Reading the piece again, I don't even see Mackey as being fundamentally opposed to health care reform, or to the goal of treating people with dignity and humanity. Keep in mind that he runs Whole Foods as a company, not as a series of co-ops (as such stores are usually operated). Wouldn't it stand to reason that he's in favor of doing as much good as is financially sustainable? His main criticism is that the public option isn't financially sustainable. "We can't afford this, it will do more harm than good, and the individual consumer can be empowered to make a difference themselves"? That seems quite compatible with what Whole Foods is.
I get how it's bad PR on Mackey's part. But it's an unfair expectation on the part of the boycotters.
I get how it's bad PR on Mackey's part. But it's an unfair expectation on the part of the boycotters.