doesn't mean that's true.  And likely it's not true.  A rule against where a college student can fall asleep?  Do you *seriously* believe that to be true?



Rules are not always made to be uniformly enforced. For example, it may be against the rules to sleep in the common area in a dorm. However if a student falls asleep studying they may not enforce the rule. They may only enforce it if somebody is posting up and purposely sleeping there. 

There is this thing called the letter of the law and the spirit of the law. 

People don't want people who are harassing or bother customers in their store. People want to feel safe in their living quarters. So they may enforce their rules more strictly on those people. At times, they may be a minority. In fact, they may be the majority of the time. That is irrelevant, and it doesn't mean the person enforcing the rules is racist.

----------


## timosman

> Okay.....not sure if you are serious but okay.  Just to be clear I think Starbucks has a right to make stupid business decisions.  I'm not demanding free coffee or "sensitivity training" or whatever.  I just think it's stupid to give one impression about your business but then operate it in a different way.  You disagree?  If so, why?


Could you stop contradicting yourself?

----------


## dannno

> Whatever rule Starbucks has should be enforced consistently regardless of whether or not you have a laptop or have on a suit or whatever.  Don't give the world over the impression that you are a meeting space if you are not.


I don't think the rules should be enforced consistently at all, I think they should be applied by the managers at their discretion in order to maintain a positive, chill atmosphere in their place of business. That may mean doing one thing in the Starbucks in the nice neighborhood and doing something else in the Starbucks in the bad neighborhood. That may mean allowing Derek to use the bathroom, and denying Pookie.

----------


## jmdrake

> Could you stop contradicting yourself?


What is the contradiction?  I can't simultaneously think that a decision is stupid for business but a business has a right to make it?

----------


## H_H

> You tell me.  Why did you feel the need to bring up "skittles" in a thread that didn't mention them?  Triggered perhaps?


I don't know what that means, but I'm pretty sure that it must be good. " _Trigger-happy,_" could we say?  That sounds pretty cool.

Now, to answer your riddle about yourself and what you wrote, let's see:  Hmm, these two fine citizens were not homeless.  You know that, right?  Ahh yes indeed; you've repeatedly reminded your interlocutors of this Crucial Factoid.  Let's see, they didn't smell bad either; you covered that.


> these two men weren't smelly


They weren't loitering.  


> and hadn't been there for hours.


 They were well-dressed and handsome and exemplary in every way.

OK, we're making progress, digging down into this mystery.  Thank you for the invitation, by the way!  This is _so_ much more fun than you simply telling us.

So, having ruled all that out, what could you have possibly been implying when you wrote they were "freaking out when the 'wrong people' actually took them up on that"?  What criteria are you accusing Starbucks of using here?  How did they determine these two outstanding men of business were the, as you put it, "the wrong kind of people" for their establishment?

Well, I'll have to leave it there for now.  I feel like we're getting closer to the answer, though.  Just a little more hard thought and detective work and we should be able to figure your riddle out.

----------


## jmdrake

> Rules are not always made to be uniformly enforced. For example, it may be against the rules to sleep in the common area in a dorm.


Except *YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE THAT THERE IS ANY SUCH RULE WHATSOEVER!*

From the article:

_Eventually two more officers arrived. After some confusion about Siyonbola's ID -- her name did not match the name in a student database -- the police told her she was free to go.

Yale spokeswoman Karen Peart said the issue was that the name on Siyonbola's ID card was her preferred name, so it did not exactly match her name in university records.

The officers in the dorm admonished the student who called police, saying Siyonbola had every right to be present, according to Kimberly Goff-Crews, Yale's vice president for Student Life.

CNN has reached out to the other student for comment._

So all you have is one busybody student who *claimed* she was enforcing the rule but neither the cops nor the university have backed up that claim.

----------


## H_H

> Why did you feel the need to bring up "skittles"?


Wait, are Skittles racist too, now?

I mean, I know they're colorful.  But this is ridiculous.

----------


## jmdrake

> I don't know what that means, but I'm pretty sure that it must be good. " _Trigger-happy,_" could we say?  That sounds pretty cool.
> 
> Now, to answer your riddle about yourself and what you wrote, let's see:  Hmm, these two fine citizens were not homeless.  You know that, right?  Ahh yes indeed; you've repeatedly reminded your interlocutors of this Crucial Factoid.  Let's see, they didn't smell bad either; you covered that.They weren't loitering.   They were well-dressed and handsome and exemplary in every way.
> 
> OK, we're making progress, digging down into this mystery.  Thank you for the invitation, by the way!  This is _so_ much more fun than you simply telling us.
> 
> So, having ruled all that out, what could you have possibly been implying when you wrote they were "freaking out when the 'wrong people' actually took them up on that"?  What criteria are you accusing Starbucks of using here?  How did they determine these two outstanding men of business were the, as you put it, "the wrong kind of people" for their establishment?
> 
> Well, I'll have to leave it there for now.  I feel like we're getting closer to the answer, though.  Just a little more hard thought and detective work and we should be able to figure your riddle out.


I'm trying to figure out your skittles riddle.

----------


## Suzanimal

> What is the contradiction?  I can't simultaneously think that a decision is stupid for business but a business has a right to make it?


Damn, we're almost on the same page. I simultaneously think that a decision is stupid for business but a business has a right to make it AND the two guys were $#@!s. 
I don't think they looked like thugs, though. I'm not sure why dannno quoted me with that comment AND I also don't like Amy Schumer.

----------


## jmdrake

> Wait, are Skittles racist too, now?
> 
> I mean, I know they're colorful.  But this is ridiculous.


You brought them up for a reason.  I didn't say they were racist.  I asked you why you brought them up.  Go ahead.  Enlighten me oh wise H_H.  /sacrasm.

----------


## timosman

> I'm trying to figure out your skittles riddle.


You could do us all a favor and stop trying to figure things out.

----------


## jmdrake

> You could do us all a favor and stop trying to figure things out.


You could just put me on ignore if you feel that way.  You could also stop being a prick.  But that would be asking too much I'm sure.

----------


## timosman

> What is the contradiction?  I can't simultaneously think that a decision is stupid for business but a business has a right to make it?


So what's your case against Starbucks?

----------


## H_H

> I asked you why you brought them up.  Go ahead.  Enlighten me oh wise H_H.  /sacrasm.


Wait, I was about to answer, but I see now your sacrasm tag.  So, you are saying the opposite of what you mean and you _don't_ really want me to answer?  I don't want to be accused of impolitely ignoring a sacrasm tag.

----------


## H_H

> Damn, we're almost on the same page. I simultaneously think that a decision is stupid for business but a business has a right to make it AND the two guys were $#@!s. 
> I don't think they looked like thugs, though. I'm not sure why dannno quoted me with that comment AND I also don't like Amy Schumer.


But do you like Skittles, though?

----------


## timosman

> You could just put me on ignore if you feel that way.  You could also stop being a prick.  But that would be asking too much I'm sure.


Correct. I am really interested when the foam will stop coming out from your mouth.

----------


## dannno

> Except *YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE THAT THERE IS ANY SUCH RULE WHATSOEVER!*




The guidelines do not say that sleeping in common areas is allowed and the rules specify what IS allowed - and guests are specifically not allowed to sleep in common areas:

https://housing.yale.edu/sites/defau...dbook17-18.pdf

The thing is, if you had guests the student could sleep in the common area and the guest could sleep in their bed, but to me that is just as burdensome on the common area and I believe the rules would be enforced in that case. 

Many other schools do specify that sleeping is not allowed in the common area in dorms. 

But that is all irrelevant to my argument. What is relevant is the fact that she would have done the same thing if some shady white lady was sleeping in there.

----------


## jmdrake

> So what's your case against Starbucks?


I thought it was obvious but maybe I wasn't clear.  Starbucks has a reputation for being a hangout space.  I always thought that was part of their business model, namely be the place people go to have informal meetings, get on the free wifi, and buy overpriced coffee which covers the cost of the perks.  Every Starbucks I've ever been in has plenty of power plugs so that 10 to 20 laptops can be plugged in.  One of my sons got involved with the "write a novel in a month" movement and the people that did that would usually meet at a place like Starbucks or Panera Bread Co where there was free wifi, plenty of places to plug in and they stayed open much later than the library.  Some people bought something, some people didn't, that was never a problem.  By contrast, most of the MacDonald's and Taco Bells around here only have a couple of plugs available.  Either you want to be that place were people hang out as a part of your business model, or you don't.

----------


## dannno

> I don't think they looked like thugs, though.


Like I said, it's also about attitude, but this guy didn't need any attitude to look like a thug:
[img]https://static01.********/images/2018/04/16/business/16xpstarbucks-promo/16xpstarbucks-promo-facebookJumbo.jpg[/img]





> I'm not sure why dannno quoted me with that comment AND I also don't like Amy Schumer.


It wasn't so much for entertainment purposes, although that clip is entertaining, the point is that the same person can dress or act a certain way and be accepted in a Starbucks, or they can dress and act another way and not be accepted in Starbucks, regardless of their skin color.

----------


## jmdrake

> Correct. I am really interested when the foam will stop coming out from your mouth.


Yes.  Being libertarian = foam in your book.  I get it.  Nobody should question whether or not Starbucks did something stupid because...well.....why exactly?

----------


## jmdrake

> [COLOR=#333333][FONT=&]
> 
> The guidelines do not say that sleeping in common areas is allowed and the rules specify what IS allowed - and guests are specifically not allowed to sleep in common areas:
> 
> https://housing.yale.edu/sites/defau...dbook17-18.pdf


 She wasn't a guest.  She was a student.  That's why when the police checked her ID that told the busybody she was out of line.

----------


## jmdrake

> Like I said, it's also about attitude, but this guy didn't need any attitude to look like a thug:
> [img]https://static01.********/images/2018/04/16/business/16xpstarbucks-promo/16xpstarbucks-promo-facebookJumbo.jpg[/img]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It wasn't so much for entertainment purposes, although that clip is entertaining, the point is that the same person can dress or act a certain way and be accepted in a Starbucks, or they can dress and act another way and not be accepted in Starbucks, regardless of their skin color.


Yes.  Because wearing a hoodie makes you a thug.

----------


## jmdrake

> But do you like Skittles, though?


Not may favorite candy by a long shot.  They're okay.

----------


## timosman

> What is the contradiction?  I can't simultaneously think that a decision is stupid for business but a business has a right to make it?





> Yes.  Being libertarian = foam in your book.  I get it.  Nobody should question whether or not Starbucks did something stupid because...well.....why exactly?

----------


## Suzanimal

> But do you like Skittles, though?


Don't be a troll. Timosemen keeps me busy with his cryptic use of emojis and weird obsession with Mr A.




> Like I said, it's also about attitude, but this guy didn't need any attitude to look like a thug:
> [img]https://static01.********/images/2018/04/16/business/16xpstarbucks-promo/16xpstarbucks-promo-facebookJumbo.jpg[/img]


That guy doesn't look like a thug.

----------


## jmdrake

> 


 Right back at you.

----------


## Danke

> Don't be a troll. Timosemen keeps me busy with his cryptic use of emojis and weird obsession with Mr A.
> 
> 
> 
> That guy doesn't look like a thug.


Exactly, he looks like he dressed up for a business meeting...

----------


## jmdrake

> Don't be a troll. Timosemen keeps me busy with his cryptic use of emojis and weird obsession with Mr A.
> 
> 
> 
> That guy doesn't look like a thug.


_You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Suzanimal again._

----------


## jmdrake

> Exactly, he looks like he dressed up for a business meeting...

----------


## timosman

> Right back at you.


You failed to include a couple of quotes to show the insanity of your statements.

----------


## jmdrake

> You failed to include a couple of quotes to show the insanity of your statements.


You are always free to include quotes you feel I "failed" to include.  Or you can just be a prick.

----------


## timosman

> You are always free to include quotes you feel I "failed" to include.  Or you can just be a prick.


I don't like repeating myself especially when engaging with somebody who ignores what is being said when convenient.

----------


## jmdrake

> I don't like repeating myself especially when engaging with somebody who ignores what is being said when convenient.


LOL.  You keep repeating yourself and then you claim you don't like repeating yourself.  Rich.

----------


## Suzanimal

> Exactly, he looks like he dressed up for a business meeting...


Mr A @timosman  has had meetings in his hoodie. 

Does he look like a "business man"? No but he doesn't look like a hood rat, either. 


Like I said before, I think everyone involved was wrong.

----------


## timosman

> LOL.  You keep repeating yourself and then you claim you don't like repeating yourself.  Rich.


Statements of this nature should be accompanied by quotes as you risk looking like a troll otherwise.

----------


## dannno

> [img]https://static01.********/images/2018/04/16/business/16xpstarbucks-promo/16xpstarbucks-promo-facebookJumbo.jpg[/img]
> That guy doesn't look like a thug.


Well then your thugdar is off, to me *everybody* in that photo looks like a thug.

----------


## jmdrake

> Statements of this nature should be accompanied by quotes as you risk looking like a troll otherwise.


Let's see.  You claim there are some quotes that make me look crazy, you don't quote them, then you say that I'm "trolling" by not providing quotes.  Hypocrisy much?

----------


## jmdrake

> Well then your thugdar is off, to me *everybody* in that photo looks like a thug.

----------


## jmdrake

> Mr A @timosman  has had meetings in his hoodie. 
> 
> Does he look like a "business man"? No but he doesn't look like a hood rat, either. 
> 
> 
> Like I said before, I think everyone involved was wrong.


You disagree with the "Starbucks manager was right to call the police on suspected thugs" narrative and instead say everybody was wrong?  You must be trolling.

----------


## timosman

> Mr A @timosman  has had meetings in his hoodie. 
> 
> Does he look like a "business man"? No but he doesn't look like a hood rat, either. 
> 
> 
> Like I said before, I think everyone involved was wrong.


You should clarify why my name is included here. It may sound like I object attending business meetings wearing hoodies.

----------


## jmdrake

> You should clarify why my name is included here. It may sound like I object attending business meetings wearing hoodies.


Probably because she's on record as having taking the same position I am in this thread.

----------


## timosman

> You disagree with the "Starbucks manager was right to call the police on suspected thugs" narrative and instead say everybody was wrong?  You must be trolling.


I think your adrenaline level is too high to be able to think clearly. Please start demanding apologies from everybody for being triggered.

----------


## timosman

> Probably because she's on record as having taking the same position I am in this thread.


Dude, not everything is about you.

----------


## Suzanimal

> You should clarify why my name is included here. It may sound like I object attending business meetings wearing hoodies.



I didn't want you to miss a Mr Animal story.

----------


## Danke

> Mr A @timosman  has had meetings in his hoodie. 
> 
> Does he look like a "business man"? No but he doesn't look like a hood rat, either. 
> 
> 
> Like I said before, I think everyone involved was wrong.


Real Estate meetings with a potential investor?

----------


## timosman

> I didn't want you to miss a Mr Animal story.


Thank you!

----------


## jmdrake

> I think your adrenaline level is too high to be able to think clearly. Please start demanding apologies from everybody for being triggered.


You have yet to explain what you're bitching about.  My adrenal level is fine thank you very much.

----------


## Suzanimal

> Real Estate meetings with a potential investor?


Who knows and I don't really care. Why they were there is irrelevant to me. 

I dunno if you read my earlier posts but my position has always been buy something or GTFO but I also said the Starbucks employee was a douche for calling the police. 

I think everyone involved acted like a jackass. I'm not defending the guys for being jerks, I just don't happen to think they looked like hood rats.

----------


## Ender

> I thought it was obvious but maybe I wasn't clear.  Starbucks has a reputation for being a hangout space.  I always thought that was part of their business model, namely be the place people go to have informal meetings, get on the free wifi, and buy overpriced coffee which covers the cost of the perks.  Every Starbucks I've ever been in has plenty of power plugs so that 10 to 20 laptops can be plugged in.  One of my sons got involved with the "write a novel in a month" movement and the people that did that would usually meet at a place like Starbucks or Panera Bread Co where there was free wifi, plenty of places to plug in and they stayed open much later than the library.  Some people bought something, some people didn't, that was never a problem.  By contrast, most of the MacDonald's and Taco Bells around here only have a couple of plugs available.  Either you want to be that place were people hang out as a part of your business model, or you don't.


Exactly my experience with Starbucks.

It's always been a great meet up place & many Starbucks are in the middle of bookstores; they were actually given a PR update a few years ago to be more like outdoor French cafes. 

This whole thing sounds like a stupid move on the manager's part- NOT what the ordinary customer experience is.

And, no, they don't look like thugs to me, either.

----------


## Ender

> Who knows and I don't really care. Why they were there is irrelevant to me. 
> 
> I dunno if you read my earlier posts but my position has always been buy something or GTFO but I also said the Starbucks employee was a douche for calling the police. 
> 
> I think everyone involved acted like a jackass. I'm not defending the guys for being jerks, I just don't happen to think they looked like hood rats.


And I can't +rep you again either.

----------


## Schifference

My point is if Starbucks makes policy regarding race then it does not matter what color you are. If they say you can stay in the store and use the restroom even if you do not purchase anything, then it doesn't matter how good you do or do not look or how good you do or do not smell. No one should ever be ejected from a Starbucks after the new training session.

----------


## timosman

> This whole thing sounds like a stupid move on the manager's part- NOT what the ordinary customer experience is.



Exactly. Is it possible for a Starbucks employee to do something stupid on their own? Just look at their CEO closing business for the entire afternoon to send all employees to a mandatory sensitivity training.

----------


## timosman

> My point is if Starbucks makes policy regarding race then it does not matter what color you are. If they say you can stay in the store and use the restroom even if you do not purchase anything, then it doesn't matter how good you do or do not look or how good you do or do not smell. No one should ever be ejected from a Starbucks after the new training session.


What if they are closing the shop for the day and you still need the restroom for a few more hours?

----------


## Ender

> Exactly. Is it possible for a Starbucks employee to do something stupid on their own? Just look at their CEO closing business for the entire afternoon to send all employees to a mandatory sensitivity training.


It's called PR- when a thing like this is pushed into everyone's face, so that it takes over the MSM, a smart business will have to "do" something to ebb the tide.

----------


## timosman

> It's called PR- when a thing like this is pushed into everyone's face, so that it takes over the MSM, a smart business will have to "do" something to ebb the tide.


You should have put quotes around "smart".

----------


## H_H

> Don't be a troll.


Just injecting some chaos into the system.  

Anyway, since you're taking the position that you dislike the behavior of everyone involved, allow me take the perfect inverse position.

I don't have a problem with any of the people involved.  I love them all.  I think they all acted predictably, according to their personal interests and situations, and, in fact, acted super, and are continuing to act super!  They are doing their part to Make America Great Again.  I heartily approve of this entire incident 100%, for reasons that even I do not fully understand.

Thumbs up to Starbucks, Thumbs up to the business boys, Thumbs up to the scheme-hatching lawyer, Thumbs up to the MSM, and Thumbs up to everyone on the Socia Mead keeping this in the forefront of public consciousness for the past few weeks.  Everybody's pulling together, doing their part.  

It's a beautiful thing, actually.

----------


## Danke

> Just injecting some chaos into the system.  
> 
> Anyway, since you're taking the position that you dislike the behavior of everyone involved, allow me take the perfect inverse position.
> 
> I don't have a problem with any of the people involved.  I love them all.  I think they all acted predictably, according to their personal interests and situations, and, in fact, acted super, and are continuing to act super!  They are doing their part to Make America Great Again.  I heartily approve of this entire incident 100%, for reasons that even I do not fully understand.
> 
> Thumbs up to Starbucks, Thumbs up to the business boys, Thumbs up to the scheme-hatching lawyer, Thumbs up to the MSM, and Thumbs up to everyone on the Socia Mead keeping this in the forefront of public consciousness for the past few weeks.  Everybody's pulling together, doing their part.  
> 
> It's a beautiful thing, actually.

----------


## Suzanimal

> Just injecting some chaos into the system.  
> 
> Anyway, since you're taking the position that you dislike the behavior of everyone involved, allow me take the perfect inverse position.
> 
> I don't have a problem with any of the people involved.  I love them all.  I think they all acted predictably, according to their personal interests and situations, and, in fact, acted super, and are continuing to act super!  They are doing their part to Make America Great Again.  I heartily approve of this entire incident 100%, for reasons that even I do not fully understand.
> 
> Thumbs up to Starbucks, Thumbs up to the business boys, Thumbs up to the scheme-hatching lawyer, Thumbs up to the MSM, and Thumbs up to everyone on the Socia Mead keeping this in the forefront of public consciousness for the past few weeks.  Everybody's pulling together, doing their part.  
> 
> It's a beautiful thing, actually.


That was funny. If you're going to troll, at least be entertaining.

----------


## timosman

> That was funny. If you're going to troll, at least be entertaining.


Sad and angry trolls are terrible.

----------


## Schifference

Starbucks is setting precedent. What happens if it is closing time and two respectable people of color are not finished in the restroom and are taking a very long time? Do they call the police? What if the people are Chinese, Indian, Korean, Jewish....Homeless?? 

Starbucks would have been better off instituting a policy that the establishment and its facilities are for paying customers and they reserve the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

Maybe they should have instituted a cover charge that goes toward your purchase or used to pay for your usage.

----------


## timosman

> What if they are closing the shop for the day and you still need the restroom for a few more hours?





> Starbucks is setting precedent. What happens if it is closing time and two respectable people of color are not finished in the restroom and are taking a very long time? Do they call the police? What if the people are Chinese, Indian, Korean, Jewish....Homeless?? 
> 
> Starbucks would have been better off instituting a policy that the establishment and its facilities are for paying customers and they reserve the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.
> 
> Maybe they should have instituted a cover charge that goes toward your purchase or used to pay for your usage.


..

----------


## pcosmar

> I was responding to the article you posted about the girl sleeping "in her dorm" who had the cops called on her. She was not sleeping in her dorm room, she was sleeping in a common area that has rules against sleeping.
> 
> And in Starbucks people sitting around reading a book have bought something. People with a laptop, probably have, but maybe not, maybe they are using the wifi. But maybe they will get tired or thirsty or hungry, so no reason to kick them out especially if the place isn't full.. as long as they are being quiet and are fitting in with the atmosphere. If they are dressed up like thugs and putting off a thug vibe then they will probably get kicked the $#@! out.


She was sleeping in the Common Room of her Dorm Building..

Cops were called because a Black person was there. and that she obviously did not belong..

except she did.

and when looking for the article,,it seems this was the second time a Racist has Called the Cops.. 
Just to start chit.

There are two problems,,, Racists and the Cops who respond to them.


it has nothing to do with "homeless".  (Never mind that more and more are being created)

----------


## pcosmar

> It's called PR- when a thing like this is pushed into everyone's face, so that it takes over the MSM, a smart business will have to "do" something to ebb the tide.


Well Yale should expel the trouble maker.

https://nowthisnews.com/videos/polit...t-for-sleeping

Racism is flat stupid,, but regardless,, racism exists.. everywhere.

----------


## enhanced_deficit

> *Starbucks drops Jewish group from bias training - POLITICO*
> 
> Apr 30, 2018 - Left-wing activists had attacked Starbucks over the ADL's involvement, citing the ADL's support for Israel and its arms-length relationship to the ...



As happened in case of  ADL, liberal boycott groups probably would next  demand Starbucks to cut ties with Trump Tower and Ivanka Trump/Kushner also as shocking report of them being blessed by racist Israeli rabbi who compared black people to 'monkeys' gets published in US media.

----------


## dannno

> She was sleeping in the Common Room of her Dorm Building..
> 
> Cops were called because a Black person was there. and that she obviously did not belong..
> 
> except she did.
> 
> and when looking for the article,,it seems this was the second time a Racist has Called the Cops.. 
> Just to start chit.
> 
> ...



That is incorrect, you have this all completely wrong. She would have called the cops on anybody who she felt didn't belong there, *regardless of race*. There are rules saying what the common area is to be used for, and sleeping is NOT one of those uses. Most dorms have rules against sleeping in the common area. If you ask someone who lives in a dorm to sleep in their common area for a few weeks, somebody will notice, they will get kicked out, regardless of race.

The other time she called the cops was because her friends were there who didn't live in the dorm and they were acting in a way that made her feel uncomfortable or unsafe.

----------


## timosman

> Well Yale should expel the trouble maker.
> 
> https://nowthisnews.com/videos/polit...t-for-sleeping
> 
> Racism is flat stupid,, but regardless,, racism exists.. everywhere.


So does stupidity to an even larger extent. Why isn't anybody railing against that?

----------


## H_H

> racism exists... everywhere.


 So I'm sure you are happy to see it finally getting more prominent coverage in the media, in the form of a ~semi-weekly story to stir up racial outrage and division.

With our universal and pervasive hatred and racism getting non-stop front-page coverage, at last our nation can come to grips with this problem, and perhaps finally find a solution.

----------


## dannno

*https://www.nmu.edu/housing/hallcommonarea

Residence Hall Lobbies*
For the most part, lobbies, the most public of residence hall common areas, serve a public reception function, as general lounge and recreation space, and occasionally a place for scheduled activities, including those intended for raising funds for residence hall students and their guests. The behavior of students, their guests, and visitors must reflect those primary functions and, therefore, inappropriate behavior – e.g., disorderly conduct, littering, *sleeping*, cutting hair, watching personal TV’s, etc. – *will not be permitted.


https://reslife.ucla.edu/regulations

*Sleeping or loitering in lounges, common or other public areas is not permitted.

----------


## pcosmar

> With our universal and pervasive hatred and racism getting non-stop front-page coverage, at last our nation can come to grips with this problem, and perhaps finally find a solution.


Nope..

The Divisions ARE being leveraged. And that is deliberate and calculated...

There are folks (and have been),, that are trying to eliminate the divisions. or to minimize the impact..

And there are Police. Who are just a problem.. from inception.

I have seen it personally too many times.. I walked through a near Riot in Prison over it.
 God Blessed me to see peace there.. and to make peace there.

Your world outside is becoming my world inside.. and I don't like seeing it.

----------


## pcosmar

> Residence Hall Lobbies[/h]


Residence hall lobbies are completely irrelevant.. as it was not the lobby.

And you can drop the dumb crap..

It  was deliberate harassment and the offender has been called out on it.
So you can stop pretending to didn't happen or it was something else..
https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2018/...n-common-room/



> “Universities are not utopias, and people of color experience racism on our campus as they do elsewhere in our country. This fact angers and disappoints me,” Salovey wrote. “Each of us has the power to fight against prejudice and fear. I hope you will join me in doing so.”


*this is not the first time Braasch has called the police to HGS.*

----------


## dannno

> Residence hall lobbies are completely irrelevant.. as it was not the lobby.


It was a common area, they use words like lobby sometimes, but it's the same thing. A study area with couches, sometimes there is a tv or games. 





> It  was deliberate harassment and the offender has been called out on it.
> So you can stop pretending to didn't happen or it was something else..
> https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2018/...n-common-room/
> 
> 
> *this is not the first time Braasch has called the police to HGS.*


LOL, ya, she got called out on it just like Starbucks manager got called out for performing her job duties as instructed... Yale is not being sensible, Starbucks is not being sensible, they are protecting themselves from the irrational leftists who want to come crashing down on them.

----------


## pcosmar

> It was a common area, they use words like lobby sometimes, but it's the same thing. A study area with couches, sometimes there is a tv or games. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL, ya, she got called out on it just like Starbucks manager got called out for performing her job duties as instructed... Yale is not being sensible, Starbucks is not being sensible, they are protecting themselves from the irrational leftists who want to come crashing down on them.


Dude,,the Racist bitch that called Police was a Leftist,, batppoop crazy feminist .. it is a friggin' university..a leftist indoctrination center..



> *
> not the first time Braasch has called the police*


it's a habit..

----------


## jmdrake

> *https://www.nmu.edu/housing/hallcommonarea
> 
> Residence Hall Lobbies*[FONT="] [/FONT]
> For the most part, lobbies, the most public of residence hall common areas, serve a public reception function, as general lounge and recreation space, and occasionally a place for scheduled activities, including those intended for raising funds for residence hall students and their guests. The behavior of students, their guests, and visitors must reflect those primary functions and, therefore, inappropriate behavior – e.g., disorderly conduct, littering, *sleeping*, cutting hair, watching personal TV’s, etc. – *will not be permitted.
> 
> 
> https://reslife.ucla.edu/regulations
> 
> *Sleeping or loitering in lounges, common or other public areas is not permitted.


LMAO!  So now your comeback is "Well it's against the rules *at a different university?*"  Seriously...that....that's your argument?  So if someone is arrested for going to the Bunny Ranch in Nevada the arrest is okay because prostitution is illegal in Alabama?   

Yale != North Michigan University.

I can't believe you would even try to float such a retarded argument.  Then again.....

----------


## Ender

> Well Yale should expel the trouble maker.
> 
> https://nowthisnews.com/videos/polit...t-for-sleeping
> 
> *Racism is flat stupid,, but regardless,, racism exists.. everywhere*.


Oh, I agree- and I've never understood it.

----------


## timosman

https://www.wsj.com/articles/starbuc...icy-1526918854




> May 21, 2018
> 
> Starbucks Corp. SBUX 0.31% tried to dig itself out of controversy Monday by attempting to clarify a policy toward nonpaying guests that generated an onslaught of weekend criticism.
> 
> The Seattle-based retailer on Saturday had said it would allow all guests in its U.S. company-owned stores to use its cafes, including its restrooms, whether or not they make a purchase. That announcement, which attracted some support, also drew complaints that cafes wouldnt have enough seats for paying customers and would turn into homeless shelters and drug havens.
> 
> On Monday, Starbucks revealed more about the policy, telling The Wall Street Journal that employees now have detailed instructions on what to do if someone is behaving in a disruptive manner, such as smoking, using drugs or alcohol, using restrooms improperly or sleeping.
> 
> At issue, in essence, is whether Starbucks views itself as a business that caters to customers, or a quasi-public place generally welcome to all. The uproar, which follows the arrest last month of two black men who wanted to use a Starbucks bathroom in Philadelphia, demonstrates the unusual spot that the nations biggest coffee chain holds in American culture.
> ...

----------


## H_H

Sound like time for more memes to re-counter-clarify.

----------


## navy-vet

I love it when the chickens come home to roost! Isn't karma awesome!

----------


## Madison320

> *Starbucks drops ADL from bias training amid protests*


I just saw this. Too funny! Obviously Jews did not make the "approved" minority list.

I wonder how much those groups get paid for the "diversity training"?

----------


## angelatc

> https://www.wsj.com/articles/starbuc...icy-1526918854

----------


## Schifference

Starbucks should close all interior bathrooms to public and have portable toilets managed by a private firm placed outside in the parking lot and put picnic tables outside with a sign inside area reserved for paying customers.

----------


## Suzanimal

The locations in the cities are going to fill up with hobos.




> Starbucks closing 8,000 stores today to give employees classes in rooting out racial bias
> 
> ....
> 
> During Starbucks’ training today, Schultz said, employees will "be sharing life experiences, hearing from others, listening to experts, reflecting on the realities of bias in our society and talking about how all of us *create public spaces where everyone feels like they belong -- because they do*."
> 
> Employees will also watch a video guiding them through the lesson and partly narrated by Academy Award-winning rapper Common.
> 
> ...


https://abcnews.go.com/US/starbucks-...ry?id=55501441

----------


## Swordsmyth

Starbucks has quietly walked back their "all inclusive" bathroom  policy, perhaps after realizing that their employees and customers alike  weren't responding well to the prospect of vagrants using their stores as a homeless shelter.

  As part of their new "Third Place Policy"  which the company shuttered 8,000 stores to pound into employees heads  on Tuesday, Starbucks says "We want our stores to be the third place, *a warm and welcoming environment where customers can gather and connec*t. *Any  customer is welcome to use Starbucks spaces, including our restrooms,  cafes and patios, regardless of whether they make a purchase*."
  Ok - so far so good for homeless people looking to catch some free  air conditioning this summer or simply drop that massive cabbage dump  that's been brewing. 
  But wait - what's this? Starbucks' new Third Place Policy also reads: 
 When using a Starbucks space, *we respectfully request that customers behave in a manner that maintains a warm and welcoming environment* by:
*Using spaces as intended*
*Being considerate of others*
*Communicating with respect*
*Acting responsibly*Uh oh, this isn't looking good for those looking to take a sink-bath while breathing in freshly brewed coffee...
 *On occasion, the circumstances of a customer’s disruptive  behavior may make it necessary to prohibit that customer from returning  to our stores*._Excuse us_?
 *In these situations, Starbucks partners should follow “Requesting A Customer Restriction” procedure* for U.S. company-operated stores.Starbucks Executive Vice President Rossann Williams gave an example  of how an employee should approach a "disruptive" customer using foul  language:
 “You are in our store every day, and we love that this is your third  place, but from one human to another human, the language that you are  using is making other customers uncomfortable. *So either you  have to change your behavior, and stay and be a part of our third place,  or I’m going to have to ask you to leave, and you can come back at a  later time*, when you feel like you can be a part of our third  place. And in fact if you want to go have a seat, I’ll bring you over a  cup of water, just to make sure that it’s a great rest of your day."Not so inclusive now, are we Starbucks? Sure, the marginally diverse  group of well dressed customers pictured below might be able to enjoy  using the facilities at Starbucks, *but what about the differently housed? What constitutes a "disruption?"* 

  The new 68-page employee guidebook and over a dozen videos shown  during the Tuesday training session included racial bias training, with  much of the coffee seller's new ethos focused on teaching employees to  be "color brave" - reminding everyone that institutional racism  permeates society.

More at: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-...ew-color-brave

----------


## timosman



----------


## timosman

*Coffee Cultivation Merely Extends The System Of Colonial Oppression, Recite Nations 180,000 Radicalized Starbucks Employees After 3-Hour Anti-Bias Training*




> SEATTLEIrrevocably changed after attending a mandatory training session on racial bias, the nations Starbucks employees reportedly returned to work Wednesday radicalized and united behind a new credo stating that coffee cultivation merely extends the system of colonial oppression. Welcome to Starbucks, you $#@!ing bourgeois pig, said barista Alexandra Balvin, delivering the greeting in lockstep with 180,000 Starbucks workers across the nation who were suddenly sporting camouflage-printed aprons, hanging up Che Guevara posters, and writing Imperialist Swine or AmeriKKKan on customers coffee cups. Can I interest you in one of our Ultra Caramel Frappuccinos? The coffee is all sourced from oppressed bean pickers exploited by the same capitalist forces that allow you to spend on a single beverage what they make during an entire week of grueling physical labor. Dont feel pressured to buy anything, though. Youre welcome to just sit at a table or use the bathroom to wash the blood of the working class off your hands. At press time, sources confirmed baristas at approximately 8,000 Starbucks locations were overturning tables and throwing them through plate-glass windows to notify customers that stores would be closing in 15 minutes.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Your world outside is becoming my world inside.. and I don't like seeing it.


Becoming?

It already is...one huge, open air, "free range" prison.

----------


## Suzanimal

> ...
> 
> with  much of the coffee seller's new ethos focused on teaching employees to  be *"color brave"* - reminding everyone that institutional racism  permeates society.
> 
> More at: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-...ew-color-brave


I had to look up color brave.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Starbucks has quietly walked back their "all inclusive" bathroom  policy...corporate feelgood double speak blarg blarg blarg


Oh that is precious.

Hoisted by their own petard, they, Starbucks, have no place to go, having painted themselves into a politically correct corner.

It is delightful watching them thrash around like a melting Terminator.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> I just saw this. Too funny! Obviously Jews did not make the "approved" minority list.
> 
> I wonder how much those groups get paid for the "diversity training"?


Ahahahahahah, oh this just keeps getting better.

----------


## Danke

Employees Find Needles, Drug Baggies and Blood All Over the Walls After Starbucks Opens Its Bathrooms to Everyone


by Cristina Laila May 24, 2018 398 Comments


You’re gonna love the new Starbucks!


Starbucks recently enacted its “Third Place Policy” which means employees should consider anyone who enters the establishment a customer regardless whether they make a purchase.


“We are committed to creating a culture of warmth and belonging where everyone is welcome,” Starbucks said.


Because customers who pay north of $5.00 for a fancy latte want to have a side of syringes.


Starbucks enacted this policy after they faced a huge backlash when two black men were arrested at a Philadelphia location.


This new policy is not only upsetting Starbucks employees, but paying customers as well, who are used to enjoying a pleasant atmosphere.


A Starbucks employee reportedly found syringes, drug baggies and blood all over the walls in the bathroom.


GROSS.


Fox News reported:


n a Starbucks subreddit, people are voicing concerns that the new policy will lead to stores being filled with homeless people and drug users. One user who claims they work at a Chicago Starbucks wrote that a homeless person using the bathroom got into a fight with a customer and police requested to see the store policy before taking action.


Someone claiming to be an employee who works at a store in the loop in Chicago said they hate the new policy because the store bathrooms have turned into a hub for drug activity. “We haven’t been allowed to change our bathroom codes since April. So almost all the junkies and homeless people know the code now. About once a week we find needles, drug baggies, blood all over the toilet or walls,” the user wrote.


The Wall Street Journal reported a Starbucks employee was pricked by a syringe in the bathroom.


Starbucks openly invited bums and drug addicts into their establishment. What could possibly wrong?


As if we needed _another_ reason to boycott Starbucks…


http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018...s-to-everyone/

----------


## Danke

> I had to look up color brave.



"Your truths"...So flat earthers need safe spaces?

----------


## Madison320

> Youre gonna love the new Starbucks!


That was fast. I figured it would take awhile for Starbucks to get overrun with homeless people.

----------


## timosman



----------


## Danke

> 



can't profile because of statistics...

----------


## timosman



----------


## phill4paul

> Starbucks burned by social-justice appeasement as growth stalls, stock plunges
> Coffee giant to shutter 150 stores next year instead of 50
> 
>    Starbucks may have appeased progressives with its social-justice workshops and open-bathroom policy, but such moves have failed to caffeinate the company’s bottom line.
> 
> The coffee giant’s stock took a tumble Wednesday after CEO Kevin Johnsonannounced that Starbucks would close 150 company-owned stores next year instead of the expected 50, with an emphasis on underperforming shops in densely populated urban areas, and lowered growth projections.
> 
> Mr. Johnsonacknowledged that the decision to shut down 8,000 U.S. stores on May 29 for anti-bias training, driven by the high-profile arrests of two black men in Philadelphia, played a role in the company’s sluggish second-quarter performance.
> 
> “In this current quarter, certainly we had an unplanned initiative driven out of the Philadelphia incident, we closed all our stores for training, we had to delay some marketing, but none of that is an excuse,” Mr. Johnson told CNBC. “The fact is the way I think about a growth company at scale is we’ve got to deliver consistent growth, month after month, quarter after quarter, and year after year. And we have not done that.”


https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...sement-growth/

----------


## timosman

> https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...sement-growth/


The SJWs from the board and the top brass ring should go. It may turn out they are really big on discipline instead of openness.

----------


## specsaregood

> “The fact is the way I think about a growth company at scale is we’ve got to deliver consistent growth, month after month, quarter after quarter, and year after year. And we have not done that.”


meh, this stupid mindset.  growth for the sake of growth, throw it in the woods.

----------


## dannno

> https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...sement-growth/


I disagree with the headline somewhat - 




> Starbucks would close 150 company-owned stores next year instead of the expected 50, *with an emphasis on underperforming shops in densely populated urban areas*, and lowered growth projections.


They are just shutting down their free bathrooms. Pretty funny.

----------


## Suzanimal

Starbucks says anti-bias training hurt sales

Starbucks officials said closing its stores nationwide for an afternoon in May to conduct anti-bias training impacted it sales over the past quarter.

The Associated Press reported Thursday that officials said shutting down the stores for the day lowered comparable-store sales by less than half a percent.

Starbucks held the training after an employee at a Philadelphia store called police on two black men who were at the store but did not order anything.

The incident sparked a national outcry. Starbucks also announced that going forward, stores would allow anyone to use its bathrooms without having to buy a product.

The company said in its third-quarter earnings report Thursday that total sales increased by 11.5 percent to $6.31 billion, compared to $5.66 billion during the same quarter last year, CNBC reported.

Revenue was slightly below estimates, with the company earning $6.23 billion compared to the expected $6.25 billion.

Sales increased by 1 percent at established stores in the U.S., after the number of sales declined but the amount spent during each visit rose, according to the AP.

Starbucks has cited health concerns over its beverages like Frappuccinos for lower sales.

http://thehill.com/policy/finance/ec...ing-hurt-sales

----------


## Swordsmyth

Starbucks locations in the Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue metropolitan  region will be shortly introducing needle deposit boxes in store  bathrooms after thousands of employees signed a petition demanding the coffee company do more to “protect employees.”
  “Exposure to HIV/AIDS, Hep C, Hep B, etc. is a risk in Seattle where  there is a heroin/hep c crisis. There is no vaccine for Hep C, and  Starbucks refuses to comment when employees mention this risk,” the  petition — posted by “Citizen Z” states. “Employees risk getting poked,  and DO get poked, even when following ‘protocol’ of using gloves and  tongs to dispose of used needles left in bathrooms, tampon disposal  boxes, and diaper changing stations.”

  The petition provides a brief understanding of the hazardous  conditions at work. First, there is a fear among employees that they  will come in contact with hypodermic needles that are regularly disposed  of in trash cans in bathrooms by opioid addicts and the homeless. The  petition provides an example of some employees having to receive medical  care and paying "almost two thousand dollars" for hospital bills  after-exposure. It goes on to say that employees must "pay out-of-pocket  for this before being reimbursed until Starbucks's company insurance  kicks in," adding that, "many baristas cannot afford the medical bills  and have to resort to "loans and credit cards."

  It goes on to say that there is a significant risk for pregnant  employees, or those with immune disorders, find themselves afraid to go  to work because of needles that are generally found in Starbucks  bathrooms throughout the Seattle region. “Making coffee should not come  with this kind of easily detoured risk,” the petition ends.

  As of Thursday afternoon, the petition has more than 3,700 signatures out of the 4,000 needed. 
  Business Insider spoke with Starbucks representative Reggie Borges,  who said employees are given a protocol for removing needles, but  new disposal boxes will offer more safety. 
  “These societal issues affect us all and can sometimes place our  [employees] in scary situations,” said Borges. “I can’t emphasize enough  that if our partners are ever in a position where they don’t feel  comfortable completing a task, they are empowered to remove themselves  from the situation… As we always do, we are constantly evaluating our  processes and listening to partner feedback of ways we can be better.”
  Starbucks will be installing FDA-cleared  sharps disposal containers in bathrooms around the city. Sharps  containers are made from rigid plastic, and allow  people to safely dispose of needles, syringes and other sharp medical  instruments that might otherwise pierce a trash bag.


More at: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...-sign-petition

----------


## angelatc

We are so screwed as a society.

----------


## H_H

> We are so screwed as a society.


How could that be???

Aren't they using the Peer Review process?

Or could it be that our authorities and authority figures are all *lying* to us?

----------


## tod evans

> How could that be???
> 
> Aren't they using the Peer Review process?*
> 
> Or could it be that our authorities and authority figures are all lying to us?*


Say it ain't so...........

----------


## Schifference

McDonalds in Bristol CT does not follow in Starbucks footsteps. I went into a McDonalds for first time in like forever last Sunday. I went into restroom to piss and wash my hands. When I was leaving I noticed a 30ish black guy that was at the sink with his shirt off. I left and rejoined my family. I later noticed him taking napkins out of the dispenser and saw him outside with other homeless people. That particular McDonalds has a sign that states something to the effect of, No loitering. Time limit 30 minutes while consuming purchased food.

----------


## Anti Federalist

*Starbucks Installs Needle Disposal Units After Workers Pricked With Bloody Hypodermics Left in Bathrooms*

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...-in-bathrooms/

 by Cassandra Fairbanks April 22, 2019 274 Comments


Starbucks bathrooms in at least 25 markets will be fitted with new needle-disposal units, as thousands of workers express concern about drug use in their bathrooms.
In May of last year, Starbucks announced that their bathrooms would be open to everyone after a viral outrage mob came after them over an employee calling the police on loitering customers.


“We don’t want to become a public bathroom, but we’re going to make the right decision 100% of the time and give people the key, because we don’t want anyone at Starbucks to feel as if we are not giving access to you to the bathroom because you are less than,” Starbucks chairman Howard Schultz said at the time. “We want you to be more than.”

Late last year, two Starbucks employees in Oregon were both struck by dirty needles while cleaning bathrooms in the same month, leading to a government investigation.

Learn more about RevenueStripe...
“The manager confirmed two employees had received needle stick injuries within the last month from hypodermic needles left uncapped in the bathroom, and stated needles and blood had been found in the bathroom at this location for over a year, but the frequency of needles being left in the bathrooms had increased significantly in recent months,” the Oregon OSHA inspection narrative states, according to a report from Business Insider.

Additionally, over 5,000 employees have signed a petition for the coffee giant to place needle disposal units in high risk bathrooms. Ironically, the author of the petition ended up also getting struck by a needle after it launched.

“The author of this petition ended up getting poked by a dirty needle themselves, after two other coworkers were poked in the same cafe, not long after starting this petition. Since then, the author went to local Seattle news crews, and only after their story aired did Starbucks put safe sharps disposals in six cafes in Seattle, but they were only the cafes that already had an L&I complaint and fine about this issue before. The author still has yet to hear directly from anyone at Starbucks Corporate. The author still fully intends on hand-delivering this petition to Starbucks HQ. The author is obnoxiously tenacious like that,” the petition author wrote in an update.

Currently, Starbucks workers are made to remove hypodermic needles themselves and place them in a disposal unit that is not located in the rest room. They are given regular rubber gloves or some times tongs to remove them. They are also told to double-bag trash cans so that the needles are less likely to poke through and stab them.

----------


## Suzanimal

Like a drug addict shooting up in a bathroom is going to put their needles in the proper bin.

----------


## Schifference

> *Starbucks Installs Needle Disposal Units After Workers Pricked With Bloody Hypodermics Left in Bathrooms*
> 
> https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...-in-bathrooms/
> 
>  by Cassandra Fairbanks April 22, 2019 274 Comments
> 
> 
> Starbucks bathrooms in at least 25 markets will be fitted with new needle-disposal units, as thousands of workers express concern about drug use in their bathrooms.
> In May of last year, Starbucks announced that their bathrooms would be open to everyone after a viral outrage mob came after them over an employee calling the police on loitering customers.
> ...


Why should these poor people have to be injecting themselves in the bathroom? Starbucks should furnish recliners and a special room where people can shoot up in style. They should also furnish new needles at no charge for anyone that wants them.

----------


## UWDude

> Why should these poor people have to be injecting themselves in the bathroom? Starbucks should furnish recliners and a special room where people can shoot up in style. They should also furnish new needles at no charge for anyone that wants them.


People opposed to this just hate the homeless and the poor.  They just have no compassion, and are not willing to consider other points of view, and therefore, other solutions.

Heroin addiction is the fault of the caucasiocispatriarchy, so it only fits the caucasiocispatriarchy's favorite coffee establishment should provide the solutions.

Yeah, I know, gentrification is a bitch.  Should have thought of that BEFORE you were born white.

----------


## specsaregood

> Like a drug addict shooting up in a bathroom is going to put their needles in the proper bin.


Just wait until the wrongful death suit from the family of somebody that ODs in their bathroom with the door locked.   They will argue that Starbucks encouraged and welcomed the behavior, and they'd be right.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Twenty bucks says the manager is a POC.


Turns out I was wrong:

*Former Center City Starbucks Manager Suing Company for Alleged Discrimination Against White People*

By CBS3 Staff October 31, 2019 at 1:00 pm

PHILADELPHIA (CBS)   The former regional manager of a Center City Starbucks where two black men were arrested last year for sitting inside the store is suing the company for allegedly discriminating against white people. In a lawsuit obtained by CBS3, Shannon Phillips claims she was fired less than a month after the high-profile incident because she is white.

She alleges the company discriminated in an effort to convince the community it properly responded to the incident.

Phillips lawyer, who refused to comment, is asking for a jury trial.

During the 2018 incident, Rashon Nelson and his business partner Donte Robinson were taken away from the Starbucks in handcuffs after a manager called police because the two had not made a purchase. Instead, the men told the manager they were waiting for a third person to arrive for a business meeting.

Protesters of the arrests believe the men were targeted because of their race.

A Starbucks spokesperson says they are ready to defend their case in court.

We deny the claims of the lawsuit and are prepared to defend our case in court, the spokesperson told CBS3.

----------


## Occam's Banana

> WaPo:
> 
> Starbucks Chairman Howard Schultz said Thursday  that the company will now open its bathrooms to everyone, regardless of  whether a purchase has been made, following the arrest of two African  American men who had asked to use the bathroom at one of its downtown  Philadelphia coffee shops.
> 
> Schultz, speaking at the Atlantic Council in Washington hours before  he was slated to receive a business leadership award, said the company  is changing its policy, after weeks of controversy, because it wants  everyone  customer or not  to feel welcome at Starbucks.
> 
> We dont want to become a public bathroom, but were going  to make the right decision a hundred percent of the time and give people  the key, Schultz said, because we dont want anyone at  Starbucks to feel as if we are not giving access to you to the bathroom  because you are less than.


https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1535271831346855937

----------


## Anti Federalist

> meh, this stupid mindset.  growth for the sake of growth, throw it in the woods.


UNBAN specsaregood.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> UNBAN specsaregood.


#NeanderthalLivesMatter

----------


## dannno

> https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1535271831346855937


Nobody cares about that anymore.. they only care what genders are allowed in what bathrooms.

----------

