231–240 of 841 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given that the pictures of kids in cages came from before our current president was in office, this is the first time I've heard anyone call president Obama both evil and xenophobic.
Yes, Obama is evil and xenophobic, and a war criminal by every standard. That anyone still listens to him is a testament to how broken our politics are in the US.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But to expect that a _federal agency_ will be denied service from a private entity, especially for essentially political reasons, is lunacy. Um, think you've got this backwards. Private entities shouldn't have to take on anyone they don't want as customers (for whatever reason - do you have to justify who you do or don't want in your livingroom?), but publicly-funded institutions shouldn't be able to deny service o…
I am strongly against a private business being able to refuse service to a person/organization on political grounds, even when the "victim" may seem to be performing evil actions, as long as it is not breaking any laws. One should not discriminate on the basis of race, political orientation, gender, origin or religion. Refusing service is clearly a form of discrimination. When you aim that towards your own Government…
Denying service to ICE the organization isn't even remotely comparable to denying service to actual human beings.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I really dislike labeling any recognition of an issue as "cheap". It was not that long ago that any positive recognition of even gay people existing in modern media outside of farce, recognition by corporations was seen as a HUGE step forward as far as making people or concerns SEEN. Maybe some CEO's out there are all Snidely Whiplash and putting out all their messaging for free PR, but I'm not going to assume that a…
I understand the position, but nowadays Twitter is full of #BlackLivesMatter posts, pride flags can be seen commonly, all while, to bring the two most currently visible things that haven't changed, the sex/race pay gaps are still there, and Black folk are still much more likely to die during police interventions. I guess I'm glad that the recognition and posts from CEOs is there, but posting rainbow flags and "Black…
Protests happened in the past too? Do we discount that?
It's all cynicism and divisiveness these days about how someone isn't doing enough, even among folks who share values ... in favor of I don't know what standard ...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But to expect that a _federal agency_ will be denied service from a private entity, especially for essentially political reasons, is lunacy. Um, think you've got this backwards. Private entities shouldn't have to take on anyone they don't want as customers (for whatever reason - do you have to justify who you do or don't want in your livingroom?), but publicly-funded institutions shouldn't be able to deny service o…
I am strongly against a private business being able to refuse service to a person/organization on political grounds, even when the "victim" may seem to be performing evil actions, as long as it is not breaking any laws. One should not discriminate on the basis of race, political orientation, gender, origin or religion. Refusing service is clearly a form of discrimination. When you aim that towards your own Government…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Guess what? Politics are interwoven in every aspect of our lives. Yes, but also companies exist literally only to make money. Companies can't exist without workers. Once a company finds itself in a position of conflict of interest between political views of workers and point of existence of the company - where contracts bring money... we're going to see interesting things. I wonder, who will break first? The company…
> Yes, but also companies exist literally only to make money. False.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> could jeopardize their stance with other, less controversial, entities That would, of course, be a terrible and illegal abuse of power and essentially be the government policing political speech by private individuals. What an indictment of our government (and I don't mean a single person, but of the system itself) that this seems to be an uncontroversial statement. Because I agree, it's true, and it's the mark of…
Choosing business partners based on the degree to which you can expect stability & reliability from them is not corrupt. Not everything has to be political & tribal.
But let's take your example, since you aren't the only one who interpreted it that way. That would be covered by the scope of the government contract being awarded during the normal bidding and contract process. The contract would stipulate the terms by which one party could pull out of the deal. What would be illegal would be for political influence to discourage the awarding of that contract.
There are a few comments in here already decrying “politicization”. Guess what? Politics are interwoven in every aspect of our lives. You cannot choose to “avoid” them; even suggesting you can be politically neutral is a political stance that comes from a place of privilege, because only the privileged can avoid experiencing negative political consequences inside their bubble. Collaboration with ICE is collaboration…
IMO it's foolish for a company to wade into these waters at all unless activism is part of their brand. If you signal you're going to take a stand it ends up having to be around everything and people are going to have a lot of conflicting agendas. Or you could just sell software tools to people who pay for them.
What a bummer that workers are publicly demanding this, and (presumably) seeking press attention on it. I'm no fan of ICE – a very large percentage of my friends in the US are immigrants, and I generally want my country to be a welcoming one. ICE has certainly committed unethical and probably illegal acts (probably true of most federal agencies). But to expect that a _federal agency_ will be denied service from a pri…
I think it's great that employees can direct this kind of business decision. It's also unfortunate (I am assuming) that the employees have much less of a stake collectively than other shareholders. There's a good chance they would make more informed decisions if they were to fail or be successful based on those decisions. For what it's worth, I think the employees would still make these demands, it would just be nice…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
(Edit: Removed “people are lazy”, poor choice of words) People feel despair, hence pushing on Github instead of the political process. I’m all for unconventional leverage, but Microsoft is a trillion dollar org and has shareholders; this isn’t some VC funded dual class share startup where the founder has a blank check to do whatever they want. Edit: Can’t give up on the political process, that’s where the change happ…
You've got this backwards. What is happening here is the real political process - people congregating and trying to achieve their political goals through organizations they can actually influence. Organizing to convince your employer, or your local government, or your school board or whatever organization you can to push things in some direction is the political process. Sure, voting is one aspect of it, but it is by…
As someone with entities that are registered to do business with the federal government, I’d provide services to ICE, because ICE isn’t the problem: how they’re regulated is the problem. Not providing services to ICE doesn’t solve that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Guess what? Politics are interwoven in every aspect of our lives. Yes, but also companies exist literally only to make money. Companies can't exist without workers. Once a company finds itself in a position of conflict of interest between political views of workers and point of existence of the company - where contracts bring money... we're going to see interesting things. I wonder, who will break first? The company…
> Yes, but also companies exist literally only to make money. False.