Comments on: Skip Starbuck’s for World AIDS Day

By: amy

amy — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 16:07:13 +0000

i just want to say that you’re an idiot. duh, starbucks is a business. they’re not opening their doors just to make a buck on world aids day. they’ll roll in the dough no matter what day it is. i think it’s generous for them to donate anything at all. and for the average human being who may not have the money or free time to spend helping out charities, i’d say it makes them think twice about being charitable and may make them feel better about ordering what may be a fancier drink for one day. in addition, because of the ignorance that abounds not only in this country, but in our world, a person may not feel comfortable openly supporting aids research and education. anonymity is an option at starbucks. give the business and its patrons a break and let them do something they consider to be important. ps, it’s not such a bad thing for people to feel good about what they do.

By: Dave

Dave — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 03:47:56 +0000

Well, it’s not a reason to drink starbucks if you don’t already. But there is the concept of voting with your dollar. I think in a free market, it is not just utility that should influence purchasing decisions, but also morality. By paying money for a good or service, you are adding resource utilization capacity to a business or individual. You are essentially deciding that what it does is worth some resource control. From this standpoint, if companies began to see voluntary donations as adding to that value, it could theoretically become a common practice. Good charities coud then compete for the donations of companies. It seems like a somewhat viable answer to the question of how things could get done where there is no direct profit incentive.

By: Dale

Dale — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 05:24:52 +0000

I didn’t say it was a bad thing. I merely offered a suggestion for a much more effective alternative for those sincerely interested in charity. Also, it’s very possible for it to “not be a bad thing” and still not be “something to be applauded”. I suggest you read my first comment in this thread.