Should Trans People be allowed to use opposite sex bathrooms?

Budweiser literally treats horses better than their employees.

They darn sure wouldn't abort a Clydesdale foal except to save the mother's life.

They're worth too much money, even though they eat like a horse.

They cost about $26K per year.

A human costs about $60K per year (if accounting for socialism indoctrination such as higher education).


There's no date on the article below.

--------------------------

Clydesdale Horse Price (Cost Breakdown of a Clydesdale)
.
.
.
How much is a Budweiser Clydesdale horse worth?

Budweiser Clydesdales are worth $5,000 to $15,000, depending on their age, performance, and speciality (if any). Budweiser sells their Clydesdales when they’re no longer helpful to the company’s marketing campaigns or cannot profit in other ways.
.
.
.
https://horsyplanet.com/clydesdale-horse-price-cost/

--------------------------

Quote: Mission146

It's not just for them; it's for Liberals, in general. Budweiser hasn't lasted this long by not knowing how to target emerging demographics who will soon become the target market.

Fence-sitters and Centrists don't care either way.

Budweiser actually has a strong history with LGBT, I just learned this last night, but Coors banned LGBTs from working there, and they used polygraphs to confirm sexual orientation (and this was not long ago, this was like the 80s....) Until polygraphs were banned by the Federal government at some point in the 80s.

So in the 70s and 80s there was a big push for progressive bars not to support Coors. And, Budwesier basically became the defacto gay beer.

Personally, I think both beers are garbage (taste wise), but back then there was more limited choice (it was not like today with hundreds of breweries.) But, I would never drink either based on taste alone even if I loved both companies.

So yeah, I am not a fan of AB, despite knowing some people there, but it sounds like Coors corporate is even more toxic in their blatant hostility to LGBT. I try to buy local beers (which is actually hard because Coors and AB are gobbling up a lot of local and regional breweries, even many local breweries are not truly independent anymore.)

So between the two AB is slightly less evil (low bar) based on my more recent readings.

Quote: Gandler

Budweiser actually has a strong history with LGBT, I just learned this last night, but Coors banned LGBTs from working there, and they used polygraphs to confirm sexual orientation (and this was not long ago, this was like the 80s....) Until polygraphs were banned by the Federal government at some point in the 80s.

So in the 70s and 80s there was a big push for progressive bars not to support Coors. And, Budwesier basically became the defacto gay beer.

Personally, I think both beers are garbage (taste wise), but back then there was more limited choice (it was not like today with hundreds of breweries.) But, I would never drink either based on taste alone even if I loved both companies.

So yeah, I am not a fan of AB, despite knowing some people there, but it sounds like Coors corporate is even more toxic in their blatant hostility to LGBT. I try to buy local beers (which is actually hard because Coors and AB are gobbling up a lot of local and regional breweries, even many local breweries are not truly independent anymore.)

So between the two AB is slightly less evil (low bar) based on my more recent readings.

I can see that, but you're never going to convince me that one of the nation's biggest companies has any set of ethics that they actually care about beyond the extent that the, "Ethics," are put in place to appeal to the target market and emerging markets. This is all stuff that we covered in the higher education at my Socialist Indoctrination (private), formerly Christian, University (that is also one of the biggest providers of education to active military and VA) that DoubleGold hates so much.

My recollection is Budweiser (never Light---gross) was drinkable as long as it was as cold as it can possibly get, preferably in a can, that way the taste of the aluminum improves that of the beer somewhat.

The 70's and 80's were the times of the huge AIDS scare with gays being discriminated against for that, but then, pop culture was making something of a move to a certain degree of androgyny both in that community, and, in general. I could see where Budweiser might think it could find a market in the Disco scene, then later, in the club and New Wave bar scene.

Beyond that, to NOT partake of a product because of their efforts to market towards a particular community is dumb, to me. I really don't care who a company is trying to appeal TO, but one sure way to lose my business is to take any action directly AGAINST anyone, so I'd never have tried a Coors in my life had I known that. I don't recall liking Coors, but I also know that Budweiser was $1 at several of the parlors back when I went out, and things like that, and was usually a $1 beer during happy hour at some of the bars.

Beyond that, are we going to pretend mega-corps run the way they are structured today carry any credible moral connection whatsoever to where they were 50 years ago?

Quote: Mission146

I can see that, but you're never going to convince me that one of the nation's biggest companies has any set of ethics that they actually care about beyond the extent that the, "Ethics," are put in place to appeal to the target market and emerging markets. This is all stuff that we covered in the higher education at my Socialist Indoctrination (private), formerly Christian, University (that is also one of the biggest providers of education to active military and VA) that DoubleGold hates so much.

My recollection is Budweiser (never Light---gross) was drinkable as long as it was as cold as it can possibly get, preferably in a can, that way the taste of the aluminum improves that of the beer somewhat.

The 70's and 80's were the times of the huge AIDS scare with gays being discriminated against for that, but then, pop culture was making something of a move to a certain degree of androgyny both in that community, and, in general. I could see where Budweiser might think it could find a market in the Disco scene, then later, in the club and New Wave bar scene.

Beyond that, to NOT partake of a product because of their efforts to market towards a particular community is dumb, to me. I really don't care who a company is trying to appeal TO, but one sure way to lose my business is to take any action directly AGAINST anyone, so I'd never have tried a Coors in my life had I known that. I don't recall liking Coors, but I also know that Budweiser was $1 at several of the parlors back when I went out, and things like that, and was usually a $1 beer during happy hour at some of the bars.

I have a pretty high tolerance for not caring about a company's actions if I like their product. For example, I could care less about the chicfilet outrage. But, there is a certain line (when it comes to human rights violations.) Mandatory polygraphs to determine the sexual orientation of employees is over that line, donating money to a pro-family movement is not.

I do agree corporations will do whatever is most profitable. And, often tailor their ethics for their local customers. For example Starbucks may say one thing in American Press releases, but then have very different statements in Saudi Arabia about similiar issues. So corporations are also only as woke as the nation that you view them from. At the end of the day, they want to move as much product in each market as they can and any allegiance with social movements is almost always just a version of advertising (with very rare exceptions.)

if in a crowded, noisy bar, why should you ask the bartender for a Bud and not a Budweiser?

some posters have claimed that LGBTQ persons are a tiny minority, but in fact, in beer fact, I say there is evidence to the contrary

Quote: link

The U.S. beer leader is, by a long shot, Bud Light, with 39.15 million barrels sold last year.

https://www.nbcnews.com/businessmain/3-beers-americans-no-longer-drink-1c7472709

Quote: Gandler

Budweiser actually has a strong history with LGBT, I just learned this last night, but Coors banned LGBTs from working there, and they used polygraphs to confirm sexual orientation (and this was not long ago, this was like the 80s....) Until polygraphs were banned by the Federal government at some point in the 80s.

So in the 70s and 80s there was a big push for progressive bars not to support Coors. And, Budwesier basically became the defacto gay beer.

Personally, I think both beers are garbage (taste wise), but back then there was more limited choice (it was not like today with hundreds of breweries.) But, I would never drink either based on taste alone even if I loved both companies.

So yeah, I am not a fan of AB, despite knowing some people there, but it sounds like Coors corporate is even more toxic in their blatant hostility to LGBT. I try to buy local beers (which is actually hard because Coors and AB are gobbling up a lot of local and regional breweries, even many local breweries are not truly independent anymore.)

So between the two AB is slightly less evil (low bar) based on my more recent readings.

It is a bit meaningless since both AB and Coors are controlled by the European mega beer corporation Anheuser-Busch InBev that controls almost 30% of the brewing in the world.