iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Kristen Breitweiser

GET UPDATES FROM Kristen Breitweiser

No Place To Go But Up: Howard Schultz' Upward Spiral 2011

Posted: 09/04/11 03:24 PM ET

It's seven days before the tenth anniversary of 9/11.

Usually during the week-long build-up to the anniversary of my husband's death, I stay away from television and newspapers. Too depressing. Too much of a reminder. Just too much in my face.

So with trepidation, I picked up my morning newspaper and started rifling through it.

Same old, same old. Economy in a deathspin. Obama a disappointment. Middle East in precarious transition. Wounded veterans being neglected. Education wallowing. Environment a mess.

And then I came across the full-page advertisement of Howard Schultz, CEO of Starbucks Coffee Company on page A15 of the NYTimes. And I read it.

Now, I don't know if Starbucks is perfect. If Howard Schultz is perfect. Or if the group upwardspiral2011.org is perfect. But I do know one thing: Schultz' idea is perfect.

Like many of us, Schultz is frustrated and fed up. He is done with partisan politics and useless leaders. He loves our country, still believes in the American Dream, and knows that we are better than this. And he is right.

What sets Schultz apart from the rest of us is two-fold: first, he runs Starbucks a multinational company that is responsible for employing many Americans in every state across the country. In other words, he knows what he is talking about when he talks about jobs and our faltered economy.

Secondly and perhaps most importantly given the current personalities appallingly exhibited by almost all of those in Washington today, Howard Schultz follows up his sensible, well-informed, and reality-based talk with genuine concrete, concerted action. How absolutely rare, refreshing, and revolutionary. And to think, this comes from a CEO?!? Aren't they the bad guys who got us into this mess to start with?

Schultz is not asking us to buy his coffee. Nor is he asking us to donate money to any cause. He merely asks us to pick up our telephones on Tuesday night to become a part of a new movement -- an upward spiral. A call to arms that starts with all of us who feel like we've been left behind, don't matter, can't make a difference, and/or can't have our voices heard.

Prior to the call, he asks everyone to visit www.upwardspiral2011.org to take a pledge with two principles: first, to withhold all political contributions to all elected officials until a "transparent, comprehensive, bipartisan dept and deficit package is reached that honestly and fairly sets America on a path to long-term financial health and security."

And second, "to do all we can to break the cycle of economic uncertainty that grips our country by committing to accelerate investment in jobs and hiring."

Sounds pretty simple and straight-forward to me. More than anything, it's a start and I'm grateful to Schultz for picking up the baton.

And as someone who's tried in the past to make a difference in Washington, I can say first-hand that the best, quickest, most potent way to get Washington to listen is to cut off their money and get 'em where it hurts.

I know I will be on the call on Tuesday, how about you?

www.upwardspiral2011.org

(I haven't regularly drank Starbucks coffee in years and I've regrettably never met Howard Schultz. My agenda is simple: I have a 12-year-old daughter who has already grown up without a father, I'd like to ensure that she can still have an American Dream.)

 

Follow Kristen Breitweiser on Twitter: www.twitter.com/kdbreitweiser

 
 
  • Comments
  • 181
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (6 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ochaye
06:13 PM on 10/14/2011
How do you know Shulz loves his country?
Is it all the low-paying jobs he's created?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TheStreamAlwaysWins
06:30 AM on 09/06/2011
Oh and who wins? The Koch Brothers et. al who spend $100 million in Superpacs and faux outrage. S/mple minded ideas for complex problems.
02:04 PM on 09/06/2011
Simple, maybe but not simple minded and surely much preferrable to a jaded rant by one who offers no solution at all. America is a country that has always righted a wrong course eventually by listening to its wiser, often simpler citizens like the founding fathers. I admire Mr Schulz for having the courage to put his reputation on the line. His plea for a sane economic plan is one we might do well to consider.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
SShaw490
A man hears what he wants and disregards the rest
06:21 AM on 09/06/2011
I definitely agree with Howard Shultz in principle, but witholding individual campaign contributions effectively concedes the presidency to the candidate backed by the largest institutional contributors. As far as plans to address the deficit and jobs, there are plenty of them - Bowles Simpson was a very good one - and Obama is going to get into a more specific jobs plan on Thursday. The problem is not an inability to write a plan, it's an unwillingness of Congress to tell Norquist to KMA and we're going to do what we have to do to overhaul the tax code and increase revenue. No plan is viable without that, and, with the Norquist pledge in effect, no plan with increased revenue can pass. It's a Catch-22.

But I do applaud a call for average citizens to get involved in their country's management. As long as Congress and the President don't see people out on the streets expressing their views, they're going to continue to take the political path of least resistance, which is what got us here in the first place.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
slinkymom
Show me your micro-bio and I'll show you mine
09:25 AM on 09/06/2011
I agree with you.  Schultz makes it sound all so great to take this stand against making contributions to candidates until they get their act together, but it ignores the very specific problems we are dealing with, particularly the consistent obstruction from the right.

It also ignores the fact of corporate money being funneled into PAC's and Super PACs.  And who are the greatest recipients of those money machines?  Republicans.

Sorry, I am NOT buying what this man is attempting to sell.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ignacio sanabria
Mirror synapses at work
04:39 AM on 09/06/2011
``He is done with partisan politics and useless leaders.`` If 300 million Americans feel this way, America will rise strong again.
06:35 AM on 09/06/2011
i, I know, and I wish people would fight back instead of wimping out. They have no strength to fight, working 2 or 3 jobs if they are lucky or sitting home depressed and can't find work. It is an outrage that 25 mill people are w/out jobs. That cheap labor in foreign countries is like manna from heaven to these greedy bosses right here. Things here are going from bad to worse. A tragedy, truly.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
2lib4oh
01:32 AM on 09/06/2011
Kristen., I am certain about your agenda given your great loss on 9/11 but be careful not to let others misuse you because of who you are and your sincerity. Starbucks has not been respectful toward Democrats in the past and has even asked them to leave their premises when groups met there in 2008 when they were planning to support Obama. I hope Mr. Schultz is sincere but you should know that Democrats are being attacked harder than every before. Millions are being spent to undermine support for them like never before thanks to the Koch brothers. These guys were responsible for the attacks on Democrats in Wisconsin and Ohio. Its hard to know who to trust anymore. I say this with utmost respect.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
slinkymom
Show me your micro-bio and I'll show you mine
09:27 AM on 09/06/2011
Exactly.  This man appears to be trying to reduce funding for the Democratic Party.  He is not calling for corporations to stop making massive donations to PACs and Super Pacs, is he?  Not that I can see.  He wants people who make individual donations to stop doing so - who gets most of their funding from individual donors?  The Democratic Party.

This seems like a complete and utter manipulative game by Schultz.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
2lib4oh
01:02 AM on 09/06/2011
When Obama was running for election and Democratic groups were meeting in Starbucks, I remember reading about people getting kicked out of Starbucks because they were Democrats. I wonder what changed his mind?
Is this just another cynical strategy to keep Democrats from donating to candidates like Elizabeth Warren who won't see a drop of corporate money, yet is one of the best people we could have in Congress. I suggest that people follow their best judgment and conscience on this and ask Mr.Schultz to do the same.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
slinkymom
Show me your micro-bio and I'll show you mine
09:30 AM on 09/06/2011
I don't think his mind is changed.  I believe this is simply another way to limit donations to the Democratic Party.

Where is his call to ask CORPORATIONS to stop donating to Pacs and Super Pacs?  The Republicans are the great beneficiaries of those groups.  The Dems get a great deal of funding from individual donors which this man is calling on to stop their donating.

Tell corporations to stop funding PACs and maybe I'll believe he is sincere.
10:06 PM on 09/05/2011
Regular people can withhold contributions to politicians but it won't make much difference. The country is going to hell because the politicians on both sides do what the corporations want. Politicians can't get re-elected without corporate contributions. If you want something to change, you're going to have to stop corporate contributions. "Bipartisanship" won't help us since both sides agree that screwing regular people is just fine, as they did in the last budget agreement.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
ThatsTheTheWayItIs
religion, ideology, partisanship are delusional
07:47 PM on 09/05/2011
The US had 5% unemployment in 2007, but people still couldn't pay mortgages, economy crashed.
Unemployment is the result of recession, not the cause. Fixing unemployment will do nothing but help the 4% that get jobs when we reduce current 9% to 5%, full-employment according to Fed. That will stimulate economy by maybe 2% since those won't be exec positions, doctors or lawyers we are adding. They will be low-paying jobs. Ending unemployment will not end recession.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
almostlyniceguy
Not young enough to know everything..
09:11 PM on 09/05/2011
You are wrong. We are experiencing a lack of demand. Demand increases when employment goes up. When employment goes up, people and companies are more confident about the future, and spend more money, employ more people. It is a self-feeding cycle, just as the downward cycle we are in now that is being exacerbated by reduced government spending.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
ThatsTheTheWayItIs
religion, ideology, partisanship are delusional
10:01 PM on 09/05/2011
The Depression started in 1929, by 1938 it was at it worst point. Despite all the stimulus and work projects under FDR, unemployment peaked at 20%, nine years after crash. Hoover and FDR did not fix it, World War II did, gave everybody jobs building weapons.

Spending stimulus to give people pay is a waste. Less than half ends up as wages, rest is corporate profit and overhead. If you want to stimulate demand just give people the money, saves half. Extend unemployment benefits indefinitely. The purpose of jobs is to do something. The lack of jobs indicates a lack of things that need to be done, or people would be paid to do them.

When the global economy crashed in 2008, Germany mandated companies cut workers hours rather than lay people off. They compensated companies with funds they would have spent on unemployment payments. No one was laid off, economy recovered faster.

We in US work 20% more hours than in Europe, have lower standard of living. They have lower unemployment. The solution is shorter work weeks, 6-week vacations, full health care, all the stuff they have in Europe. Create jobs by reducing each workers output. Good for workers, bad for corporate profits, why it's not suggested as solution except by me.
07:03 PM on 09/05/2011
In the last election cycle, we had "vote out all incumbents!" This, of course, would (and did) only work in the Republicans' favor, since all incumbents being voted out meant that the Democratic majorities in the House and Senate would become Republican majorities. Seizing he opportunity, the astro-turf tea party jumped on what started as a nonpartisan project, but now that they've gotten theirs into office, I suppose they lost interest in that path.

Now we have this CEO telling us we should withhold contributions, and it could be his heart is in the right place. Certainly if all political contributions stopped, every candidate would take notice. But what if we regular people stopped sending in our tiny contributions, while the Koch brothers continued to buy the Scott Walkers of the world? Sounds like a tea party dream to me.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
2lib4oh
01:05 AM on 09/06/2011
Yes, why is this CEO telling us to withhold contributions? It could make all the difference to someone like Elizabeth Warren who will not get one dime of corporate money.
photo
unitron
Reverse Chron Order never stays checked
06:59 PM on 09/05/2011
Right. Because we can certainly count on the Koch brothers and their ilk to "... withhold all political contributions to all elected officials until a "transparent, comprehensive, bipartisan dept and deficit package is reached that honestly and fairly sets America on a path to long-term financial health and security."

The people who support and vote for the kind of politicians who are part of the problem are not the people who will be getting onboard with this.

Your asking the good guys to go to a gun fight with only a knife and then throw the knife away.
06:21 PM on 09/05/2011
Most of these people are so wealthy!! They don't know what to do with there money except complain. Go to the supreme court and get the system changed. Then go to Wall St. There are plenty of crooks there. Lets not forget President Obama got Osama Bin Laden. Oh by the way it was President Clinton
that signed NAFTA into law. That screwed the American workers and you all know it. You all did well with all the laws into place and probably paid very little in taxes.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jstrate
05:26 PM on 09/05/2011
A lot of political science research indicates that corporate and other contributions don't purchase votes. The do purchase access (they will return your phone calls). My guess is that this corporate CEO is resentful because he gets shaken down all the time for campaign contributions, doesn't get much, probably can't get much, and is resentful of corporations that do (e.g., GE). Then their are all the costs of high paid belt line lawyers and lobbyists, just to participate in the game and protect yourself from being blindsided. His efforts might be better spent rallying other corporate CEOs to demand reform of the tax code so that it is transparent, fair, and allows corporations like his to compete globally. The distortions and waste or deadweight loss to the American economy from all this corporate rent seeking activity are huge. Members of Congress are not going to stop holding their palms out.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
jmpurser
See My micro-bio
09:25 AM on 09/06/2011
Corporate contributions allow corporations to write and pass laws.  Yes, they're purchasing votes.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Leslie Y
10:40 AM on 09/06/2011
Ever heard of ALEC? It is there that the corporations and right wing fanatics are writing the laws. Who started ALEC? Koch Brothers that's who. Country wide there has been more bills passed by GOP governors this past year that are very similar. Collective bargaining loss is the first step that they have put into place to ultimately take away the minimum wage. I would assume that you and others on this board are aware. The question is, how do we get others aware and willing to believe what is happening. I do not trust the call to end contributions to the candidates at this time. The Citizens United decision only makes it that much easier for the likes of Koch and Big Business to put "their people" into place where they can then begin using these "puppets" to implement ALEC.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MUDPUPPY
05:23 PM on 09/05/2011
It was our capitalist industrialist that built our nation to the greatest, gave our military the best equipment to defend us and gave us an economy that enabled all our social reforms.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
psnyder325
Yep, I'm a Socialist. Deal.
09:11 PM on 09/05/2011
It is the PEOPLE of the United States, the labor, the middle class and the dedicated military that built our nation to the greatest. It is the capitalist industrialists and bankers who brought our country down to a Third World Country. Only the people, the labor, the middle class, and, yeah, maybe the military, can restore us to a great country again....if it isn't too late.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
07:59 AM on 09/06/2011
It was both.
"Capitalist Industrialists" and the "People" BOTH, built our nation... together...into the wealthiest, most powerful nation in the world, with the strongest middle class in the world. Neither one of them could have done it WITHOUT the others help.

A WAGON without WHEELS goes nowhere.

I think the main thing wrong with our country, is "DIVISION" Period.
UNITED we stand, DIVIDED we fall.

Back in the "good ole' days" as an industrialized nation after WWII, when our country's economy was growing, "people" were working hard, and had "job security" from their "employers" as a reward for their dedicated labor that had helped make the COMPANY be successful and profitable.

How many "employees" a company had, USED to be a sign of how successful the company was. "Putting People to work" USED to be a thing of pride for employers in America after WWII.
Now the ONLY goal of Corporations is to find ways to operate with as FEW employees as possible, and AVOIDING rewarding the employees they do have, as much as possible, to maximize the COMPANY'S PROFITS "only"

"ONLY" being the operative word.

"Profit" became the ONLY consideration, and "employees" became NOTHING MORE then DISPOSABLE TOOLS to be used and discarded,

American Employers just moved to ANOTHER COUNTRY and "TRADED" in "American" employees for CHEAP FOREIGN slave wage workers.

They weighed the Patriotism of America's success "United as one Nation" AGAINST "their" profit and they chose "their" PROFIT. ONLY.

Patriotism, SCHMATRIOTISM.

Divided we fall.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:00 AM on 09/06/2011
It is BOTH.

The main problem we have in our country is DIVISION.

United we stand, divided we fall.
Out of Many, ONE.
ONE Nation, under God with Liberty and Justice for ALL.
Divide and CONQUER.

Those words have meaning. They aren't just bumper sticker platitudes. They are Truth.
04:35 PM on 09/05/2011
Journalists and the media as a whole are also disappointments.
04:24 PM on 09/05/2011
hi Kristen
i know this must be a tough time for you, but please speak up again at this 10 year mark. More & more people are awakening to 9-11 truth. It's just a matter of time. Please help the mainly Liberal Huff post readers wake from their main stream media induced slumber.