For various reasons the most convenient route to a late lunch was the nearest McDonald’s, so after my wife’s physical therapy session, I reluctantly hit the drive-thu. All went surprisingly well at first: for a welcome change, someone who could speak clear-English was at the mic, and the order was correct on the screen (though the prices for fast food now are absurd). Two sandwiches, one small fries, no drinks, easy-peezy.
The order was simple, Grace didn’t bother to check the bag when I handed it to her at the window, but it felt light, so she checked after we had pulled away. Sure enough, there was only one of the two sandwiches we had ordered.
I slammed on the brakes and stepped in front of the window where the car behind us was waiting for an order. “You gave me only one of the two sandwiches I paid for,” I said. “What did you order?” the young woman snarled. Actually I didn’t remember: it was Grace’s sandwich that was missing. “Don’t you know? It was the previous order,” I said. The woman rolled her eyes, turned, and handed me the missing sandwich, sneering all the while, like it was my fault.
I shouted to no one in particular, “What kind of quality control do you have here? What if got home and discovered that half my order was missing?” The woman turned her back on me and left the scene. Some guy who looked like the manager caught my eye for a second. “Do you train anyone here? Is there any accountability when employees screw up?” He turned his back on me. No one said “I’m sorry.” That would have literally been enough to satisfy me. Instead, it was pure defiance.
Well…
1. Since the lock-down ended, this kind of rude, defiant, “consider yourself lucky to be serves at all” treatment has become routine.
2. I have never been one to ignore rude and incompetent service, but I’m officially escalating the battle. If I had been alone, I would have pulled over and gone in the store to confront the manager.
3. The woman who acted like I was imposing on her for insisting on my order was a member of a group that certain parties inform me daily is being kept from life success by systemic racism. Anyone who does their job like that, whose interpersonal skills are that poor and who does not know that the concept of customer service involves serving the customer in an efficient and friendly manner, is not going to have much success and doesn’t deserve success.
4. Who is accountable for this vicious cycle? Who is going to break it? Parents should teach children how to interact with people. Schools need to spend more time on this than on telling kids that they have been curse to live in a racist country. Employers need to train their workers and insist on minimum standards. Managers need to be accountable.
5. Of the three convenience outlets near my home that we have occasion to use, two—the CVS and the McDonald’s, are miserably managed, under-staffed and employ exclusively rude and badly trained minority staff. One, the 7-11, is owned and managed by an elderly Hispanic man who handles the night shift. His rainbow staff is friendly, efficient, and a pleasure to deal with. I have seen the owner correct staff in the store: he treats them all like family. I show my gratitude by going there instead of the other two hell-holes even though the 7-11 food is mostly awful and the prices are exorbitant.
6. Finally, I am increasingly inclined to believe that the proliferation of badly socialized incompetents and assholes is one of the reasons mass shootings seem to be proliferating as well. Our technology-stuffed existence is needlessly complicated, making it difficult for the less intellectually gifted among us to just get through the day. The break-down in the social balm of just thoughtful and respectful conduct in commercial transactions makes human interactions as frustrating as the mechanical ones. I just saw an old “Sopranos” episode in which Tony’s nephew Christopher, after waiting in line for a pastry order, was rudely ignored by the proprietor when his turn came to be served because a regular customer walked in the door. Tony’s nephew protested, and was curtly told by the guy manning the counter that it was his store, and he would serve whomever he chose to in whatever order he chose to.
So Christopher pulled out a gun, made the owner fill a box with pastries, and shot him in the foot. My dad once told me to always serve a customer as if he was the most important person in the world. I would add, “Or might be a psychopath who might snap at any moment.”
Ethics Alarms 
3. The woman who acted like I was imposing on her for insisting on my order was a member of a groups that certain parties inform me daily is being kept from life success by systemic racism.
What does her skin color have to do with anything?
Anyone who does their job like that, whose interpersonal skills are that poor and who does not know that the concept of customer service involves serving the customer in an efficient and friendly manner, is not going to have much success and doesn’t deserve success.
No one who is a poor worker deserves success, but what does her skin color have to do with anything?
It appears you’re saying minorities aren’t successful because they’re poor workers, and not because of racism.
In her case, it’s true. But she would probably be the first to argue that she can’t get ahead because of systemic racism.
Why do you think she would argue that?
Amateur Sociology and Applied Statistics.
Because there is a large segment of society that is broadcasting such a view.
They teach people like her that her struggles are not her fault.
They teach that people are trying to keep her down.
They are teaching people like her that her failure is beyond her control.
Given people’s tendency to blame misfortune on others, it is a very convincing message.
And, of course, the people peddling that message advertise themselves as the solution to the problem.
-Jut
There’s also a large segment who don’t teach that view.
So why do you think she would take that position?
Because she didn’t take responsibility for one missing sandwich.
People like that don’t think they are at fault for anything, much less their difficult lives. As such, she is the target audience for systemic racism indoctrination.
Army Grog asked, “Why do you think she would argue that?”
Like bias; to ignore regularly observed patterns makes people stupid.
So it’s a good idea to assume a unique individual you interact with fits a certain pattern of thinking based on how they look because other people who look like them think a certain way?
Not necessarily, add the way they act that corresponds with observed patterns and you should get the idea.
You may be on to something here, Steve. She may very well have concluded that an angry man shouting at no one in particular was a danger to her and other employees. Could’a fit a pattern.
Oh, bite me. I wasn’t screaming at anyone, and I wasn’t out of control. I was being emphatic because no one was taking charge or dealing with me at all, and they had screwed up. You’ve been biased on this topic before. I had a legitimate complaint, and nobody was dealing with it properly, or respectfully. My reaction was reasonable, theirs was not. I was there. You weren’t.
I didn’t say screaming. I said shouting at no one in particular, as you said you had done. I expect you were driving since you “slammed on the brakes” and that therefore you had placed the order, yet of the three items in the order, you could not tell her which item was missing, and that might have made her a bit suspicious. The fact that you got in between the next car in line and the window might have added to that. If I have a bias in situations like this at all, it is a bias in favor of the low-level employees who have to deal with a wide variety of unpleasant and difficult customer situations. True, I was not there, so my evaluation is based on what was presented and an effort to see the situation from the point of view of both the customer and the employee.
You see, I don’t care whether an employee is low level or high level, or what they are paid or if they are getting paid at all. If they accept money for a job, or accept the responsibility of one, then their obligation is the same: do the damn job as well as possible, do it politely and with the customer’s experience in mind, and take responsibility for your screw-ups. Your attitude that there is some kind of sliding scale where the more “low-level” the job is, the more justifiable poor performance and attitudes, is one that harms everyone involved.
Nobody really knows what another person is thinking. From a very young age, humans begin to make assumptions about other’s thought patterns based on patterns from observations and cause and effect. These patterns then form biases that are sometimes recognized and discarded, or they are not recognized and instead are reinforced via confirmation bias.
Sometimes these assumptions are correct, much of the time they are not.
Right now, I’m forming a thought pattern that third parties who jump into a defensive position on any discussion about a negative social interaction involving a minority and majority participant has bound racism as a cilice around their soul. The discomfort causes them to lose all perception of nuance and they ironically are convinced they need to stamp out the definitive racist thought in an other’s brain.
Perhaps they harbored similar biases in the past and discarded them based on firsthand observations. Perhaps more likely the urging of more militant factions of DiAngelo and Kendi caused even the correct assumptions this person previously held to be discarded as sediment among the bottom of the cognitive dissonance scale where true racism resides.
It’s not incorrect to observe that minority cultures in the U.S. are permeated with violent, separatist, sexiest, grievance-based, anti-authoritarian messages, and that those messages have very negative outcomes on that population’s interactions with society. It follows that it’s prudent to locate oneself away from any culture that exhibits those fruits. To blindly declare oneself anti-racist and swing an accusatory cludgle of racism against everyone who express thought patterns in line with observed reality is to deny that reality.
Those who deny reality for idealism do so to their own peril, like Pippa Bacca. To be confused why others don’t see and also discard the “racism” is simply because you had tilted at a racism windmill.
Army Grog wrote, “It appears you’re saying minorities aren’t successful because they’re poor workers, and not because of racism.”
Poor workers are not successful, period, end of argument.
It appears that you may be unethically attributing minorities poor success to unsupported claims of racism and I say that that opinion is signature significant. Now if I’m misunderstanding your opinion please correct me.
It appears that you may be unethically attributing minorities poor success to unsupported claims of racism
What else would you attribute it to?
Army Grog wrote, “What else would you attribute it to?”
That question in this context is transparently obvious obtuseness and therefore it’s sealioning. I read through this thread and I think you’ve been given a reasonable fair shake to come around, but it seems to me that you are in search of some kind of racist “gotchas” and I don’t think you’re going to get them here so you’re going to go away having to read the things you assume are between the lines to smear participants.
This could be a fabulous test for Extradimensional Cephalopod’s communication skills so he could show everyone at Ethics Alarms how to effectively use his deconstruction method.
Good job not answering the question!
Well, let’s see: the Mayor of New York claims his failures are due to racist critics. The Vice-President has claimed criticism of her is caused by racism. The lack of Oscar nominations for black actors was attributed to racism. Lori Lightfoot, a total failure as mayor of Chicago, blamed racism for her defeat. And so on. Celebrities and high-profile African-Americans are teaching that rationalization by their conduct. Maybe it’s not what any one A-A citizen is thinking—but plenty of role models and exemplars are encouraging that point of view.
Minority workers who do lousy jobs can and often do attribute their deficits to racial bias. White workers have to devise some other excuse, and often do. In recent years, especially since the George Floyd freak-out in the DC area, I have increasingly encountered A-A service people in the DC area who begin encounters with a “chip on their shoulder,” treating me as hostile from the beginning. I resent it. I have been raised to assume everyone is a potential fried and a decent human being until they prove otherwise. Part of the proof is owning up to mistakes and not being defensive.
And no, what I said is that poor workers are unsuccessful because they are poor workers, but they are increasingly being conditioned to blame their problems on bias and prejudice.
And no, what I said is that poor workers are unsuccessful because they are poor workers, but they are increasingly being conditioned to blame their problems on bias and prejudice.
I’m confused. You’re saying poor workers are being conditioned to blame their problems on bias and prejudice?
No, genius. What he’s saying is that lousy workers of color are being conditioned to believe the problem isn’t that they suck, but that they can’t get a fair shake or quick success because RAAAACIST.
But it’s not just lousy workers who are being told this right? It’s all black people correct?
Do you not think racial bias affects them getting a fair shake or quick success?
He also didn’t say that…he said lousy workers in general.
Obviously lousy black workers can’t blame society for their issues, and would be wrong to do so. But no black leaders are arguing that, so that’s why I’m confused.
“But no black leaders are arguing that, so that’s why I’m confused.”
WHAT? Black leaders routinely blame racism for their own failures! Why? It works.
Black leaders are definitely not arguing that lousy and lazy workers who don’t apply themselves should blame society and racism for their own failures.
“ And no, what I said is that poor workers are unsuccessful because they are poor workers, but they are increasingly being conditioned to blame their problems on bias and prejudice.”
I also dont know how poor workers face prejudice. Is there some movement advocating for lazy workers I’m unaware of?
“Black leaders are definitely not arguing that lousy and lazy workers who don’t apply themselves should blame society and racism for their own failures.”= Rationalization #64, “It isn’t what it is.” That is exactly what they are arguing, and have for a long time
No they’re not arguing that. And if you think that, then you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what they’ve been saying for decades.
If you have any proof to back that up, I’m all ears.
I already did back it up. This is sealioning and trolling. Go to another post. This is your last comment on this one.
Members of that group routinely use the color of their skin to justify why they are held back. My interpretation of Jack’s point was that something other than her race was the cause of her being less successful.
I often wonder why the question of what does the color of one’s skin matter when claims of racism are leveled at those who typically don’t use the color of their skin as a reason for a lack of economic success.
1. Members of that group routinely use the color of their skin to justify why they are held back.
yes
2. My interpretation of Jack’s point was that something other than her race was the cause of her being less successful.
yes
But unless this person was arguing her skin color and racism was holding her back (when obviously it’s because she’s an awful worker), I don’t see how these two statements are connected.
What’s the connection.
First the person in question isn’t arguing anything in this post. I suggest that the usage was to more clearly identify an individual without resorting to race. in order to avoid claims of racism. Lets evaluate.
First, Jack’s interpretation of events:
“You gave me only one of the two sandwiches I paid for,” I said. “What did you order?” the young woman snarled. Actually I didn’t remember: it was Grace’s sandwich that was missing. “Don’t you know? It was the previous order,” I said. The woman rolled her eyes, turned, and handed me the missing sandwich, sneering all the while, like it was my fault.
I have no reason to believe that Jack is embellishing the behavior of his observations to make an unwarranted attack on a poor low level worker. I too have had encounters with all sorts of workers who make me feel as if I was an imposition.
Jack’s analysis:
3. “The woman who acted like I was imposing on her for insisting on my order was a member of a group that certain parties inform me daily is being kept from life success by systemic racism. Anyone who does their job like that, whose interpersonal skills are that poor and who does not know that the concept of customer service involves serving the customer in an efficient and friendly manner, is not going to have much success and doesn’t deserve success.”
The point of contention is clearly illustrated by Jack in the actual bullet point. He never stated that she claimed she was being victimized and Jack made no reference to her skin color other than to say she belongs to a group that others preach systemic racism is the cause of holding her back. He was merely pointing out that members of this group are taught to use racism as a crutch for poor behavior.
I would posit that everyone here would know her race without having him mention it. I would not think it unfair or bigoted of him to make some reasoned assumptions based on his perception of her behavior as well as what he knows about racial politics in this country. After all, it’s his lived experience that counts, right?
It is for that reason alone that the first sentence in bullet point three is relevant. How does one go about breaking the cycle of using racism as a crutch for poor behavior if you are denied the ability to identify the one group who systematically utilizes racism as an excuse for underperforming in an economy?
That is why the reference to skin color was important in this post.
I think it’s an important point because it is a tragic development and a trap for minority groups. I believe I have mentioned the epiphanal experience I had many years ago while casting a production of “H.M.S. Pinafore.” In a true rarity, four students, all decent tenors, had auditioned for the role of “Ralph,” the romantic lead. One was an easy stand-out and got the part; I offered the others roles in the chorus. The one black student in the group of four turned down the chorus, telling me that he “didn’t think racial discrimination should be part of casting decisions.” I was ticked off. I told him that he was the weakest singer of the four considered by the part; indeed, he couldn’t reach the highest notes “Ralph” had to sing and the others could. He knew this. It was clear in the call-backs. I told him that my only concern as a director is casting the strongest possible cast, and that he was using his race as a crutch and an excuse for his own inadequacies, a destructive and obnoxious habit. I told him, “If you want to get the part the next time, learn to sing better. It’s really just that simple.” He still didn’t accept the chorus offer.
I often wonder what became of him.
Agreed.
The issue of behavioral crutches is not limited to any given race. I would posit that true white supremacists rely on such crutches to cover for their own inability to prevail in competition against those of other demographic/racial groups.
What so many progressives who espouse the concept of systemic racism fail to realize is that they are engaging in the same rhetoric as those nasty Nazis who labeled the German economic woes on the Jewish population. Then as now, one group becomes the scapegoat. It is easy to blame others for one’s own lack of industry or success.
Maybe the woman was originally from Oakland. When I lived there, we called this kind of poor service “Oakland Syndrome.” Oakland Syndrome has a long and storied history.
How can Oakland have a syndrome? I thought that “there is no there there”…
I will literally drive miles and miles out of my way on a trip to avoid having to go to a McDonalds and Burger King is a very close second. The food is terrible these days, I’m sorry but that shit they put in burgers now is not beef meat – they’re lying to everyone, the service sucks, attitudes suck, orders are routinely messed up, the lack of effective communication is a constant annoyance and their food is way too expensive now. I’ve basically boycott them, permanently.
A recent boycott, apparently, since you appear to be familiar with the products, the service and attitudes, and the prices. Curious as to the sample size involved since I have not experienced any of that, except for the prices, which are high, but I suspect competitive.
It’s so long since I’ve eaten at McDonald’s that I couldn’t honestly tell you when I started to boycott them. Burger King is definitely more recent.
I will second Steve’s assessment. When I went to our local McDonalds, the most consistent experience I had was one of incorrect orders. Our Burger King opened around 2010 and closed in 2021. It had a reputation in town as having terrible food. I can’t say anything bad about the service there, because the one time we went (shortly after it opened), the service was decent…the food was NOT, and we did not go back.
Seriously, since the pandemic, I have found that whatever I make at home tastes better, is MUCH cheaper, the service is far-and-away more pleasant, and I don’t mind not tipping myself.
….and anytime I do have to go to a fast food place because I’m nowhere near home, I’m mentally prepared with the fast that the experience WILL BE terrible and expensive and a regret. But knowing that going in makes it a bit more palatable. I miss the good ole’ days.
“I shouted to no one in particular, “What kind of quality control do you have here? What if got home and discovered that half my order was missing?” The woman turned her back on me and left the scene.”
Apparently her training was complete enough for her to know she should not engage with an angry customers shouting outside her window, especially apropos in a state which permits concealed carry.
With regard to Army Grog’s question (still not answered), there does seem from time to time to be an undercurrent of racist comments here along with assumptions about people (c.f. A M Golden above) that are not justified by the stated facts.
Here’s Johnny,
Not to toot my own horn, but I think I just addressed those concerns. (Toot toot!)
I think I understand Jack’s comment (and the follow-up comments). I do not believe they are racist, but are a sarcastically cynical take on the incessant focus of all issues through a lens of race.
-Jut
You tooted twice, so I went back and read your comments twice. I agree that it is possible, maybe even likely, that the young woman in question has been taught the things you mention. But, there is no evidence in the post about her that indicates she bought in to or accepted that kind of teaching.
To say she was a “member of a groups that certain parties inform me daily is being kept from life success by systemic racism”, or to say “she would probably be the first to argue that she can’t get ahead because of systemic racism” imply, without directly saying it, that she would think and act in a certain way because of the color of her skin. That is what I mean by an undercurrent of racism.
I prefer to see people as individuals, even when they voluntarily associate themselves with a group. For me, it is especially wrong to make assumptions about a person based on their perceived race.
“member of a group that certain parties inform me daily is being kept from life success by systemic racism” does NOT in any way make any assumption about the individual. It is a 100% factual statement. Your comment has an “undercurrent of racebaiting,” and not for the first time, either.
“member of a group that certain parties inform me daily is being kept from life success by systemic racism” does NOT in any way make any assumption about the individual. It is a 100% factual statement
And you disagree with that?
What? I WROTE that. Of course I agree with it. You need a nap.
So you agree minorities are kept from success because of racism?
That’s what my question was referring to.
Thanks, I agree.
I dont understand why Jack brought up systemic racism if he’s not implying that this person would blame their failures on systemic racism…even though no black leader is arguing that black people don’t have personal responsibility to do their best and that it’s okay to be a lazy and a crappy worker who doesn’t apply themselves but it’s then okay to blame systemic racism on those failures.
I’m sure there are people out there who think that but that’s not what black leaders are arguing, so I dont get the point of mentioning that unless this worker said it.
The entire theory behind BLM is that presumed racism explains bad outcomes for black Americans. What black leaders did not endorse the movement, based on the presumed racism that helped end the life of petty hood who was overdosing on one of the many illegal drugs he was habitually buying, selling and taking? That false assertion was used to justify mass protests, demonstrations, riots, property damage, injuries, deaths, and afterwards, the destructive DEI fad which declared that minority personnel should be hired, promoted and advanced, not for superior performance, but on the basis of minority status alone.
Pretending reality doesn’t exist because it’s inconvenient is not a rebuttal. Black Lives Matter was and is a statement that systemic racism, not the actions of individuals, is the cause of negative outcomes. Maybe there were acknowledged black leaders who didn’t endorse its central lie, but I can’t think of any right now.
Sorry I’m confused,
The entire theory behind BLM is that presumed racism explains bad outcomes for black Americans.
Not only BLM but black leaders for decades. Do you not agree with this idea?
Sealioning: is a type of trolling or harassment that consists of pursuing people with relentless requests for evidence, often tangential or previously addressed, while maintaining a pretense of civility and sincerity (“I’m just trying to have a debate”), and feigning ignorance of the subject matter.
The sealioner feigns ignorance and politeness while making relentless demands for answers and evidence (while often ignoring or sidestepping any evidence the target has already presented), under the guise of “I’m just trying to have a debate”, so that when the target is eventually provoked into an angry response, the sealioner can act as the aggrieved party, and the target presented as closed-minded and unreasonable.
From Wikipedia
How are you confused? Of course I don’t agree with the idea that in 21st century America current racism is a constant burden and hurdle on African Americans. The concept of presumed racism is essentially anti-white bigotry. Slavery and Jim Crow inflicted deep and still festering wounds on black culture and society. Minorities of any kind have special problems in a society. That does not translate into pervasive systemic racism.
Of course I don’t agree with the idea that in 21st century America current racism is a constant burden and hurdle on African Americans.
Okay well then you’re living in a fantasy, don’t understand current racial issues facing African Americans, and probably shouldn’t be voicing your opinion on these things.
Well that didn’t last long. And this person isn’t smart enough to be Masked Avenger.
Why, what a nuanced, substantive, convincing rebuttal! I told you that you are suspended from this thread. Do better on another, or go away. Another trollish “I believe what I believe and so there!” response and I’ll invoke the Stupidity Rule.
Alert All! The jerk called “Army Grog” is officially banned. Nobody can say he wasn’t given a chance to comment fairly and substantively. He was warned, he did what he was directed not to do not once, but twice.
You are BANNED. I told you to find another post to comment on because you abused the privilege on this one. You posted again anyway; I gave you a second chance. Any comment you make anywhere from this point on will be spammed the second I see it, along with any replies it gets. Too bad.
Jack.
Army Grog wrote, “Okay well then you’re living in a fantasy, don’t understand current racial issues facing African Americans…”
That’s pure delusion. You’re blinded by bias and it appears to have made you stupid.
Delusion: a false belief or judgment about external reality, held despite incontrovertible evidence to the contrary, occurring especially in mental conditions.
Army Grog wrote, “…and probably shouldn’t be voicing your opinion on these things.”
That appears to be pure psychological projection.
So in the short time you’ve participated here at Ethics Alarms you’ve shown us that you’re a complete moron and an internet troll. Of course there will be some other woke individuals that participate here once in a while that might tend to agree with some of your projectile vomiting of chunky Grog but even they aren’t complete morons.
You argue a lot like another internet trolling race baiting moron that I recently came across, Jemele Hill, she too is a morally bankrupt race baiting attack dog that cares nothing about actual truth and facts. To people like you two, it seems like public discourse means slinging ad hominem attacks and reading stuff between the lines that doesn’t exist to try an find some kind of allusive race “gotcha” to use in an endless defamation campaign. In my opinion, you’re a morally bankrupt hack and a troll.
Here’s how I suspect Army Grog reacts to Ethics Alarms…
Army Grog, read the second sentence from point 3 again…slowly.
“The woman who acted like I was imposing on her for insisting on my order was a member of a group that certain parties inform me daily is being kept from life success by systemic racism. Anyone who does their job like that, whose interpersonal skills are that poor and who does not know that the concept of customer service involves serving the customer in an efficient and friendly manner, is not going to have much success and doesn’t deserve success.”
The first word in that second sentence is “anyone.” Not “anyone black”, not “anyone of color”, not “straight, white, Christian men”, and not “a lesbian.”
Anyone who does his/her job poorly shouldn’t expect success. The OP was being the opposite of “racist”. He was using the fallacy of blaming failure on genetics and melanin content – a perceived condition – to contrast it with failure based on poor work ethic and poor customer service – a real condition.
You have taken the minor point, blown it up, assumed racism, and maybe missed the larger issue.
I shouted that question after my previous, reasonable questions went unanswered and were ignored. Of course you engage with angry customers who are angry for good reasons. You say, “I’m very sorry, sir, for the inconvenience.” How hard is that?
Or you say, “get out!”
They could be wrong, of course, about this particular individual. In formal logic, it’s a fallacy to argue from the general to the specific (or vice versa). That doesn’t mean that statistical probabilities should be discarded in real life situations. Prejudice, at its root, is a hard-wired survival skill.
In an area like DC, where the mayor has had “Black Lives Matter” painted in huge block letters on a city street, and where most public officials push CRT propaganda in their statement, I don’t think AM’s assumption is unreasonable at all.
Nope, totally reasonable.
An assumption about an individual is unreasonable when it is based on what someone else has said or done, even a big city mayor, unless there is no such thing as individuality.
I assume that someone who screws up and won’t say, “I’m sorry for your inconvenience” is a badly trained asshole. I make assumptions about conduct based on that conduct. I encounter a lot of black service-providers who communicate resentment, dislike and hostility through body language, looks and tone of voice. I’m a stage director: I’m sensitive to all that. Maybe this has nothing to do with racial bias on their part. I’m certainly open to alternative explanations.
Uh. No. It is a tenet of progressivism that minorities are never, ever, ever racist or prejudiced. Minorities in thought and deed are as pure as the driven snow. They are perfect. Their only problem is the existence of white people. For example, during the gay marriage campaign, it became evident that everyone not only had to consider gays and lesbians worthy of equal rights and equal protection, but everyone also had to consider gays and lesbians to be vastly superior to straight people. For example, the idea that some gay guys sneered at heterosexuals as “breeders” was preposterous. So, no, it’s simply not racist to think a minority person is acting a certain way because they are predisposed to dislike majority people. There is an undertone in the comments here. It’s called realism.
I think the combination of globalism, rampant money printing, open borders and government regulatory malfeasance is creating a permanent underclass of serfs. Serfs aren’t happy people, and no amount of shouting at the serfs is going to make them happy. The deliberate agitation efforts by the elites to make the serfs fight amongst themselves instead of with the elites doesn’t make the serfs happy, either.
Agreed NP. I will add that contemporary serfs are unwilling to put forth the necessary effort to learn a marketable skill. The demand for tradesman is sky high and they can make excellent bank. This industry offers paid apprenticeship programs throughout the country. Or I suppose one could join Antifa instead. They are always looking to hire pasty white skinny arm disgruntled losers.
“So Christopher pulled out a gun, made the owner fill a box with pastries, and shot him in the foot. ”
Never get between an Italian and his pastries. 😀 All silliness aside, Christopher did attempt to play by the rules, but the jerk behind the counter disrespected him. It wasn’t because the guy was a regular, it was because he had been in line and stepped out to put gas in his car. OK, his response was colorful, about going out, banging the guy’s sister, coming back Saturday and going to the head of the line, but he had a point. The rest of it was just a bully’s fantasy. Most people would just walk away and never come back. These days Christopher would also have had his picture taken about six times and been picked up pretty quickly.
BTW, Christopher gets his when he crashes his car while drugged up, Tony sees that a baby seat where his (Christopher’s) daughter could have been sitting has been destroyed, and chokes him to death on his own blood.
Seriously, Jack, did you think yelling at someone you couldn’t reach would get you anywhere? There’s no patience these days for customers who come in angry and ranting. Everyone’s seen that guy throw the smoothie in Connecticut because he flipped out. There’s always the chance that someone will see an angry customer and decide to take preemptive action. It’s hard to argue ethics with a bullet between your eyes. The last few years have also made people defensive and paranoid and willing to resort to violence. You know if you go in there someone’s going to photograph you and your license plates, and the next thing you know this woman calls for blackup and comes to your house.
From the host: A Friends latest unpermitted trollish comment begins, “If you don’t like McDonald’s, don’t go there.” The Mark of Weenie! I didn’t read the rest, and only caught that idiotic response to the post by accident.
Yeah, that’s how we make the world better: avoid the jerks, the exploiters, the incompetent, the unethical. Live and let live. If San Francisco is filthy and dangerous, don’t go there! If CVS pretends to take complaints seriously and lies to customers, take an extra 10 minutes each way and get drugs some place else; Let badly trained, anti-social employees treat you like crap and say nothing that might upset them. This is how entropy works in society, and how things fall apart. The Universal Shrug.
Not me. Never me.
I thought Jack threw you out. Get lost.
Well, that’s a perfect way to deal with unwelcome comments. Now, where have I seen that approach before?
No, I think Jack said that A Friend exiled himself. Jack just accepted his “noisy withdrawal.”
-Jut
And held him to his own threat. Which I have always done, not just here, but everywhere.
It was actually a good example of a unilateral contract, but AF is a musician, not a lawyer. He said, I will quit the blog if [banned commenter ] isn’t reinstated. I said, “Deal!”
I’ll just erase AF’s comment, whatever it is, and let your comment stay up.
My parents are immigrants from a middle eastern country run by regime that billed itself as “socialist” and whose leaders justified their seizing of power (and the social and economic changes that made) using very similar social justice excuses and arguments US lefties and most Dems use nowadays.
My parents say that the attitude, work ethics (or lack thereof), and pride in quality of work (or lack thereof) they observe in workers nowadays, especially young ones, are very reminiscent of what they encountered back home after a couple decades of socialist rule.
You hear very similar observations from people who grew up in other socialist hellholes. This is our future as long as Dems continue their drift to the left, and voters continue to vote for them for one reason or another
What country, Ron? I came of age among Cuban refugees and their parents and grand parents growing up in post Castro Miami.
Workers of the world unite! But then there’s the Will Rogers saying: “I never treat my employees like partners. If I did, they’d start acting like partners.”
Would this work ethic be a symptom of a stronger economy as these people are all that remains, everyone else in higher demand/pay employement.
I surrendered to bad service long ago. I realized that most everything can be done better if I do it myself.
So, when in need of garbage to eat, I decided to be a better customer. Flipping the responsibility of the business transaction and percieving gain(a cheese burger) rather loss($). Now, McDonald’s is my customer and when I rarely interact with them, I treat them as the best customer that I have. Not coincidentally, the overall payment and experience that I receive from them is consistently better, yet my $ remains the same.
Open question:
I have noticed a very consistent behavior with many store clerks regarding who says thank you. Seems that a very large percentage only expect the customer to say it, but ideally shouldn’t it be mutual?
Many businesses are not essential and therefore they need the customer more than the customer needs them, which places the onus of saying thank you more on the clerk. In reality many clerks do not see it this way, for a variety of reasons no doubt. In fact, it is not unusual to observe the attitude they are doing me a big favor by checking me out. Peculiar.
Batman:
“I have noticed a very consistent behavior with many store clerks regarding who says thank you. Seems that a very large percentage only expect the customer to say it, but ideally shouldn’t it be mutual?”
To quote Apu, “Thank you, come again.”
But, yes, in a free market, every exchange could be concluded with each party thanking the other. I forget if it was Thomas Sowell or Walter Williams who made that observation. But, yes, in a free market, each party desires the property of the other more than they value their own. So, each should perceive themselves better off afterward. Of course, that line gets blurred when you are dealing with an hourly employee who gets the same pay if they serve 5 people or 25 people.
-Jut
Wait. You actually had the chance to talk to an employee? Huh. Maybe it is the drive-through line, which is always challenging.
I went to McDonald’s this past Friday. I went inside to order and was instructed to use the kiosk. Well, that was an interesting experience. First, I had to open the kiosk app, which took a bit. Then, I ordered my meal (a Quarter-Pounder with cheese, regular fries and a soda). Cool. Right? Well, not really, because then I had to figure out how to navigate to complete the order. There was no “complete order” until the very end, AFTER I was prompted through 3 or 4 more screens for add-ons, none of which I wanted. After going back three or four times, I finally had the kiosk epiphany that “complete order” was labeled “confirm order” and I did. D’uh. But, where was the pay option? There was a credit/debit card option but what about paying cash at the counter? That took a few minutes to figure out, which I did.
Now, I have been fighting with the kiosk for 10 minutes, much to the amusement of the teenager standing next to me, who used the other one in a matter of seconds and off she went. At one point, she looked at me, pathetically, and asked if she could help. I thanked her and told that, come hell or high water, that kiosk would not, and I repeat NOT!!, defeat me. She chuckled at my predicament and watched as I waved my fist at the machine and cursed it in three or four long-forgotten languages. Well, as luck would have it, I figured it out, and paid at the counter. The staff was kind and efficient (well, reasonably anyway . . .), and the manager told me lots of people “struggle” with the kiosk. She said that it takes two or three times to use it and you figure out the prompts. As I awaited my order, the teenager was standing next to me and struck up a conversation. This is the scene:
Teenager: “Are you having a nice day?”
Me: “Yes,s but my long-suffering wife is having a rough time dealing with the altitude – we live in Houston and the elevation here in Idaho Springs is about 8,000 feet above sea level. She already had a migraine, and has had to deal with me for 26 years, so she’s not feeling well.”
Teenager: “Oh, I am sorry to here that. Is she here right now?”
Me: “Yes, you see that lady sprawled on the floor?”
Teenager: “Yes, you mean the lady in the overcoat?”
Me: “Yes. My wife is the lady sitting at the table next to that lady. Do you think we should help that lady?”
Teenager: “Her? Nah, she’s a regular and always acts like that to get free food. The manager can’t kick her out. She’s her cousin or something. People have learned to avoid her. She’s a nuisance but harmless.”
Me: “Good to know. I will tell you what, I am reasonably tech savvy but that kiosk is confusing.”
Teenager: “Yeah, but you just have to use it a few times and you get used to it. It’s not really user friendly. I’m sorry to hear your wife isn’t feeling well. It takes a few days to get used to the height here. She might need some of those oxygen bottles. They say they help. I have lived here a long time so I am used to it.”
Me: “We saw those bottles at Safeway but weren’t sure if they worked. We will give it a try if she doesn’t feel better.”
Teenager: “How long are you in town?”
Me: “Just the weekend. My wife loves this whole area and we needed to get away for a few days. So far, the mountains are lovely. She loves the Rockies. Tomorrow she wants to hike St. Mary’s Glacier. If she feels better, we will tackle it.”
Teenager: “The glacier is nice and has some nice hiking paths. Some are pretty hard but there are few worn paths up the side of the glacier that are easier to climb. You guys should also try Mt. Evans. That’s nice, too.”
Me: “Thanks.”
(Teenager gets her order and leaves.)
Teenager: “Well, have a great trip and I hope your wife feels better.”
Me: “Thanks. It was nice talking to you. Take care.”
(Manager provides me with my order – which was correct and well-prepared.)
Me, to Manager: “Thanks. I still think the kiosk is a bit confusing.”
Manager: “Lots of people think that but after a few times it is pretty easy.”
Me: “Proof will be in the pudding, as they say.”
Manager: “We don’t have pudding . . . Just kidding!!! See you. Oh, and don’t mind the floor lady. My aunt has some ‘issues’ but is actually very nice. Don’t feed her, though.”
Me (chuckling): “Oh. Ok. Thanks.”
jvb