>They aren't. We're nowhere even close. They are and have been for decades. One of the reasons of passing laws preventing businesses from engaging in certain

>They aren't. We're nowhere even close. They are and have been for decades. One of the reasons of passing laws preventing businesses from engaging in certain forms of discrimination is because because businesses had enough power that to discriminate based on a protected factor could lock someone out from society. This is extremely noticeable in smaller communities where there might be only a single grocery store, but even in larger communities you'll find companies often working together and that they share common suppliers of certain goods or services who can lock you out of the majority of companies all at once. Up until now we have tolerated it because the forms of discrimination we wouldn't tolerate have since been individually banned and there haven't been enough cases of coordinated denial of social involvement to prompt further legal action, but the power is there. I assume the threat of legal action further limiting the power of companies to discriminate has prevented the threat from going too far, and why companies will even walk back cases when enough popular support gets behind it.