• jimerson@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    I hate to say anything in defense of Starbucks (as a small Coffee House owner), but non-dairy costs more in general. It’s not like they are upcharging because they want to stick it to the lactose intolerant.

    • WetBeardHairs@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      The idea that it costs more to put oats in a blender with an enzyme is more expensive to produce than breeding and feeding cows is pretty laughable. Non-dairy is only more expensive because of gigantic subsidies that simply don’t need to exist in the modern era.

      Edit: the number of you simping for a gigantic corporation is surprising. Oat water is cheap to make. Milk is not. You buy milk at the grocery store nearly at cost. You buy oat milk in branded containers in the yuppy-vegan-white-women priced section at gouging prices. Starbucks does not have costs like the grocery store lists their prices.

      • SkippingRelax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Re your edit, no one is simping for Starbucks, just common sense. You don’t have to have milk with your coffee. For fuck sake, you don’t even have to have a coffee.

        Want something unusual in your coffee? Pay for it.

        Not happy, about how much they are charging for it. Make your fucking coffee at home before leaving the house and put whatever you want in there.

        We are not talking insulin prices here, let’s get real.