By Patricia Lee Sharpe
Starbucks czar Howard Schultz just told Fox news that he’s not running for President as a Democrat because there’s too much infighting within the Party. Sounds to me like we’ve got another I-know-best billionaire, someone who’s used to instant absolute obedience. Sure, infighting can sometimes descend into mutual suicide, but much squabbling is the democratic process at work. Many points of view. Furious debate. Ultimately an agreed upon modus operandi.
And sometimes not. Just another round of debate.
Seems like Schultz is really miffed and sulking because the Democrats aren’t welcoming his self-nomination with hosannas. And so he goes whining to Trump string-puller Fox, choosing the one news channel that will joyfully use him to tarnish Democrats who are willing to work their way up within the party—from school board to mayor to Congress and so on, thus acquiring the skills and demonstrating the temperament to do the job of joining with the co-equal branches of government to make America work.
Exactly what the current billionaire (or probably much less-aire) is unwilling to do. What, if anything, we’ve learned from two years with Donald J. Trump as president is that all-powerful CEO'S are totally unsuited for the position of chief executive of a democracy with divided powers. These guys don’t like limits. They like autocrats.
Already Schultz is using his hiring and firing authority to pressure Starbcks employees to read his own books (half price offers, for instance) and, worse, by instructing them to tell customers he’s a great boss—or, essentially, keep their mouths shut. Evidently there’s a some quiet, anonymous push back against that "back me" decree by employees who don’t think much of their pay levels and work conditions, especially considering that they themselves are the source of the whip wielder's obscene wealth. (Note: I admire people who build fabulously successful businesses—but only up to a point. If they aren’t already paying their staff and employees generously enough to keep profits to a reasonable level, they need some pretty high tax brackets to do the distribution they refused to do voluntarily on the way up.)
Meanwhile, consider the bad example we’re living with now. Donald Trump has been running his properties with low paid non-documented workers, while railing about illegal immigration to the point of holding Federal workers hostage to his demands for a WALL–or else! Yes, he’s been outed on his employment practices. Reform, supposedly, is on the way. We’ll see.
Back to the imperious Mr. Schultz. We already know that his baristas aren’t rolling in dough. Would a President Schultz be any better attuned to the needs of Federal workers or structurally disadvantaged Americans , or would he, like the Donald, be blithely ready to furlough them—or make them work without pay or or rip up the safety net, because Congress won’t bow to his unilateral unalterable demands?
Doubtful. Howard Schultz is one more self-nominated savior with nothing but his own self-esteem to recommend him. The time to stop him is now. Don’t give up coffee. Give up Starbucks. People who once happily lived in Trump Towers have been suing to get the Trump logo off their buildings. Maybe we coffee fiends should start boycotting Starbucks. That’s easy for me. I live in a city where Starbucks has plenty of competition the behemoth hasn’t managed to squash out of business. But look around and send Howard Schultz a powerful message. See if there’s a better place to get your joe and your free wifi.
In 2016, many American’s fell for the notion that an uber entrepreneur can run a government better than the bureaucrats. We should think twice before we fall for that line again.
Recent Comments