Who knew a glorified coffee shop could inspire such passion, grief and loathing? This article has inspired 260 some odd posts and counting as of my writing! I've read none of them, but it isn't hard to discern the emotion, judging by the subject title.

Which leads to the obvious question: why?

Why this outpouring? I haven't seen this sort of intensity since I witnessed church fights about homosexuality, gay marriage, abortion -- the politics of the body. Moneybox has never been so popular!

Something deeper is going on here. The breadth and depth suggests an emotional process that transcends the mere fact that a chain which sells exotic, expensive coffee-based drinks and oversized desserts is pulling in its horns a bit.

Could it be that the excessive expressions of grief and the equally excessive expressions of vehemence signify certain understandings about the world that are now being challenged.

Clearly, there's some socio-economic class issues going on here. My first job was washing floors and toilets at a Dunkin' Donuts a few blocks from my house, and all the Dunkin' Donuts I've been in over the years had a working-class attitude, where guys and gals hung around gossiping, bemoaning the 'bosses', critiquing the local pro sports team, sharing a plain cup of coffee (with a shot of cream) and a smoke. Starbucks, however, aimed for the 'Bobos in Paradise,' the upscale strivers in the cities and burbs who were willing to plunk down several bucks for coffee that was syruped, foamed and confected. Starbucks became a place to meet someone for the first time after making an internet dating site connection. Starbucks afficiandos did seemingly important work on their laptops, read the NY Times and bitched about their nannies. Dunkin' Donuts had waitresses; Starbucks has baristas.

Ultimately, the difference is less about the coffee than it is the cachet. Caffeine is caffeine, after all. But Dunkin' Donuts and Starbucks convey radically different worldviews. The former values those who work with their hands or labor anonymously in cubicles; the latter, the knowledge workers and managers in charge. And now, it seems, the 'stars' of our meritocracy are getting their comeuppance.

Driving a three-ton behemoth a few miles to indulge in a cup of coffee and status affirmation no longer seems so wise and fruitful with gas at $4/gallon. It now seems frvilous. But the craving for staus remains.

Paradise has been lost. And we're all getting booted out of the garden we all have imagined as our rightful home since the 20's. The era of cheap fossil fuels upon which our fantasies have been based is ending with astounding rapidity.

No wonder there's so much wailing and gnashing of teeth. It feels like... Hell.

And I wonder at the appeal of a bookseller with only one book.

Interestingly, the announced closures sent my Starbucks stock, of which I have quite a bit, up over 7%. I guess it shows that, at the bottom, all businesses are just that ... businesses.

Maybe they should cut back on caffeine.

Too much caffeine is a well-known cause of wailing and gnashing of teeth.

I am puzzled too.

My theory is that Starbucks gets its business largely from Internet-oriented people; and Internetters are drawn to Starbucks as another thing that makes them feel "superior."

In NYC, Dunkin's staff usually have an accent, while Starbucks workers usually don't.

So, news about Starbucks retrenching hits home to the Internet crowd. It's like they could soon feel a cutback themselves.

FEAR!

Many comments here have pooh-poohed Starbucks, but the real point has been a drawing-out of comments from people with no apparent interest in anything besides their own "addiction" to fanciful-sounding caffeine-hits.

I clearly recall the beaming-flashing pride expressed by upper-level-clerks carrying mugs of $3 coffee through my old office-building, where the bosses got their (excellent) coffee from a 25-cent machine and the top-top execs got it free from a shared coffee-pot sneaked in by their slavish secretaries who broke the rules.

One CAN get a sense of self-importance by talking about their "luxury -world" participation or even Wal-Mart, which shows that a person has SOME money to spend.

I buy some coffee beans from Starbucks at their outrageous prices, but I'd never pay the small fortune that they get for a cup. And most of their foamed-up brews look like diabetes cocktails, upwards of 500 to 900 calories. I drink coffee black or, rarely, espresso (home-made in my pump machine).

Apparently some people have a lot of spare time to go on and on and on about a culture of pseudo "coffee" drinkers. Those people don't go to Starbucks to drink coffee because they don't make coffee. They sell "dreams in a cup." Their logo says coffee, but their cups are filled with Frappuccino, Latte, Mocachino and now something called Vivanno—whatever.
The last time I went there to get coffee they had two varieties, the standby Verona and a bolder blend, which they were out of. So they only had one coffee to serve. Wow, what a choice.

I do feel badly for people who have lost their jobs. Otherwise, get a life and drink some coffee once in a while. You might actually like it.

You can get Starbuck's French Roast at a good price at Costco - assuming you like strong coffee.

Over here, almost every supermarket sells at least ten varieties of Starbucks beans. But I buy the Mocha Sanana, which is $16 a pound and sold only at SB. However, that saves me a trip to the Arabs in Brooklyn, whose Yemen Mocha is better and "only" $10, while their excellent Colombian is $6. And Maxwell House Colombian is quite good at $2.50, but too coarsely ground.

Costco gets around $17 for a 2.5 pound bag of the Starbucks French Roast.