Tagged: Starbucks

The cost of the bottom line

Today I was in Starbucks with a friend who bought my drink. I think their prices are silly and I only go if I am with someone who invites me. Anyway, it was a completely new crew and the cashier didn’t know how to ring up my drink. I told her how to add it since I overheard that answer from another cashier who didn’t know how to ring it up. It’s the salted carmel hot chocolate which is a seasonally promoted drink but is available year round.

NEW YORK, NY - OCTOBER 04:  Starbucks CEO Howa...

Why did I share that? So that I could share this. I once was downsized by a company that had financial issues. One company I worked for once let 15% of its workforce go in a single day. It was really tough that day. I wonder sometimes about the cost to the bottom line when companies think this way. Companies are free to do whatever is in their interest, but at some point they have to realize that if people don’t have jobs they can’t afford to buy their goods. I bet that Henry Ford who said he wanted his employees to be able to afford to buy the goods they produce would be surprised at what seems to be the common experience. That the lowest priced worker gets the job, and even then it’s not certain.

I am not suggesting that anyone has a right to be paid any amount of money. I am only humbly asking that if people are treated as costs and not resources, it doesn’t seem like the best use of people. I remember reading a story in which a hospital was facing a shortage of millions of dollars and told the employees that they might have to let people go since management couldn’t find a way to fix the imbalance. Miraculously the employees brain-stormed ways to save money, and it turned out that no one needed to be fired. Instead of letting people go, they improved the waste that was inherent in the system.

It is tough to manage a business in todays economic environment. I am not suggesting that I know better than anyone else how to be profitable and a responsible citizen. It does seem however that by emphasizing profit over everything else gets rid of the people who are creative, dedicated and will find ways to make a business survive.  This is just my idea, I could be wrong.

Share

Powerbook G4 Resurrected (via Notes En Route)

It is a great value how long these powerbooks have lasted. I would have loved to get one myself but I was not in that financial place when these came out. Oh well, I enjoy the several year old MacBook I have now. Even an older mac can be great fun can’t it?

Powerbook G4 Resurrected I am not really one to be attached to things, especially gadgets.  I consider my passport as my most important possession, the first thing I’m going to grab if I’m inside a burning building.  That is until six days ago, I spilled a venti-sized drip coffee in Starbucks on my Powerbook G4. I never talk about technology much.  I like my cellphone because I can call and send text messages, and take the occasional grainy photo you see on this blog (li … Read More

via Notes En Route

Share

Is Mark Zuckerberg a good example?

Mark Zuckerberg, founder Facebook, and Jet Li ...
Image via Wikipedia

I responded to a post here of someone who said this:

I don’t think the quote ” Live within your means.” applies to him. He is living way below his means which is amazing. While some a lot of people, on the other hand, is living beyond what they can afford. It is a sad truth. I hope we could all take a lesson or two on Mark Zuckerberg’s modest living. It is an inspiration.

My response:

Hello,

You might not know this but Mr. Jobs has been trying to get rid of that house for years and has been appealing the board of his community to remove it. They felt it was a historic landmark. The plans for Mr. Jobs are detailed at Gizmodo here.
http://gizmodo.com/5649909/the-house-that-steve-jobs-will-build
It is as humble as Mr. Zuckerbergs home. In fact, more so because of his wife and kids.

Also while I am not defending the large homes of the wealthy, there is a practical element of having those homes. They have significant reason to need better security than the average joe, and those homes provide that. The world would be a poor place without people who risk things and take chances. While materialism does have some unhelpful consequences, I would rather see them spend it on this than just hoard it and not provide tax revenues and jobs.

If modest living appeals to you, look at monks/spiritual people who have a literal handful of possessions. Look at the poor of society who have to do without not by choice, but by the circumstances of their lives. Look at the 2 billion people in the world who live on less then $2 a day. Wealth doesn’t make our lives better, it just distracts us from the good things that it sometimes obscures.

I think its reasonable for the stability of Mr. Jobs children (everyones children) that he owns a house.  In addition, famous peoples homes are probably one of the only places they can relax and not worry about invasion of privacy.  It doesn’t seem so unreasonable that they have these places, even if they are more about ego than necessitity.

 

Share

Starbucks Wi-Fi Goes Free (via Technologizer)

This is way overdue for the prices they charge. Caribou has had this for years.

Looks like Starbucks is finally getting with the program and offering truly free Wi-Fi, starting July 1st in partnership with Yahoo. (Until now it's offered two free hours a day to Starbucks cardholders.) I don't even drink coffee, and I have a Verizon Wireless MiFi mobile router that radically reduces my interest in free hotspots–but I'm pleased by the news. … Read More

via Technologizer

Share