Monday, November 28, 2005

Drip Coffee Company

Hey hey, for all those corporate-phobes out there, gather round this new independently-owned coffee place: Drip Coffee Company. Altho i feel obliged to point out that, like SO many of these "independent" heroes, Drip's (very cool) founder Steve Thatcher studied coffee w/ you-know-who. In fact, he moved to Seattle back in the '90s to work for them and learn the ropes. He opened his first indie coffee place in Amarillo, when he was a mere 22; he’s also done coffee in Austin & Boston. He came to Dallas for a girl -- and we get another coffee spot in the bargain. Drip is in the old Avon Cleaners bldg, where he’ll be roasting about 10 varieties of coffee, along w/ fine teas from Octavia and pastries from Doughmonkey.

4343 Lovers Lane. 214-599-7800. Opening 1st wk of December

15 Comments:

At November 28, 2005 9:47 AM, Blogger BK said...

Why come to Dallas for a girl when there are all those women running around everywhere?!

 
At November 28, 2005 11:12 AM, Anonymous m.b. said...

People seem to love Doughmonkey, but I'm not one of them.

 
At November 28, 2005 11:23 AM, Blogger Scott Roche said...

Yeah for the indies!

 
At November 28, 2005 11:31 AM, Blogger Twisted Link said...

Corporations aren't inherently evil, but the way the courts have interpreted the laws regarding them certainly makes it very easy for them to be malicious.

 
At November 28, 2005 12:13 PM, Anonymous m.b. said...

What a very erudite comment from Twisted.

 
At November 28, 2005 12:27 PM, Anonymous paris hilton said...

Doughmonkey .. good name for a pet

 
At November 28, 2005 1:58 PM, Blogger Kirk said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At November 28, 2005 2:00 PM, Blogger Kirk said...

Twisted is right. Corporations are inherently dysfunctional. They are, by definition, a fictitious "person" that is not responsible for its actions or those of its people, especially as long as its "veil is not pierced."

When you add the "natural selection" of corporate leaders -- who tend to be selected for their ruthlesness and even psycopathic behavior -- you end up with something that looks a lot like ... well, Dick Cheney.

But all of us are so used to living with corporate and other dysfunction that we accept the fiction that there is something "right" about them. Some of us even lionize and mythologize them. Plus, they pay the bills.

Hey, I am starting to feel a new blog comin' on!

 
At November 28, 2005 2:49 PM, Anonymous peanut gallery said...

Unlike some of the other commenters here, I have no issue with Starbucks. Just because a coffee place is indepedent doesn't make it better. If anything, it's the opposite. Anybody remember La Creme? That was maybe Dallas' first independent coffee purveyor and it was utter crap.

 
At November 28, 2005 8:27 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Drip Coffee" obviously they'll have brewed coffee, but espresso drinks too? Drip ins't such an enticing name for a coffeehouse.

 
At November 29, 2005 3:38 AM, Anonymous Dr. Who said...

Drip is also slang for something entirely different and most unappetizing!

 
At November 29, 2005 7:56 AM, Blogger Scott Roche said...

And just because it's a major chain doesn't make it better either.

 
At November 29, 2005 8:43 AM, Anonymous peanut gallery said...

You're right, captain eucalyptus, but my point was that it's more common for people to mindlessly defend the "indepdent coffeehouse", as if their sheer independence made them better. Where starbucks gets automatically criticized because it's a "big corporation". I'm not one to defend corporations, but I've had too much shitty coffee from independents to defend them, either.

 
At November 29, 2005 12:08 PM, Blogger BK said...

Kirk... you should read Krugman's latest bit of wisdom (in today's DMN among others) about Drucker's great work from the 60's and his take on corporations.

Basic take is that in past they essentially became our 'semi-private' social safety net and now that no longer is the case. When you take into account all the tax breaks and credits they get to provide health care and pensions to an ever shrinking amount of the population, at an ever increasing cost, then they dump the plan and fire the people, the net cost could serve a hell of a lot more with single-pay, universal health care.

Pretty compelling stuff...

 
At November 29, 2005 2:42 PM, Blogger Kirk said...

BK:

The argument for a single payor system, a la Canada, is compelling, until one remembers that both the late health minister of Ontario and the late premier of Quebec elected to fly to New York for treatment of their cancer.

That said, I agree completely that something's got to be done about the health care system here. And Krugman is one of the few Americans with the guts to suggest there might be an alternative to the bare-knuckled, "free-market," who-cares-where-the-chips-fall capitalism that has been in vogue in the U.S. for the past 25 years.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home