Live data from Hacker News

Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

nytimes.com

31–40 of 144 posts

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#31
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I miss Four Barrell since moving out of SF. I don't really understand why they don't seem to be doing as well as Blue Bottle or Stumptown or even Ritual.

What about Sightglass?

Verve is also really good and just opened an SF location

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#32
post #16

That's a major bummer. Nestle is one of the most evil companies there is--their CEO once said water isn't a human right. Nestle uses cocoa from slave labor and bottle water in drought stricken communities and national forests on expired permits, and do shady stuff like hiring the regulator who gave them their water license. Very few companies are as vile and amoral as Nestle. Unfortunately, this will taint Blue Bottl…

You can do much better the Philz, depending on where you are at there are lots of good options. In you're in the bay area look up Four Barrel, they roast great beans and their SF coffee shop is really nice.

I've really been enjoying Black Powder

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#34
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Counterpoint: Saying water isn't a human right is different than saying not everyone should have access to water. I generally agree that water isn't a right. I think it's a misuse of the word "right" and a misapplication of the concept of a "right". Rights define what you're free to do for yourself, and the various ways in which those freedoms can't be infringed upon by others. For example, you have a right to free s…

You're explicitly making a semantic argument. When people say "water is a human right" or "Internet is a human right," all they mean is that governments should use public funds to improve (or guarantee) access to those things. Of course you're correct about the way the word "right" is generally used in philosophy and ethics. But that's absolutely not the definition being used here.

It's exactly a matter of semantics. Condemning people for saying water isn't a human right is also a matter of semantics.

The Nestle CEO was using the correct definition of "human right". Now people are going to attribute their inaccurate definition of the term to his statements, and condemn him for it (like the parent comment did).

It's all semantics.

Now how about we start using the word correctly so we can avoid this? Or how about the liberals condemning him try being intellectually honest for once, and stop deliberately and knowingly misinterpreting what he said just because it's convenient for the argument they're trying to make?

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#35

As this thread will ultimately will end up discussing the corporate evil that Nestlé apparently is, I want to, for the sake of the discussion, point out the reasonableness of the CEOs statement regarding water as a human right: He argues water should have a market value so that it is treated more like a resource that should be well managed. Of course a state can also do this and in my opinion should, but of course as…

And I don't get exactly what it means to declare water a human right. There are certainly people in the world not getting the clean water they need. But how do you solve this? You set up an international agency to acquire water for them. But where do you get the funding for this agency? If it really is a _human_ right, is this agency above local laws? What are the restrictions on this agency? Can this agency ban the…

Positive rights are very much a thing - we have a positive right to at least some education in the first world.

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#36

As this thread will ultimately will end up discussing the corporate evil that Nestlé apparently is, I want to, for the sake of the discussion, point out the reasonableness of the CEOs statement regarding water as a human right: He argues water should have a market value so that it is treated more like a resource that should be well managed. Of course a state can also do this and in my opinion should, but of course as…

And I don't get exactly what it means to declare water a human right. There are certainly people in the world not getting the clean water they need. But how do you solve this? You set up an international agency to acquire water for them. But where do you get the funding for this agency? If it really is a _human_ right, is this agency above local laws? What are the restrictions on this agency? Can this agency ban the…

Exactly. I often hear this whole "water a human right" argument from the left and when asked about what would change they really can't answer that. I think everyone knows how water is essential for the human life but declaring it a human right won't change anything. After all what would we do the next day after making it a human right?! Send the US Army to Malawi bearing Super Soakers?

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#37
post #16

That's a major bummer. Nestle is one of the most evil companies there is--their CEO once said water isn't a human right. Nestle uses cocoa from slave labor and bottle water in drought stricken communities and national forests on expired permits, and do shady stuff like hiring the regulator who gave them their water license. Very few companies are as vile and amoral as Nestle. Unfortunately, this will taint Blue Bottl…

You can do much better the Philz, depending on where you are at there are lots of good options. In you're in the bay area look up Four Barrel, they roast great beans and their SF coffee shop is really nice.

I wish counter culture had cafes in the Bay -- they have a huge roasting center in Emeryville and their beans are delicious.

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#38

Well, and how many are conscious of the fact Nestle owns Nespresso? You're basically drinking mediocre folgers in a pod and paying the premium. No amount of branding will divert from the fact that local, organic alternatives can be had for less.

Just because a company owns two of the same thing, doesn't make them the same. Using that logic, Blue Bottle is now just Folgers.

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#40

That's a major bummer. Nestle is one of the most evil companies there is--their CEO once said water isn't a human right. Nestle uses cocoa from slave labor and bottle water in drought stricken communities and national forests on expired permits, and do shady stuff like hiring the regulator who gave them their water license. Very few companies are as vile and amoral as Nestle. Unfortunately, this will taint Blue Bottl…

Counterpoint: Saying water isn't a human right is different than saying not everyone should have access to water. I generally agree that water isn't a right. I think it's a misuse of the word "right" and a misapplication of the concept of a "right". Rights define what you're free to do for yourself, and the various ways in which those freedoms can't be infringed upon by others. For example, you have a right to free s…

I think that even by your definition water is a human right. Should we not have access to plumbing anymore lets say, and there was a freshwater lake near where we lived, we should be allowed to get our water from it and no other human should stop us from doing so simply because they said that they owned it.
Post reply on HN