Whether you go to Starbucks or not is kind of irrelevant. The broader population needs to know how Starbucks is anti-worker. They are happy to take more money from the consumer, and push the "partner" narrative, but it falls apart when the partners want to be treated with dignity.

That's a story everyone needs to hear before they spend $5+ on a drink.

[–] NotAPenguin@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The broader population needs to know how Starbucks is anti-worker

And what should the broader population do with that information?
Stop going to starbucks perhaps?

When you're against something you should stop financially support it.

[–] IHeartBadCode@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

When you're against something you should stop financially support it.

Yes. But it should be said, it cannot just stop there. People need to indicate to their various governments that union busting should be prosecuted no matter the billionaire doing the busting or the third party they hired.

I think too often people rely on the “you should vote with your wallet” that they forget, we cannot buy our way out of social ills. Spending our money on the “correct” product and not spending it on the “incorrect” product isn’t a panacea. And worse it can breed superficial support in companies to simply convince you to buy more of their shit. I think we’ve made enough memes about Eddard Stark warning us that with Pride month, the rainbows are coming to social media.

I think that’s the key point. Not going to Starbucks is one thing BUT it cannot stop there, otherwise no Real ™ change is actually going to happen. Lots of people are just tangentially caring about the issue for lots of various reasons. We need to implement change at every level. People should talk to their mayor, their city council, governor, State assembly, and what not.

Starbucks spends money so they can see results quickly, and since us common folks are not wealthy beyond belief, we’ve got to take the long and time expensive route. It cannot just be “just stop spending your money there” that alone is never going to work and breeds even worse results, with ads just pretending they’re buddy buddy with you.

[–] ForestOrca@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

Thank you for this. I'm in just this position. I would never spend money at Starbucks. And I would like to support the workers efforts to unionize. So I'll look into ways that I can do that, and to spread the word about Starbuck's insidious anti-worker corporatism.

[–] Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It reminds me when the Starbucks CEO pitched that he wants to run for president. And some random guy was like, "Wtf nooooo." And that single handedly destroyed his whole platform

[–] downpunxx@kbin.social -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

no dipshit. whether you got to starbucks or not is immanently relevant. if you go to starbucks, you should stop. if you don't go to starbucks you shouldn't start. it's literally the point of the initial post and the discussion of it.

[–] kae@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 year ago

A wee bit aggressive there.

Read the rest of the thread. "I can't boycott what I don't use" is everywhere. A boycott is more than money, it's getting the message out there, which was the intent of my post.