can't boycott any harder.
Dude already has his billions.
We need a wealth tax.
True.
So...professional athletes who take Nike money support fascism?
What a fucking ghoul
He financed a spoiler candidate for OR governor last election. That spoiler candidate was too obviously right wing to siphon enough votes, despite what she was being paid to say.
Phil knight is strongly opposed to democracy.
He’s on the list.
Buying your politician is all out in the open now.
What's he trying to get a pardon for?
Even don't like nike, Adidas is much better.
Nike shoes never fit my feet properly anyway lol, my feet are just too wide.
...everybody look! a rich asshole is helping other rich assholes!..look!..it's news!..not the fucking pedophile president....
Heh. Fuck Nike.
Overpriced fashion accessories for impressionable people with disposable income.
I never have nor will I ever purchase a pair of Nike shoes.
We truly do have the best government money can buy.
Growing up poor in the 80s/90s Nike was a hated symbol, there was no chance I'd get anything beyond walmart brands, if new was even an option. So I learned to hate these symbols, but Nike chief among them. Today it's funny but I can't bring myself to buy it even tho it's a much cheaper brand.
I can relate. I grew up in the Mississippi Delta so poverty was certainly not a lifestyle choice.
I actually liked Nike, until I heard of sweatshops, and now this.
Could anyone recommend an ethical alternative that is also high quality?
Looks exactly like I’d expect.
If I'm reading this right, the record he's breaking is his own.
How unsurprising this oligarch. Always betting on the fucking elephant.
Never had a swishy because they were then expensive 33 years ago as they are now.
I've been boycotting them my whole life already
boycotting them my whole life already
My boycott cant get any harder
SO glad I don’t have any Nikes. Up yours, Phil.
I wanted to buy Nikes recently. But all their designs were ugly, so I ended up with adidas. Not sure if owner is better than nike or not, but at least I didn’t get Nikes.
Whatever you do, don't Google "Adidas history" then
This guy is the anti Christ, just look at him
There’s stiff competition for that role I mean trump, Thiel and Stephen miller are all higher on the list. He’s one of their officers in the demon army for sure though
Drop dead, ghoul.
Fuck him and his shitty shoes that give me blisters
These evil men really all look like demons
Nuke nike
I wish someone would step up and take care of this problem.
An Italian friend perchance?
It's-a Regular Giuseppe!
Add that to Tesla, Facebook, Oracle……
Looks like a corroded old ballsack.
Never liked Shooter McGavin
He looks like a cancerous testicle.
Anyone know of comfortable sneaker alternatives that are reasonably priced, available globally, and aren't hideously ugly?
I've been wearing Jordans for most of my life. They're cheap, they look good (I like them) and they're comfy. But the quality has been going down the last 5 years or so and the writing had been on the wall.
I guess now is as good a time as any to make a change but every time I've looked for alternatives I've been frustrated that nobody makes shoes I actually like.
I'm quite partial to asics
Thanks for the recommendation. I took a look but didn't see anything I liked. To me, they give off a middle aged divorced dad look that I'm not quite old enough or divorced enough to pull off
Gottem
Depends on... well, a lot of factors. I'd start by looking at "walking shoes" and "trail runners", they tend to be lightweight and comfortable without fully giving up on durability. Appearance is a matter of taste.
Maybe he could give that money to the state so they don't have to raise the gas tax
I thought this is an AI generated remake of musk's photo :)
Been on a bike boycott since their last racist stunt over a decade ago.
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.