Starbucks to require purchases to hang out in stores

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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 also fly for work for the same reason.

Businesses fled union station for safety reasons. Anyone remember the heyday of Union Station when there were shops and restaurants like B Smith's

B Smith’s had the absolutely BEST brunch. RIP, B.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Starbucks policy is really designed for homeless people and we have to be realistic, it's become a problem. I stopped going to the library a long time ago because homeless people were constantly making them uncomfortable places. Why libraries should become refuges for the homeless is beyond me. Typical urban progressive mindset, I suppose. One can't fault Starbucks for tackling this problem.

Libraries are some of the last indoor public spaces where they are allowed. That's all. It's not an urban progressive mindset. It's that there is no legal reason to discriminate against members of the public who are non-disruptive. My library has problems with the building exterior but not interior.

DC has plenty of day services for the homeless: https://dhs.dc.gov/page/day-services-centers

I think it’s entirely reasonable for a library to preserve what it actually is - a place to access media - and not turn into a homeless shelter.

A homeless person sitting there reading is no different than you sitting there reading. They have every right to be there.

If they bring bedbugs and make people ill from the stink, they are indeed very different from me.

So don't go. I'd much rather see them there than you.

— says a library fat cat paid six-figures to sit on her ass in an office, blow money on paid conferences (read vacations), and retire with a pension

NP. Wow. This post is overblown and sounds a little jelly that you’re not paid comfortably to do something you love. FTR, I don’t think homeless people should be occupying library space for sanitary reasons, but girl you are over the top.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish there was a way to do this for libraries too. The homeless have taken them over.

Libraries are a public good that ”belong” to everyone (unlike private companies).

Are you seriously suggesting homeless people shouldn’t be allowed to read or apply for a job or other service from the library? That’s really your opinion?

Cut the crap, they’re not doing any of those things. Not PP, but yes, I’m suggesting that drug addicted, drunk, mentally ill, sex offenders, ex cons, and people who smell like feces and carry lice and bed bugs should not be allowed in a public library. A library which they don’t pay a dime for, I might add. They are a public nuisance and walking biohazard. Anyone arguing to the contrary is a lunatic lib who just wants to see the world burn.

Many would call me a liberal. Nobody would call me a lunatic and why did you make it political. There are many, and I mean a lot of people in the Democratic Party who also believe that libraries should not have become deaf to homeless shelters. Such nonsense ruined the lower level MLK, Jr library downtown. Have not been in it for years because you could barely hold your noise the smells were so bad. So no, the far right does not have a monopoly on the belief that libraries and coffee shops should be used for their intended use.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Coffee shops, Panera, McDonald’s, and libraries are not homeless shelters. Get these disgusting creeps out of all of them. They have zero right to be in these places.

They do if they are a paying customer. They do not being if they are loitering. I will not be so heartless as you PP to call them disgusting creeps, but for the grace of God, that you or a loved one didn’t develop an untreated schizophrenia or equivalent disorder. Life can come fast and furious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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 also fly for work for the same reason.

Businesses fled union station for safety reasons. Anyone remember the heyday of Union Station when there were shops and restaurants like B Smith's

Loved B Smith’s restaurant and was sad to hear about what happened to her personally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Coffee shops, Panera, McDonald’s, and libraries are not homeless shelters. Get these disgusting creeps out of all of them. They have zero right to be in these places.

I feel sorry for you….

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait, so you should be able to sit and "work" there for hours but no one else should?

I personally think 20-30 min limit for everyone at a coffee shop is very reasonable.

I'm buying stuff. If they want to enforce 20-30 minutes for paying customers, fine, but would result in lost business not only from people who work from these spots, but also (for example) friends wanting to meet up for coffee. Most of those meetups would be more like an hour, not 20 minutes.

So you think your $5 latte entitles you take up their space for an entire day? And you don't see a problem with that. If you need to work, go rent a place, go to the library, work from home. Starbucks is a business. They need to turn tables and sell products. I would love if they enforced the 20-30 min limit on everyone.

First off, "$5 latte", you clearly haven't been to Starbucks since 2013. I don't work there the entire day. It's a couple hours. And clearly, Starbucks does not see a problem with that. I don't see them setting time limits or banning anyone who actually is buying things.

I guess they do with this new policy. Kudos to them.

It applies to people who aren't buying anything. Can you read?

OK so you plan to buy something every 30 min? Great.

The policy does not require this but also I would be find buying things while I sit there, in fact I already do this because if I finish my drink but am still working I will usually order another or get something to eat.

I know you've made hating people who work at coffee shops like 20% of your personality but fortunately Starbucks loves people who work at coffee shops and people who work at coffee shops love Starbucks. It's a deeply symbiotic relationship and you can't break us up.

DP. What makes you think Starbucks loves you? Maybe the barista who you tipped generously but your one drink and maybe a pastry for hours of internet, using their toilet and taking up a table for two is not in their interest.

Well I know Starbucks loves me because they are a corporate entity that exists for the sole purpose of making money and I give them lots of my money in exchange for consumables and a place to sit and work for hours.

But also the manager at my regular Starbucks definitely likes me and always brings me and other regulars samples of stuff and we've had conversations about how it's a particularly nice Starbucks and also how corporate needs to send someone to fix automatic faucet in one of the bathrooms because it sprays water too hard and it hits the sink at a wrong angle and sprays water all over the bathroom. Those of us in the know use the other bathroom to avoid this which also saves the manager the trouble of having to mop down that bathroom again. Come on, Corporate! Fix the sink.

xoxo

How much do you spend and how long do you stay? How much profit does Starbucks make off you after deducting wifi, bathroom cleaning, ingredients and labor costs. How much do they lose from other customers avoiding the store when there are no tables available?

They’re not losing any money. The reason why Starbucks charges $10 for a coffee drink is to subsidize the laptop workers.

[Anonymous]

It's ironic that the people insisting that libraries and Starbucks function as homeless shelters because "they have a perfect right to be there" are probably the exact same people bemoaning that Denmark and Japan are such nice clean societies and "we could be like that if it wasn't for (Boogeyman)....". What do you think they do with their schizophrenic population? Because that's what most homeless people are. The down-on-his-luck, mentally healthy person who just needs a bed and a job isn't homeless for long.
I worked at Starbucks 15 years ago and their goal back then was to be like "Cheers" without booze....somewhere people could relax as long as they wanted and converse with friends. They actually encouraged the employees to start conversations with patrons.
I've been to that same Starbucks recently and they've removed most of the seating for a giant "mobile order pickup" area. The majority of the people coming in and out are Uber Eats delivery guys. The few seats are taken up by the laptop crowd. I sat down with a friend to catch up and the lady next to us was annoyed and asked us to keep quiet because she was trying to work. I'm not going back again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait, so you should be able to sit and "work" there for hours but no one else should?

I personally think 20-30 min limit for everyone at a coffee shop is very reasonable.

I'm buying stuff. If they want to enforce 20-30 minutes for paying customers, fine, but would result in lost business not only from people who work from these spots, but also (for example) friends wanting to meet up for coffee. Most of those meetups would be more like an hour, not 20 minutes.

So you think your $5 latte entitles you take up their space for an entire day? And you don't see a problem with that. If you need to work, go rent a place, go to the library, work from home. Starbucks is a business. They need to turn tables and sell products. I would love if they enforced the 20-30 min limit on everyone.

First off, "$5 latte", you clearly haven't been to Starbucks since 2013. I don't work there the entire day. It's a couple hours. And clearly, Starbucks does not see a problem with that. I don't see them setting time limits or banning anyone who actually is buying things.

I guess they do with this new policy. Kudos to them.

It applies to people who aren't buying anything. Can you read?

OK so you plan to buy something every 30 min? Great.

The policy does not require this but also I would be find buying things while I sit there, in fact I already do this because if I finish my drink but am still working I will usually order another or get something to eat.

I know you've made hating people who work at coffee shops like 20% of your personality but fortunately Starbucks loves people who work at coffee shops and people who work at coffee shops love Starbucks. It's a deeply symbiotic relationship and you can't break us up.

DP. What makes you think Starbucks loves you? Maybe the barista who you tipped generously but your one drink and maybe a pastry for hours of internet, using their toilet and taking up a table for two is not in their interest.

Well I know Starbucks loves me because they are a corporate entity that exists for the sole purpose of making money and I give them lots of my money in exchange for consumables and a place to sit and work for hours.

But also the manager at my regular Starbucks definitely likes me and always brings me and other regulars samples of stuff and we've had conversations about how it's a particularly nice Starbucks and also how corporate needs to send someone to fix automatic faucet in one of the bathrooms because it sprays water too hard and it hits the sink at a wrong angle and sprays water all over the bathroom. Those of us in the know use the other bathroom to avoid this which also saves the manager the trouble of having to mop down that bathroom again. Come on, Corporate! Fix the sink.

xoxo

How much do you spend and how long do you stay? How much profit does Starbucks make off you after deducting wifi, bathroom cleaning, ingredients and labor costs. How much do they lose from other customers avoiding the store when there are no tables available?

They’re not losing any money. The reason why Starbucks charges $10 for a coffee drink is to subsidize the laptop workers.

Oh look, a shameless “camping” leech trying to rationalize being a parasite. Sweetie, your coffee or even a coffee and sandwich $10 subtotal does not justify camping in any business for hours. Restaurants that are $50 a plate with hundred dollar bottles of wine don’t want people camping at tables even if their subtotal is $500. And you think $10 is enough. lol. It’s hundreds of dollars a mo for a WeWork sub. Y’all won’t buy one because you all know you’re scamming coffee shops instead for much less. You’re apparently also too cheap to even buy a $80 mo high speed internet access at your apt? I mean come on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's ironic that the people insisting that libraries and Starbucks function as homeless shelters because "they have a perfect right to be there" are probably the exact same people bemoaning that Denmark and Japan are such nice clean societies and "we could be like that if it wasn't for (Boogeyman)....". What do you think they do with their schizophrenic population? Because that's what most homeless people are. The down-on-his-luck, mentally healthy person who just needs a bed and a job isn't homeless for long.
I worked at Starbucks 15 years ago and their goal back then was to be like "Cheers" without booze....somewhere people could relax as long as they wanted and converse with friends. They actually encouraged the employees to start conversations with patrons.
I've been to that same Starbucks recently and they've removed most of the seating for a giant "mobile order pickup" area. The majority of the people coming in and out are Uber Eats delivery guys. The few seats are taken up by the laptop crowd. I sat down with a friend to catch up and the lady next to us was annoyed and asked us to keep quiet because she was trying to work. I'm not going back again.

+1. Ugly shrews and creepy men on their laptops all day drives away good normal customers.

[Anonymous]

I’m a teacher. Nearly every Starbucks gift card a family gives me, I pass on to homeless person so they can get out of the elements with dignity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish there was a way to do this for libraries too. The homeless have taken them over.

Libraries are a public good that ”belong” to everyone (unlike private companies).

Are you seriously suggesting homeless people shouldn’t be allowed to read or apply for a job or other service from the library? That’s really your opinion?

Sure they can use the libraries, but they shouldn’t be allowed to drag their bedbug ridden suitcases and sacks through the library, sleep on the furniture or take up home in a bathroom stall. If they aren’t reading, on a computer, or otherwise occupied utilizing something at the library, then they should leave. It isn’t a shelter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait, so you should be able to sit and "work" there for hours but no one else should?

I personally think 20-30 min limit for everyone at a coffee shop is very reasonable.

I'm buying stuff. If they want to enforce 20-30 minutes for paying customers, fine, but would result in lost business not only from people who work from these spots, but also (for example) friends wanting to meet up for coffee. Most of those meetups would be more like an hour, not 20 minutes.

So you think your $5 latte entitles you take up their space for an entire day? And you don't see a problem with that. If you need to work, go rent a place, go to the library, work from home. Starbucks is a business. They need to turn tables and sell products. I would love if they enforced the 20-30 min limit on everyone.

First off, "$5 latte", you clearly haven't been to Starbucks since 2013. I don't work there the entire day. It's a couple hours. And clearly, Starbucks does not see a problem with that. I don't see them setting time limits or banning anyone who actually is buying things.

I guess they do with this new policy. Kudos to them.

It applies to people who aren't buying anything. Can you read?

OK so you plan to buy something every 30 min? Great.

The policy does not require this but also I would be find buying things while I sit there, in fact I already do this because if I finish my drink but am still working I will usually order another or get something to eat.

I know you've made hating people who work at coffee shops like 20% of your personality but fortunately Starbucks loves people who work at coffee shops and people who work at coffee shops love Starbucks. It's a deeply symbiotic relationship and you can't break us up.

DP. What makes you think Starbucks loves you? Maybe the barista who you tipped generously but your one drink and maybe a pastry for hours of internet, using their toilet and taking up a table for two is not in their interest.

Well I know Starbucks loves me because they are a corporate entity that exists for the sole purpose of making money and I give them lots of my money in exchange for consumables and a place to sit and work for hours.

But also the manager at my regular Starbucks definitely likes me and always brings me and other regulars samples of stuff and we've had conversations about how it's a particularly nice Starbucks and also how corporate needs to send someone to fix automatic faucet in one of the bathrooms because it sprays water too hard and it hits the sink at a wrong angle and sprays water all over the bathroom. Those of us in the know use the other bathroom to avoid this which also saves the manager the trouble of having to mop down that bathroom again. Come on, Corporate! Fix the sink.

xoxo

How much do you spend and how long do you stay? How much profit does Starbucks make off you after deducting wifi, bathroom cleaning, ingredients and labor costs. How much do they lose from other customers avoiding the store when there are no tables available?

They’re not losing any money. The reason why Starbucks charges $10 for a coffee drink is to subsidize the laptop workers.

Oh look, a shameless “camping” leech trying to rationalize being a parasite. Sweetie, your coffee or even a coffee and sandwich $10 subtotal does not justify camping in any business for hours. Restaurants that are $50 a plate with hundred dollar bottles of wine don’t want people camping at tables even if their subtotal is $500. And you think $10 is enough. lol. It’s hundreds of dollars a mo for a WeWork sub. Y’all won’t buy one because you all know you’re scamming coffee shops instead for much less. You’re apparently also too cheap to even buy a $80 mo high speed internet access at your apt? I mean come on.

You didn't read carefully or you don't understand the word "subsidize".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Libraries are a public good that ”belong” to everyone (unlike private companies).

Are you seriously suggesting homeless people shouldn’t be allowed to read or apply for a job or other service from the library? That’s really your opinion?

Homeless drug addicts, mentally disturbed, ex cons & registered sex offenders do not own or contribute in any way to library funding. Anyone arguing these unpredictable biohazards have any right to ruin libraries and endanger patrons and staff sounds mentally ill themselves. Like, who in their right mind thinks is okay or normal for library clerks and Starbucks baristas to be trained using narcan because so many opioid addicts are shooting up in the bathrooms? W-t-f. This is NOT normal or acceptable!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Libraries are a public good that ”belong” to everyone (unlike private companies).

Are you seriously suggesting homeless people shouldn’t be allowed to read or apply for a job or other service from the library? That’s really your opinion?

Homeless drug addicts, mentally disturbed, ex cons & registered sex offenders do not own or contribute in any way to library funding. Anyone arguing these unpredictable biohazards have any right to ruin libraries and endanger patrons and staff sounds mentally ill themselves. Like, who in their right mind thinks is okay or normal for library clerks and Starbucks baristas to be trained using narcan because so many opioid addicts are shooting up in the bathrooms? W-t-f. This is NOT normal or acceptable!

Your argument doesn't work since 8 year olds don't contribute to library funding. I don't have a logical argument to remove the homeless from libraries until they become an active threat. Otherwise, the law is on their side.

If Starbucks or some government is requiring Narcan training by private citizens, well, that is an abdication of responsibility by the local government.