4 ms·
> Starbucks is bad coffee anyway. It's better coffee than those places that want to make coffee the "proper way", but can't. I understand the "corporations-bad
by ghusto 3y ago
> Starbucks is bad coffee anyway.
It's better coffee than those places that want to make coffee the "proper way", but can't. I understand the "corporations-bad" source of the hate for Starbucks, but their coffee is okay precisely because they're driven by corporate goals: Press button, coffee comes out, calibrated the same as every other Starbucks in the world; to be passable.
- mandmandam 3y ago> I understand the "corporations-bad" source of the hate for Starbucks No, you don't. If you did, you wouldn't talk about it like that. And their coffee is bad, not [just] in a "this company illegally attacks unions, treats their workers heinously, undercuts small businesses to gain a monopoly, and are currently actively supporting a genocide" kind of way, but in a "these beans are literally burnt" kind of way. Some people might like burnt beans, in the same way some people like burnt steak, or prefer McDonalds over a real burger. Fine. You're allowed to like bad coffee.
- ghusto 3y agoThe other claims you make aside, what does "actively supporting a genocide" mean? I'm genuinely interested.