Jonathan A. Knee writes that New York’s love affair with Starbucks has turned sour. He juxtaposed the courtship years with the loveless middle age relationship that has now emerged. Highlights include:

• Starbucks in NYC used to work to make you believe that you had left the city:
  • Comfortable chairs distracted from urban life.
  • Cheap refills for discount hungry citizens.
  • Well-stocked bathrooms
• Now however:
  • The chairs are gone, and many Starbucks’ are now standing room only.
  • Since your refill is only eligible if you drank your drink in the store, Starbucks is now moving to eliminate refills since people aren’t likely to finish their drinks in a store without sitting room.
  • Starbucks no longer wants to be New York City’s public bathroom.
• Perhaps the reason for the change is that when it first entered the New York market Starbucks was a young chain looking to grow.
• But today New York’s stores represent just 1% of Starbucks’ total stores.
• Luckily competitors are moving in to fill the gap.

To read more including how Starbucks used to make you forget how rude New Yorkers can be, how competitors are responding to Starbucks’ transformation, the end of free Wi-Fi, and the rise of anti-Starbucks websites click here. It’s a short, entertaining, and well-written article.

Source: Slate

The Economist reported on some fascinating research with real implications for the next time you visit the supermarket:

• If you were offered a 33% discount in price or a 50% increase in quantity which would you take? According to studies people would overwhelmingly prefer having 50% more, but the two offers are completely identical.
• Similarly if you were given 33% extra free or a 33% discount off the price, you should pick the discount. But most think the two are equal.
• Finally people prefer getting 20% off, and then another 25% off rather than 40% off. But the two are the same.
• The problem is that people, in general, are bad at fractions.

To read more including some of the ways that this is, and can be, used, what this might teach the government, details of the study, why you should watch out before you buy your next car, and what would help you as a shopper, click here.

Source: The Economist

San Francisco has an innovative new plan to deal with the problem of pan-handlers lining the streets writes Heather Knight. Highlights include:

• Evidence suggests that beggars in San Francisco have housing, but pan-handle to supplement their income or because they have nothing else to do.
• At the same time the economic recession has caused pet owners to abandon their dogs. A minority of these dogs require special treatment and care from people with a lot of time.
• The city plans to offer to pay beggars $50-$75 a week to take care of these dogs, and promises to pay all associated dog expenses.
• Candidates need to be living in a house, can’t be severely mentally ill, can’t have a history of violence, must seek treatment if they have addictions, and must give up begging if they want to keep the dogs.

To read more including the safeguards put in place for both the pan-handlers and the dogs, what happens to dogs that are not socialized to interact with humans, how many dogs are left in the shelters, what happens when a human-dog pairing isn’t deemed a good match, other ways that the city has tried to deal with the problem of pan-handing, and the therapeutic effect of dogs, click here.

Source: San Francisco Chronicle

Via: Freakonomics