Robin Smith Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 As a Briton myself I can be as rude as I like about the British -- so there. You know its true. Actually it is related to the idea put forward so elegantly by someone above that success MUST have come through foul practice. Occasionally yes, but often not. Of course if it is an American company then, in addition, its success must be due to oppressing the natives and brutally forcing people to buy products they would have no intention of buying otherwise under threat of military action, or equally foul and dastardly pressure. I see no evidence that Starbucks fall into the "foul practice" category but they are American so, presumably, guilty of what I said in my penultimate sentence. Robin Smith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael s. Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 Kerry - I see that you're very new to photo.net. Eric's point is well taken. Speaking for myself, I'll say that the taunting of "Oriental female" drivers is offensive is out of bounds. Recognizing that it was certainly intended to be in jest, I hope you'll find another way to joke with us in your future posts. Not sure why Eric also quoted your references to NRA and AMS? Non sequiturs they are, but objectionable they aren't. And since mathematicians, meteorologists, and musicologists, among others, all seem to use some form of "AMS" designation, I'm curious which is yours? Can't say I agree with you, Kerry, on the food at Starbucks. For me, the baked goods seem dry, flavorless, and overpriced. If the food were the best Starbucks had to offer, I'd pass altogether. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricM Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 Okay, if anyone is really interested in the harm of Starbucks, do your own google search. There�s tons of info from bankrupting poor farmers in countries outside The G8, to paying landlords not to renew the leases of the established competition in your neighbourhood so they can open shop. Do you really think a company like this can get so big so fast without doing damage somewhere? Of course they have. All you can do is choose to drink their coffee or not. Now post some damn pics! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beau 1664876222 Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 "the idea put forward so elegantly by someone above that success MUST have come through foul practice" I didn't say that. I said "most corporations accumulate money by..." which isn't to say they accumulate ALL their money that way. And "foul practice" is not the same as what I said they do: finding ways to create market frictions or inefficiencies that help them. Is it "foul practice" to lobby legislators to put tariffs on foreign competitors? Or to buy and then dissolve strong competitors? Or to create a shell offshore parent-entity to gain tax advantages? Or to operate money-losing locations to starve out rivals? Maybe, maybe not. These things are legal, and yet they are arguably contrary to the notion of "free markets," just like professional guilds, patent laws, real estate zoning laws, etc. etc. That was my point. I was refuting the naive notion that Starbucks has done nothing but sell a better product at an attractive price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beau 1664876222 Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 Eric, you keep posting stuff that steals my thunder while I'm busy typing ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
douglas k. Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 <i>"Is it "foul practice" to lobby legislators to put tariffs on foreign competitors? Or to buy and then dissolve strong competitors? Or to create a shell offshore parent-entity to gain tax advantages? Or to operate money-losing locations to starve out rivals? Maybe, maybe not. These things are legal, and yet they are arguably contrary to the notion of "free markets," just like professional guilds, patent laws, real estate zoning laws, etc. etc."</i> <p> Good points. But I don't think we can blame profit-seeking entrepreneurs for taking full advantage of legal tactics in order to get ahead, as that is how the system is <i>supposed</i> to work. The problem is a government which legalizes and (through the tax system) rewards, at consumers' and taxpayers' expense, such behavior. Beau, if you haven't already seen it, you might look up the new book "Perfectly Legal" by David Cay Johnston. It'll make your blood boil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
summitar Posted April 13, 2004 Author Share Posted April 13, 2004 I withdraw my previous remark about tripple witching; it was intended to be mildly amusing with a tiny grain of truth, not to be offensive. I do think that talking on a cell phone while driving is extremely hazardous as it seems to divert attention as much or more than anything else, and it is extremely common, more common say, than dropping a lighted cigarette in your lap, or having a large angry hornet inside the car. Female drivers, like male drivers, run the spectrum of ability -- they seem to me to be more likely to occupy the fastest lane and drive just at or below the speed limit, and won't pull over to let anyone pass. The same with ah, non-native(?) drivers. I'll keep my opinions to myself. The term tripple witching is a term associated with the US stock market when three events that can cause large market swings occur on the same day. AMS I'll keep to myself. NRA is an organization that provides technical information on firearms and are advocates of the 2nd amendment, just as the ACLU are advocates of the 1st amendment. Both go way over the top sometimes. NRA members are rarely involved with criminal acts regarding firearms. Like free choicers regarding abortions, they want the government to butt out, but the NRA would like the government to vigorously apply the existing laws. I am a law obeying citizen who is aging and getting weaker through disease, and I don't know why I can't carry a concealed weapon in NYC to protect myself, as I can in my home state. Of course if you are will healed or well connected, you can carry a weapon in NYC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike dixon Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 <center><img src="http://mikedixonphotography.com/alexcol07.jpg"><br> <i>in Nashville, caffeinate yourself at Fido or Bongo Java--fair-trade coffee and the prettiest girls around</i></center> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricM Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 NRA? How could anyone advocate the NRA after Bowling For Columbine? I wish that the only weapons people carried where M6�s or F3�s loaded with HP5 I wish I could concentrate on doing my year end taxes� Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
._._z Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 Mike, are we seeing a slow shutter speed, or a lot of caffeine? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricM Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 <div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vic_. Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 George Carlin did a very funny routine on "I want coffee flavored coffee." At Starbucks there is a plethora of combinations, enough to intimidate anyone. Brevi, half latte, half frappe, shaken not stirred, yada yada. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patricks Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 I'm definitely sure I like the photos displayed in this thread (apart for my own snap which was nothing mor than jus that) than all the jiddrish, mine included. Eric - really did the old lady fondling her fags! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
._._z Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 Those aren't flavors; they're options. When did choice become bad? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_brown4 Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 Well, I rather prefer 7-11 coffee. Most of the SB coffee tastes over-roasted to me (like Euro-coffee YUK!). As for Wi-Fi, I like my Apple Airport better, don't have to deal with all the cyber loafers burning the bandwidth at the coffe shop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew_lee2 Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 <i>George Carlin did a very funny routine on "I want coffee flavored coffee."</i> <p> Wasn't that Denis Leary? Or did Denis rip off George Carlin as he had Bill Hicks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vic_. Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 You're right, it's Dennis Leary. All these guys on Comedy Central become a blur after a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Herbert Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 Trevot Hair, has stolen Harvey's hair. See, Harvey has to use boot polish on his bounce now; for the shine...to look better. He lost his hair in the Boar War, he was scared sht..less. Trevor is happy now. He's got proper hare. Not that plastic stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Herbert Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 Think i'll have a cup of tea, lot nicer than that £4.00 coffee crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
absinthe Posted April 15, 2004 Share Posted April 15, 2004 Allen, Would that be English Breakfast, Earl Grey, Orange Peoke, Chai (sweetened or unsweetened), green, black, white, decaf? Or... just plain old Liptons? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuart d Posted April 15, 2004 Share Posted April 15, 2004 "Plain old Liptons" - shudder! That's not tea Heather, that's a poor imitation. PG Tips, Typhoo, Yorkshire Gold, or the proper Tetley (not the fake stuff sold here in the US under the same brand name) beats a cup of coffee any day. Thanks to the declining Dollar, I'm paying comparatively stupid amounts for imported British teabags. What makes it worse is seeing the UK price on the packaging - less than a Pound for a box of 40, and yet I'm paying $7-9 for it. But it's still a damn sight cheaper than anything at Starbucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
._._z Posted April 15, 2004 Share Posted April 15, 2004 They see Allen coming with that Leica around his neck, and they jack up the prices just for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex_Es Posted April 16, 2004 Share Posted April 16, 2004 I tend to avoid Starbucks in the U.S. In Japan it's another story. It is one of a few places in Japan that I can go and not have cigarette smoke blown in my face. The coffee isn't bad; I just wish they won't serve it in paper cups. In Kobe I am passionately local to the Cosmopolitan coffeeshop which belongs to friends. But I do moonlight at Starbucks sometimes. Here is a shot from Starbucks in Motomachi, Kobe.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted April 16, 2004 Share Posted April 16, 2004 "Why is it when companies become successful they get attacked?... I see no reason to deride Starbucks..." ============================= Try Gevalia coffee, Robin. You'll find plenty of reasons to deride Starbucks after that experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
._._z Posted April 17, 2004 Share Posted April 17, 2004 Pleanty of reasons to deride Gevalia, actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now