Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

PayPal Withdraws Plan for Charlotte Expansion

paypal.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 72 posts

Re: PayPal Withdraws Plan for Charlotte Expansion

#31

Post by zeveb »

coco1989 wrote: post #19
zeveb wrote: post #7

Absolutely shameful for PayPal. This is not about equality and inclusion, but rather about using government violence to force people to support that which they oppose. A black baker should not be required to bake a cake for the KKK; a homosexual florist should not be required to provide flowers to the Westboro Baptist Church; neither should a Christian baker or florist or software developer be forced to employ his ar…

What is your point? That being awful is ok? This is a religious thing in this case so a government should not be in the business of protecting one religion or any religious belief - or we should discuss how far to go with it - this ... is too far

> What is your point? That being awful is ok?

No, that being awful (by some folks' lights) should be legal — i.e., that violent force (which is the ultimate backstop of any law) should not be employed to force people to be nice to one another.

> This is a religious thing in this case so a government should not be in the business of protecting one religion or any religious belief

Government shouldn't be involved, period. If someone wishes to do business with someone else, good (or bad) for him; if not, good (or bad) for him all the same. No-one should be forced to do business with someone he dislikes: not PayPal, and no-one else either.

Re: PayPal Withdraws Plan for Charlotte Expansion

#32

Post by throwaway5752 »

Grishnakh wrote: post #28
throwaway5752 wrote: post #24

I will be super interested in Red Hat. They threatened to leave for Atlanta in the past five years. This could not be further from their corporate values, and they have a highly distributed workforce and a big base of operations in Massachusetts and a fair number of people in the Bay Area. McCrory is a real idiot. The money in NC comes from the cities. They may have won a Pyrrhic victory in the gerrymandering, but no…

Well, the people of NC are getting exactly what they deserve. They voted for this. And spare me the whining about gerrymandering. The Governor is elected by everyone in the state; gerrymandering has no effect on that election. If this were really an issue of gerrymandering, we would have seen a crappy bill passed by the Legislature, and sent to the governor, and promptly vetoed because the governor more closely repre…

Well, technically not. A roughly 50/50 turnout resulted in one party controlling the general assembly around census/redistricting time. You cannot make an honest case that it wasn't an aggressive redistricting based on a thin majority, and the governor wouldn't have had to veto anything if this bill didn't make it out of the house (which if would not have, in the pre-redistricting NCGA).

The governor is at high risk to lose his reelection to the state AG later this year because of this and his perception of being in the pocket of his former employer (Duke Energy) because of his behavior in several high profile coal fly ash pond industrial accidents. He positioned himself as a social moderate and business friendly, and he has spent all his capital and then some on this.

edit: Not sure how this comes off as whining. I am giving an honest account of this bill/the NC political background as I can. You're obviously right, the voters own this in the end.

Re: PayPal Withdraws Plan for Charlotte Expansion

#33

Post by gstn »

zeveb wrote: post #31
coco1989 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is your point? That being awful is ok? This is a religious thing in this case so a government should not be in the business of protecting one religion or any religious belief - or we should discuss how far to go with it - this ... is too far

> What is your point? That being awful is ok? No, that being awful (by some folks' lights) should be legal — i.e., that violent force (which is the ultimate backstop of any law) should not be employed to force people to be nice to one another. > This is a religious thing in this case so a government should not be in the business of protecting one religion or any religious belief Government shouldn't be involved, peri…

So, let me understand: do you think that a person running a lunch counter should be able to refuse to do business with someone because of, let's say, their skin color?

Re: PayPal Withdraws Plan for Charlotte Expansion

#34

Post by throwaway5752 »

Grishnakh wrote: post #29
alistproducer2 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's pretty clear the OP is a troll, but at least we got your enlightening response from it. The law is even more distasteful than I knew.

Yeah, no kidding about the enlightening response. This guy has the worst username ever ("throwaway5752"); he's one of the best and most informative posters I've ever seen here.

Thanks :)

It was throwaway at first, but I've grown fond of it.

Re: PayPal Withdraws Plan for Charlotte Expansion

#35

Post by gist »

stblack wrote: post #8

This is the first time I have ever read news that reflects PayPal in a positive light. Never thought I would ever write these words: way to go, PayPal!

I view it as dangerous actually.

That is corporations with money, power and lawyers determining and overriding voters in yet another way. Doesn't matter how you see this particular issue. The next time it could go in another direction. [1]

[1] Live by the sword, die by the sword.

Re: PayPal Withdraws Plan for Charlotte Expansion

#36

Post by kstrauser »

zeveb wrote: post #31
coco1989 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is your point? That being awful is ok? This is a religious thing in this case so a government should not be in the business of protecting one religion or any religious belief - or we should discuss how far to go with it - this ... is too far

> What is your point? That being awful is ok? No, that being awful (by some folks' lights) should be legal — i.e., that violent force (which is the ultimate backstop of any law) should not be employed to force people to be nice to one another. > This is a religious thing in this case so a government should not be in the business of protecting one religion or any religious belief Government shouldn't be involved, peri…

> Government shouldn't be involved, period. If someone wishes to do business with someone else, good (or bad) for him; if not, good (or bad) for him all the same.

First, that case law was settled over 50 years ago when we ruled segregation illegal. Contrary to your wishes, that ship has sailed.

Second, businesses are permitted to serve the public and subject to lots of laws. You can't say "I don't want to comply with the health code, and it's unfair that the government is using violent force to make me wash my oven!" Similarly, all three branches of government have definitively ruled that you can't refuse to do business with someone based on their attributes (race, gender, religion, etc.). There's no meaningful line you can draw between "I don't sell cake to gay people" and "I don't sell cake to black people". Both are explicitly illegal in most places and morally reprehensible in all.

Re: PayPal Withdraws Plan for Charlotte Expansion

#38

Post by rconti »

gist wrote: post #35
stblack wrote: post #8

This is the first time I have ever read news that reflects PayPal in a positive light. Never thought I would ever write these words: way to go, PayPal!

I view it as dangerous actually. That is corporations with money, power and lawyers determining and overriding voters in yet another way. Doesn't matter how you see this particular issue. The next time it could go in another direction. [1] [1] Live by the sword, die by the sword.

They already do, for tax breaks, regulatory arbitrage, etc.. We might as well cheer it being used for good.

Re: PayPal Withdraws Plan for Charlotte Expansion

#39

Post by oliwarner »

gist wrote: post #35
stblack wrote: post #8

This is the first time I have ever read news that reflects PayPal in a positive light. Never thought I would ever write these words: way to go, PayPal!

I view it as dangerous actually. That is corporations with money, power and lawyers determining and overriding voters in yet another way. Doesn't matter how you see this particular issue. The next time it could go in another direction. [1] [1] Live by the sword, die by the sword.

Overriding? They're not writing the law here, they're going where the best laws are (or where the worst aren't). NC gets to keep its shitty laws, PayPal just won't be part of it.

What's your alternative here?

Post reply on HN