For a while the left tried to promote the ridiculous notion that milk from a cow was a symbol of white supremacy. Since that didn’t catch on, they’ve set their sights on all non-dairy forms of milk. Apparently almond milk and the like are racist because they cost more and therefor disproportionately affect people of color.
Here’s the dumbest non-Joe Biden story of the day from The Guardian:
If you are vegan, lactose intolerant, or simply don’t consume dairy, chances are your coffee run comes with an additional fee. Starbucks charges its US customers roughly 70¢ extra for oat, soy, almond, and coconut milk, and such additional costs are common at other cafes across the country.
But not every coffee shop does the same. And the reasons they cite are not only customer taste preferences – they say that dairy milk is far worse for the climate, and that because rates of lactose intolerance are higher among people of color, the alternative milk surcharge also perpetuates unfairness.
About 36% of people in the US are lactose intolerant, a genetic condition that predominantly affects people of color.
About 99% of people who get soy milk at Starbucks are white liberal weirdoes so I fail to see the point.
Also, unlike the hack who wrote this piece, I took 15 seconds out of my day to do a little research and only 12% of Americans and 19% of blacks are actually lactose intolerant. Additionally, only 8% of Starbucks customers are black, so that means that less than 1% of their customers are affected by this issue.
To “prove” their hypothesis that charging extra for non-dairy milk is racist, they wrangled a couple of randos with no particular expertise on the subject:
“The USDA mandates cow’s milk in schools, and it is the most common food allergy in children under 16. I have to ask myself, would it ever be acceptable to offer a food staple to Caucasian kids that is not digestible to them?”Olympic cyclist Dotsie Bausch said.
Dotsie is working under the assumption that black kids can’t drink milk, which is completely untrue.
“It’s not fair to charge more for plant-based milk. I’m a Starbucks girl, but it’s not accessible to everyone. Those barriers in place are what stops people from even trying vegan milks,” said Ebony Williams-Cox, a vegan content creator.
If an extra 70¢ makes a product inaccessible to you, perhaps you shouldn’t be at Starbucks spending $12 for a cup of coffee.
While The Guardian was trying make the case for the racism of charging extra for almond milk, they accidentally destroyed themselves with this stunning admission:
The retail price of plant-based milk is roughly twice that of dairy milk…
Welcome to the wonderful world of capitalism: when things cost more, they cost more.
Easily the dumbest thing about this is the liberal notion that says rules that apply to everyone are racist against black people. Starbucks isn’t charging black people extra for tree-hugger milk, they’re charging everyone, 99% of who are white.
As liberal of a company as Starbucks is, I’m kind of surprised they don’t charge white customers a “racism tax” to fund coffee reparations for BIPOCs.
