Starbucks to require purchases to hang out in stores

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What kind of a person so aggressively hates the most disadvantaged in a society???

Omg stop.

It does society no good to let every public space sink to the lowest common denominator of behavior. We went through this with the sidewalk homeless encampments during covid.

Are you ok with increasing taxes then to crate safe spaces for the homeless population to exist where you don't have to interact with them? What is your solution?

You are why Trump won, and the Democrats will be wandering in the electoral desert for a long time.

There are safe spaces already. Destroying libraries is entitlement, nothing more.

+1. what people don’t get is that homeless people make and have choices and are in fact part of society. just because they are homeless does not mean they are exempt from all rules. The people who think they should be are all highly privileged folk who don’t actually need the public space. Meanwhile our local library has gotten so sketchy that it can’t be a safe space for low income middle schoolers after school. And let’s not even get started on housing vouchers.

[Anonymous]

I used to like going into Starbucks to take a piss.
But not with homeless living in the restrooms.
Happy to pay $10 to take a piss in a clean place. I will give the uneaten Starbucks crap to some street person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What kind of a person so aggressively hates the most disadvantaged in a society???

Omg stop.

It does society no good to let every public space sink to the lowest common denominator of behavior. We went through this with the sidewalk homeless encampments during covid.

Are you ok with increasing taxes then to crate safe spaces for the homeless population to exist where you don't have to interact with them? What is your solution?

You are why Trump won, and the Democrats will be wandering in the electoral desert for a long time.

There are safe spaces already. Destroying libraries is entitlement, nothing more.

+1. what people don’t get is that homeless people make and have choices and are in fact part of society. just because they are homeless does not mean they are exempt from all rules. The people who think they should be are all highly privileged folk who don’t actually need the public space. Meanwhile our local library has gotten so sketchy that it can’t be a safe space for low income middle schoolers after school. And let’s not even get started on housing vouchers.

Please show me where ANYONE said that the homeless should not follow the rules. In fact, I said the very opposite.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I used to like going into Starbucks to take a piss.
But not with homeless living in the restrooms.
Happy to pay $10 to take a piss in a clean place. I will give the uneaten Starbucks crap to some street person.

Exactly. The homeless aren't simply using the restrooms. They set up camp in them for the day. Just like they do at Union Station. Have you been there lately? Fking hell trying to find a bathroom that doesn't have every stall occupied by a homeless person living in it. It's gotten so bad that my DC office now allows us to fly to our Boston and NYC offices instead of having to take the train because Union Station is so terrible and frankly, dangerous after dark for females.

Why can't some of the thousands of empty corporate offices be flipped to spaces where homeless can congregate during the day?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What kind of a person so aggressively hates the most disadvantaged in a society???

Omg stop.

It does society no good to let every public space sink to the lowest common denominator of behavior. We went through this with the sidewalk homeless encampments during covid.

Are you ok with increasing taxes then to crate safe spaces for the homeless population to exist where you don't have to interact with them? What is your solution?

You are why Trump won, and the Democrats will be wandering in the electoral desert for a long time.

There are safe spaces already. Destroying libraries is entitlement, nothing more.

+1. what people don’t get is that homeless people make and have choices and are in fact part of society. just because they are homeless does not mean they are exempt from all rules. The people who think they should be are all highly privileged folk who don’t actually need the public space. Meanwhile our local library has gotten so sketchy that it can’t be a safe space for low income middle schoolers after school. And let’s not even get started on housing vouchers.

Please show me where ANYONE said that the homeless should not follow the rules. In fact, I said the very opposite.

because you’re defending the status quo wherein homeless people are making libraries unpleasant and unsafe

[Anonymous]

The vast majority of homeless people suffer from mental illness and/or addictions. No one grows up wanting to be a vagrant that desperately needs their fix. And too often the resources we set aside to help the homeless are vacuumed by cynical NGOs who are only interested in enriching themselves. We need a sensible carrot and stick approach to deal with the difficult issues that the homeless bring. And that includes building long term asylums for those who are too far gone as well as serious addiction treatment facilities that give people the 90 days or so it takes for the crap to get out out of their system and for their brains to reset. The homeless need a choice - compassionate treatment or jail. Until then, homeless addicts will continue to be a public burden.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I used to like going into Starbucks to take a piss.
But not with homeless living in the restrooms.
Happy to pay $10 to take a piss in a clean place. I will give the uneaten Starbucks crap to some street person.

Exactly. The homeless aren't simply using the restrooms. They set up camp in them for the day. Just like they do at Union Station. Have you been there lately? Fking hell trying to find a bathroom that doesn't have every stall occupied by a homeless person living in it. It's gotten so bad that my DC office now allows us to fly to our Boston and NYC offices instead of having to take the train because Union Station is so terrible and frankly, dangerous after dark for females.

Why can't some of the thousands of empty corporate offices be flipped to spaces where homeless can congregate during the day?

I’m in Union Station all the time but I avoid the bathrooms at all costs. One of the few places I wouldn’t let my 12 yr old son use the bathroom alone! I did break my rule recently to use the women’s room. at first it seemed great, cleaner, calm … but then I realized there was a man loudly masturbating in the stall next to me.

What I cannot get is why we have given up actively policing (meant generically) public places. There should be security guards actively tossing out men in the women’s room, people camping in stalls, drug dealers clustering by the metro.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What kind of a person so aggressively hates the most disadvantaged in a society???

Omg stop.

It does society no good to let every public space sink to the lowest common denominator of behavior. We went through this with the sidewalk homeless encampments during covid.

Are you ok with increasing taxes then to crate safe spaces for the homeless population to exist where you don't have to interact with them? What is your solution?

You are why Trump won, and the Democrats will be wandering in the electoral desert for a long time.

There are safe spaces already. Destroying libraries is entitlement, nothing more.

+1. what people don’t get is that homeless people make and have choices and are in fact part of society. just because they are homeless does not mean they are exempt from all rules. The people who think they should be are all highly privileged folk who don’t actually need the public space. Meanwhile our local library has gotten so sketchy that it can’t be a safe space for low income middle schoolers after school. And let’s not even get started on housing vouchers.

Please show me where ANYONE said that the homeless should not follow the rules. In fact, I said the very opposite.

because you’re defending the status quo wherein homeless people are making libraries unpleasant and unsafe

No! You don't like to see them there does not equal unsafe and unpleasant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The vast majority of homeless people suffer from mental illness and/or addictions. No one grows up wanting to be a vagrant that desperately needs their fix. And too often the resources we set aside to help the homeless are vacuumed by cynical NGOs who are only interested in enriching themselves. We need a sensible carrot and stick approach to deal with the difficult issues that the homeless bring. And that includes building long term asylums for those who are too far gone as well as serious addiction treatment facilities that give people the 90 days or so it takes for the crap to get out out of their system and for their brains to reset. The homeless need a choice - compassionate treatment or jail. Until then, homeless addicts will continue to be a public burden.

+1. It’s hard to see a homeless mentally ill woman sprawled passed out on the sidewalk and believe that is somehow preferible to mandatory treatment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What kind of a person so aggressively hates the most disadvantaged in a society???

Omg stop.

It does society no good to let every public space sink to the lowest common denominator of behavior. We went through this with the sidewalk homeless encampments during covid.

Are you ok with increasing taxes then to crate safe spaces for the homeless population to exist where you don't have to interact with them? What is your solution?

You are why Trump won, and the Democrats will be wandering in the electoral desert for a long time.

There are safe spaces already. Destroying libraries is entitlement, nothing more.

+1. what people don’t get is that homeless people make and have choices and are in fact part of society. just because they are homeless does not mean they are exempt from all rules. The people who think they should be are all highly privileged folk who don’t actually need the public space. Meanwhile our local library has gotten so sketchy that it can’t be a safe space for low income middle schoolers after school. And let’s not even get started on housing vouchers.

Please show me where ANYONE said that the homeless should not follow the rules. In fact, I said the very opposite.

because you’re defending the status quo wherein homeless people are making libraries unpleasant and unsafe

No! You don't like to see them there does not equal unsafe and unpleasant.

Lol OK. You send your 11 yr old into a room full of drugged out/mentally ill unsupervised men. I won’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The vast majority of homeless people suffer from mental illness and/or addictions. No one grows up wanting to be a vagrant that desperately needs their fix. And too often the resources we set aside to help the homeless are vacuumed by cynical NGOs who are only interested in enriching themselves. We need a sensible carrot and stick approach to deal with the difficult issues that the homeless bring. And that includes building long term asylums for those who are too far gone as well as serious addiction treatment facilities that give people the 90 days or so it takes for the crap to get out out of their system and for their brains to reset. The homeless need a choice - compassionate treatment or jail. Until then, homeless addicts will continue to be a public burden.

I definitely agree that we need more services for the homeless who are often in that situation due to mental illness. But currently, we don't have the social nets and services that support them. So one of the only places they can go and not freeze to death is the library.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vast majority of homeless people suffer from mental illness and/or addictions. No one grows up wanting to be a vagrant that desperately needs their fix. And too often the resources we set aside to help the homeless are vacuumed by cynical NGOs who are only interested in enriching themselves. We need a sensible carrot and stick approach to deal with the difficult issues that the homeless bring. And that includes building long term asylums for those who are too far gone as well as serious addiction treatment facilities that give people the 90 days or so it takes for the crap to get out out of their system and for their brains to reset. The homeless need a choice - compassionate treatment or jail. Until then, homeless addicts will continue to be a public burden.

I definitely agree that we need more services for the homeless who are often in that situation due to mental illness. But currently, we don't have the social nets and services that support them. So one of the only places they can go and not freeze to death is the library.

That’s just not true - DC has Day programs and keeps additional shelters open during cold and heat emergencies. And of course it’s an issue in any weather.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is an etiquette to working in a coffee shop. Some people follow it and others don't. Those of you complaining are complaining about the people who don't follow the etiquette. Those of us who sometimes work in coffee shops are also annoyed by those people. But working in coffee shops is normal and yes the shops often encourage it. My Starbucks has comfortable padded seating and each table has its own charging station so you can plug in a laptop and cell phone at the same time. Plus the free wifi and the deals they offer me on the app at various times of day are inducements to work there.

Anyway, this is what I consider to be proper etiquette for working at a coffee shop, Starbucks or otherwise:

- Don't go during peak traffic hours. No one should be camping out on their laptop at like 8am when there is a line out the door and they are churning out 20 drinks a minute. If you are going to work, go during off-peak hours like mid-morning, early afternoon, or the evening after commutes.

- Don't go for 6 hours. That's too long. I think my absolute max is 3 hours, and that would be unusual (and I would only do it if the place were fairly empty). I generally go for like 90-120 minutes.

- Obviously, order something. Most places actually do require this -- Starbucks was an outlier for a while but this is standard. I generally order at least one drink for each hour I'm there, or I'll order a very large drink. I usually also order food simply because I get hungry. It's rare that I go work in a coffee shop and don't spend $10-20.

- No video meetings or conference calls. This is the one I see a lot and annoys me. No one should have to listen to you update your boss on your project progress during your weekly Teams call. You should do that in private. I personally think in person meetings are fine if it's just two people. This is functionally not very different from like meeting someone you met an an industry event at a coffee shop to network, and most people think that's fine too. But the conference and video calls are very obnoxious, especially when people don't wear headphones.

I think if people follow these guidelines, working at coffee shops is perfectly reasonable and likely helps these businesses fill tables during slower times of day and justify longer hours, which I think is good.

I’ll add - you should opt for the seating designed for solo patrons like a counter. Don’t take up a 4-top. If you do, then don’t look annoyed when I sit down across from you with my kid when there are no other seats.

I'm the PP and I wrote a follow saying exactly that -- don't take up more space than you need. Honestly, the Starbucks I frequent is mostly set up for singles -- There are only 2-3 tables that are designed to be shared by 2-4 people. The rest is bench seating with these tiny tables that are obviously meant for one person (two people could share if they are ok sitting right next to each other, so a parent and kid could use one but two friends would probably feel weird) plus a communal table where anyone can sit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vast majority of homeless people suffer from mental illness and/or addictions. No one grows up wanting to be a vagrant that desperately needs their fix. And too often the resources we set aside to help the homeless are vacuumed by cynical NGOs who are only interested in enriching themselves. We need a sensible carrot and stick approach to deal with the difficult issues that the homeless bring. And that includes building long term asylums for those who are too far gone as well as serious addiction treatment facilities that give people the 90 days or so it takes for the crap to get out out of their system and for their brains to reset. The homeless need a choice - compassionate treatment or jail. Until then, homeless addicts will continue to be a public burden.

I definitely agree that we need more services for the homeless who are often in that situation due to mental illness. But currently, we don't have the social nets and services that support them. So one of the only places they can go and not freeze to death is the library.

That’s just not true - DC has Day programs and keeps additional shelters open during cold and heat emergencies. And of course it’s an issue in any weather.

1) DC most definitely does not have enough to accommodate everyone
2) DC area is much bigger than DC proper.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is an etiquette to working in a coffee shop. Some people follow it and others don't. Those of you complaining are complaining about the people who don't follow the etiquette. Those of us who sometimes work in coffee shops are also annoyed by those people. But working in coffee shops is normal and yes the shops often encourage it. My Starbucks has comfortable padded seating and each table has its own charging station so you can plug in a laptop and cell phone at the same time. Plus the free wifi and the deals they offer me on the app at various times of day are inducements to work there.

Anyway, this is what I consider to be proper etiquette for working at a coffee shop, Starbucks or otherwise:

- Don't go during peak traffic hours. No one should be camping out on their laptop at like 8am when there is a line out the door and they are churning out 20 drinks a minute. If you are going to work, go during off-peak hours like mid-morning, early afternoon, or the evening after commutes.

- Don't go for 6 hours. That's too long. I think my absolute max is 3 hours, and that would be unusual (and I would only do it if the place were fairly empty). I generally go for like 90-120 minutes.

- Obviously, order something. Most places actually do require this -- Starbucks was an outlier for a while but this is standard. I generally order at least one drink for each hour I'm there, or I'll order a very large drink. I usually also order food simply because I get hungry. It's rare that I go work in a coffee shop and don't spend $10-20.

- No video meetings or conference calls. This is the one I see a lot and annoys me. No one should have to listen to you update your boss on your project progress during your weekly Teams call. You should do that in private. I personally think in person meetings are fine if it's just two people. This is functionally not very different from like meeting someone you met an an industry event at a coffee shop to network, and most people think that's fine too. But the conference and video calls are very obnoxious, especially when people don't wear headphones.

I think if people follow these guidelines, working at coffee shops is perfectly reasonable and likely helps these businesses fill tables during slower times of day and justify longer hours, which I think is good.

I’ll add - you should opt for the seating designed for solo patrons like a counter. Don’t take up a 4-top. If you do, then don’t look annoyed when I sit down across from you with my kid when there are no other seats.

I'm the PP and I wrote a follow saying exactly that -- don't take up more space than you need. Honestly, the Starbucks I frequent is mostly set up for singles -- There are only 2-3 tables that are designed to be shared by 2-4 people. The rest is bench seating with these tiny tables that are obviously meant for one person (two people could share if they are ok sitting right next to each other, so a parent and kid could use one but two friends would probably feel weird) plus a communal table where anyone can sit.

Exactly! And I wish Starbucks would put in more big communal tables. I feel like they are a good solution because everyone squeezes in where they can and nobody feels like they own it.