Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Coffee and Cronyism: Guess Who’s Really Paying for Starbucks ‘Free Tuition’
Coffee and Cronyism: Guess Who’s Really Paying for Starbucks ‘Free Tuition’
Jan 8, 2026 6:47 PM

When most people think of Starbucks they think of overpriced coffee, free wifi, and omnipresence. Starbucks are everywhere. pany was founded in 1971 and since 1987 they’ve opened an average of two new stores every day. In the U.S. alone there are 12,973 locations.

When most people think of “big business”, though, they don’t often think of the Seattle-based pany. But they should. Starbucks has 151,000 fulltime employees, $15 billion in annual revenues, and three times as many locations as Walmart. Starbucks is one of the biggest of big businesses. And, not surprisingly, a big proponent of cronyist policies.

Cronyism occurs when an individual or organization colludes with government officials to create legislation or regulations that give them forced benefits they could not have otherwise obtained voluntarily. Those e at the expense of consumers, taxpayers, and everyone working hard pete in the marketplace. A prime example is minimum wage laws. Almost without fail, big businesses tend to support higher minimum wages.

Since they could just choose to pay higher wages, why would they support federal mandated wage floors? One reason is because it helps to eliminate petition from small business who don’t have the size and scale to absorb higher-than-market wage increases.

In a recent interview with CNN, Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz said he supports an increase to federal minimum wage even though he admits the $15 wage in Seattle could have “traumatic effects” on small business owners and employees.

But notice what else Mr. Schultz says. He mentions that pany surveyed employees and asked what the “number one benefit” they wanted from Starbucks. The overwhelming request was for access to college education. He claims they now offer “free tuition for college” as part of their total benefits package. But is that true?

Last week pany unveiled a program that included a scholarship it described as “an investment” between Starbucks and Arizona State University. The program is designed to allow Starbucks workers to earn an online degree at the school at a steeply discounted rate. But the “free tuition” is based on the federal government picking up most of the tab:

Initially, Starbucks said that workers would be able to offset the costs through an upfront scholarship it was providing with Arizona State, but declined to say exactly how much of the cost it was shouldering. The chain estimated that the scholarship would average about $6,500 over two years to cover tuition of about $20,000.

Following the announcement, however, Arizona State University president Michael Crow told The Chronicle of Higher Education that Starbucks is not contributing any money toward the scholarship. Instead, Arizona State will essentially charge workers less than the sticker price for online tuition. Much of the remainder would likely be covered by federal aid since most Starbucks workers don’t earn a lot of money.

Workers would pay whatever costs remained out of pocket for the first two years, and Starbucks would bear no costs.

Starbucks had previously declined to say how much it was contributing to the scholarship. But in a subsequent email Wednesday evening, Starbucks said that the scholarship is being “funded by ASU.”

The “free tuition” is based mostly on students getting federal aid in the form of Pell Grants and federal student loans. Starbucks may eventually pay some of the out-of-pocket expenses of the student (perhaps even up to $1,000 a year) but they aren’t directly paying for tuition.

Overall, it’s a great deal for both Starbucks and for ASU. The school gets federal money for students who would not normally be enticed by their online programs. And Starbucks gets to claim a “benefit” that cost them almost nothing. The primary people who will be paying are American taxpayers (though they would have likely foot the bill anyway), the taxpayers in Arizona, and students who attend ASU.

Students who don’t work for Starbucks will be paying the normal tuition rates in order to subsidize the education for out-of-state baristas. That “free tuition” Starbucks claims as a “benefit” is actually being paid for not by coffee profits but by the students in Phoenix who don’t get the benefit of working for a crony in Seattle.

For a lesson in how crony capitalism works, ASU students don’t even need to take Econ 101; they just need to look at their tuition bill.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Eminent domain abuse, again
You probably remember when, last year, the Supreme Court upheld the taking of private land by the state for the purpose of private development in its Kelo decision. Sam Gregg highlighted the decision’s dangerous implications at the time. Religious groups were rightly among those worried about those implications, especially with respect to tax-free urban church properties. Now, in an ironic twist, Catholic sisters in Philadelphia have been party to an attempt to use eminent domain to gain property for a...
Jack Hafer at the Acton Lecture Series
Jack Hafer, the producer of the award-winning film, To End All Wars, will be speaking at the 2006 Acton Lecture Series on Wednesday, February 15. This luncheon (which does include a lunch) will be held in the David Cassard room of the Waters Building in downtown Grand Rapids from 12:00pm – 1:30. Mr. Hafer will discuss the challenges of making movies with profound moral messages in today’s Hollywood culture. He will also talk about plans for future projects that break...
The most corrupt countries
Forbes is featuring a slideshow highlighting a series of the most corrupt countries around the world, based on findings from Transparency International. The list of the “The Most Corrupt Countries” includes Chad, Bangladesh, Turkmenistan, Myanmar, Haiti, Nigeria, Equatorial Guinea, Cote D’Ivoire, Angola, Tajikistan, Sudan, Somalia, Paraguay, Pakistan, Kenya, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. “Under its current president, Nigeria is making a determined effort to clean up its act. President Olusegun Obasanjo has surrounded himself with a dozen senior government...
‘Captialism’ according to the academy
For a quick overview of the current state of appreciation for economics and capitalism among various ‘academics,’ see the newly inaugurated e-journal Fast Capitalism. It might as well be subtitled: Marxism, Alive and Well. Most of the contributors to the first issue are in munications, or political science. Here’s a sampling: In “Beyond Beltway and Bible Belt: Re-imagining the Democratic Party and the American Left,” Ben Agger, who teaches sociology and humanities at the University of Texas at Arlington, writes,...
Moral posturing on Africa
Over the weekend, the Daily Telegraph’s Charles Moore asked, “Why should the Left win the scramble for Africa?” : [T]he trouble with this subject – perhaps this is why the Left dominates it – is that it attracts posturing. Africa is, among other things, a photo-opportunity. As our own educational system makes it harder and harder to get British pupils to smile at all, so the attraction for politicians of being snapped with rows of black children with happy grins...
Oil—the forbidden fruit?
There’s something like a question of theodicy implicitly wrapped up in the debate about global warming among Christians. It goes something like this: Why did God create oil? One answer is that the burning of fossil fuels is simply a divine trap for unwitting and greedy human beings, who would stop at nothing to rape the earth. Another answer is that there is some legitimate created purpose for fossil fuels. I’m inclined to think the latter, for a number of...
Bonhoeffer’s legacy
Earlier this month, we marked the 100th anniversary of Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s birth on February 4, in what is now Wroclaw, Poland. In a message before the International Bonhoeffer Conference on February 3, Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams said, Dietrich Bonhoeffer was a man immersed in a specific cultural heritage, and untroubled by the fact; he was a person of profound and rigorous (and very traditional) personal spirituality; he was mitted to the ecumenical perspective from very early on in his...
Addicted to influence
A brief but timely editorial appears in this month’s issue of Christianity Today, “We Are What We Behold.” Here’s a taste: “…evangelicals have wrestled with our relationship to power. When in a position of influence (and in our better moments), we leverage power to better the lives of our neighbors. Cultural savvy enables us to successfully translate the gospel for a changing world. But it’s a double-edged sword—influence and savvy can also dull the gospel’s transcendence. We achieve a royal...
Concerns about consensus
George H. Taylor, the State Climatologist for Oregon, writes at TCS Daily, “A Consensus About Consensus.” The article is worth reading. It shows that scientific consensus is often overrated, both in terms of its existence and in terms of its relevance. With resepct to global warming, Taylor looks at some of the claims for scientific consensus, and states, “But even if there actually were a consensus on this issue, it may very well be wrong.” This simply means that the...
Nonprofits beware!
A friend forwarded a Website link for The Nonprofit Congress recently that was downright scary. It appears to be the epitome of good intentions fraught with unintended consequences. Or perhaps the consequences are not unintended. The Congress is an apparent call to advocacy (i.e., political pressuring) within the National Council of Nonprofit Associations. To the group’s credit, the “why” is a forthright statement of their view and values: The time e for nonprofits of all sizes and scope e together....
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved