The Briefing Room
General Category => Economy/Business => Topic started by: rangerrebew on July 01, 2016, 01:08:27 pm
-
Chobani doubles down on hiring Mideast refugees
Yogurt company makes pledge in line with Obama requests
Published: 4 hours ago
Hamdi Ulukaya, founder and CEO of Chobani, came to America originally on a student visa from Turkey and built a yogurt empire that now employs hundreds of refugees from the Middle East, Africa and elsewhere.
President Obama’s call Thursday for corporate America to hire more foreign refugees drew a commitment from one company that has already given a large share of its U.S. jobs to migrants from the Middle East, Africa and other parts of the world.
Chobani, owned by a Turkish Muslim immigrant, has filled 30 percent of its 600 positions at the world’s largest Yogurt plant in Twin Falls, Idaho, with refugees resettled in America through a U.S. State Department program carried out in cooperation with the United Nations.
http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/chobani-d...east-refugees/
READ MORE
-
Question --- Let's say an unemployed black American applies and a Middle East refugee applies to one open position .... who gets the job?
-
The HR guy has a nervous breakdown because he's actually got to judge on merits, for once.
-
The HR guy has a nervous breakdown because he's actually got to judge on merits, for once.
:bigsilly:
-
Here's another story on the Chobani mess: Child Sexual Assault Cover-Up in Idaho: http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,214331.msg949648.html#msg949648
-
On the other hand.... since they're here, which would you rather happen: that these refugees have paying work, or that they stay on the government dole?
The story comes from Wild Nut Doily, of course, so I don't expect them to ask such questions....
-
On the other hand.... since they're here, which would you rather happen: that these refugees have paying work, or that they stay on the government dole?
The story comes from Wild Nut Doily, of course, so I don't expect them to ask such questions....
I'd rather the Chobani guy didn't facilitate their presence here.
-
I'd rather the Chobani guy didn't facilitate their presence here.
Be that as it may, they're here. I'm content to let him spend his own money on them, rather than to increase the national debt on their behalf.
-
Be that as it may, they're here. I'm content to let him spend his own money on them, rather than to increase the national debt on their behalf.
You're assuming that they get no assistance taxpayer funded welfare if someone is working?
Gaak! I inadvertently slipped into politically correct speech for a moment.
-
You're assuming that they get no assistance taxpayer funded welfare if someone is working?
Gaak! I inadvertently slipped into politically correct speech for a moment.
Not assuming anything. Just pointing out that if they have paying work, they're less likely to require welfare. And -- and this is important -- gainful employment provides at least some motivation for assimilation, at least for some, perhaps many of the refugees.
Not saying there aren't going to be radicals among them, as there are undoubtedly such; but some of them will be grateful and will assimilate, in just the same way that other immigrants have done and continue to do.
-
Not assuming anything. Just pointing out that if they have paying work, they're less likely to require welfare. And -- and this is important -- gainful employment provides at least some motivation for assimilation, at least for some, perhaps many of the refugees.
Not saying there aren't going to be radicals among them, as there are undoubtedly such; but some of them will be grateful and will assimilate, in just the same way that other immigrants have done and continue to do.
Even if they have a job, they will be receiving welfare.
-
On the other hand.... since they're here, which would you rather happen: that these refugees have paying work, or that they stay on the government dole?
The story comes from Wild Nut Doily, of course, so I don't expect them to ask such questions....
Good point.
-
Not saying there aren't going to be radicals among them, as there are undoubtedly such;
You have just given the reason not to allow any into this country if there are undoubtedly radicals within them.
but some of them will be grateful and will assimilate, in just the same way that other immigrants have done and continue to do.
And so your logic once again infers a number will not assimilate. Then why in God's name should any of them be allowed in if many choose not to assimilate? Do you think that will be good for America to keep bringing in those who will not assimilate into this country? What you are proposing is madness, in purposely bringing in people who may work but will never assimilate and worse yet, will become terrorists.
It is the destruction of a country.
-
Then why in God's name should any of them be allowed in if many choose not to assimilate?
Not the issue -- these ones are in. Answer me this: since they are here, would you rather they have paying work, or not?
-
Even if they have a job, they will be receiving welfare.
And how do you know that, one way or the other?
-
They receive a number of "benefits" including housing, resettlement, etc.
-
Not the issue -- these ones are in. Answer me this: since they are here, would you rather they have paying work, or not?
That makes no diff.
If one should not be here, the should not be here.
-
That makes no diff.
If one should not be here, the should not be here.
Nice non-answer.
-
Nice non-answer.
No, it's a perfectly good answer.
What are you trying to do?
-
No, it's a perfectly good answer.
What are you trying to do?
I'm trying to get you to answer a simple question: given that they are here, would you rather they have paying work, or not?
(And to forestall your previous non-answer, yes, yes, they're here. They really are, despite your ardent wishes.)
-
I'm trying to get you to answer a simple question: given that they are here, would you rather they have paying work, or not?
(And to forestall your previous non-answer, yes, yes, they're here. They really are, despite your ardent wishes.)
No, because as I've pointed out repeatedly, they draw taxpayer funds regardless of whether they are working or not.
Given that, do you care if they work?
-
No, because as I've pointed out repeatedly, they draw taxpayer funds regardless of whether they are working or not.
Given that, do you care if they work?
So, by "no" you're saying you'd rather they didn't have paying work?
-
So, by "no" you're saying you'd rather they didn't have paying work?
That's not what I said and that's not what I asked you.
Enough of the game playing.
-
That's not what I said and that's not what I asked you.
Enough of the game playing.
You said, "No, because as I've pointed out repeatedly...."
So I took that to mean you were answering "No" to my question.
However, you were actually just not answering at all -- much as I predicted.
And you accuse me of game playing, when you cannot even answer a simple question?
Hillary, is that you?
-
You said, "No, because as I've pointed out repeatedly...."
So I took that to mean you were answering "No" to my question.
However, you were actually just not answering at all -- much as I predicted.
And you accuse me of game playing, when you cannot even answer a simple question?
Hillary, is that you?
Whatever, dude. Your cleverness leaves me speechless....
-
Whatever, dude. Your cleverness leaves me speechless....
No, son -- it's your inability to answer that leaves you speechless.
But it's not because you don't know the answer, is it? Rather, it's because you think an honest answer would weaken your position.
-
No, son -- it's your inability to answer that leaves you speechless.
But it's not because you don't know the answer, is it? Rather, it's because you think an honest answer would weaken your position.
LOL. That's got to be a record, the most errors in the least amount of letters.
-
I don't care whether they work or not.
I want them SENT BACK.
Comprende?
-
Nice non-answer.
TY.
Why should anyone respond to a hypothetical?
Is it better that a murderer be repentant? It makes no diff as a murder has been committed.
-
Nice non-answer.
Here's the kind of answer that makes all your justifications for their presence melt away.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/08/04/exclusive-5-year-old-victims-father-saw-video-of-twin-falls-refugee-rape/
-
Here's the kind of answer that makes all your justifications for their presence melt away.
Are you saying that the person in question was employed by Chobani?
-
Are you saying that the person in question was employed by Chobani?
I said no such thing. No one should endure their 5 year old being raped, especially by 'refugees' families. All the good intentions of the world to allow them in so they can 'work' does not overcome this destruction for that little girl and her family.
-
I said no such thing. No one should endure their 5 year old being raped, especially by 'refugees' families. All the good intentions of the world to allow them in so they can 'work' does not overcome this destruction for that little girl and her family.
You're being dishonest: of course that's what you meant.
You went back to a month-old thread in which I simply asked whether or not you'd prefer refugees be employed or not, and you post a totally unrelated article to me, as if it was relevant to my question.
Just shut up.
-
I don't care whether they work or not.
I want them SENT BACK.
Comprende?
Agree. With 94 million permanently out of work we-do-not-need-more-laborers.
-
Are you saying that the person in question was employed by Chobani?
Now, that's just disingenious. The issue is bring in "Syrians" ie., unvetted, unvettable, "refugees" from an area that is rife with anti-Americanism and radical islam.
-
Now, that's just disingenious.
Not at all. The question is whether he'd prefer that the ones already here were employed or not.
To tie that question to an unrelated rape in Idaho is not just "disingenuous," it's downright dishonest. It's ... dare I say it ... of Trump-like idiocy.
-
Not at all. The question is whether he'd prefer that the ones already here were employed or not.
To tie that question to an unrelated rape in Idaho is not just "disingenuous," it's downright dishonest. It's ... dare I say it ... of Trump-like idiocy.
Nope, not unrelated just because you say it is. Again, and typing slowly: "The issue is bring in "Syrians" ie., unvetted, unvettable, "refugees" from an area that is rife with anti-Americanism and radical islam."
-
Not at all. The question is whether he'd prefer that the ones already here were employed or not.
To tie that question to an unrelated rape in Idaho is not just "disingenuous," it's downright dishonest. It's ... dare I say it ... of Trump-like idiocy.
To tie it in is exactly the point.
And did anyone stop and think what type of monster it was who actually filmed this episode and not go to the rescue of that child?
We can stop it if we wish. It starts by not allowing the wrong people into this country, regardless.
-
Money for rape. Just about as low as you can go, giving up morality for a few bucks.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/08/10/twin-falls-refugee-rape-special-report-refugees/
will you still go to bat for these people?
@r9etb