Yeah, what do the French and Italians know...other than how to make tasty, tasty foods.
If you're eating your coffee, you're doing it wrong. Yes I'm completely aware of chocolate coated coffee beans. They don't count, the joke is about coffee the beverage, not the general term.
I've starting drinking a lot of coffee recently with a newly purchased french press. I find that the brew is much tastier using this method as opposed to other drip based methods.
Regular coffee, I can't deal with, milk/sugar/whatever. It just tastes like bitter water to me. Espresso, on the other hand, I'm okay with. I guess the concentrated-ness of it makes it fine, whereas coffee on its own feels/tastes to me literally like hot water with some bitter stuff in it.
Granted, I usually take my espresso in some sort of froofy mocha form, but blame my sweet tooth for that one.
I drink WAY too much Coffee and tea. My teacup is a repurposed Liter thermos, and I have a 20 ounce starbucks mug that I use alongside it, because it takes about a half hour for the thermos to cool down to a drinkable temperature.
I've really limited my coffee consumption. I have a morning cup every two or three days, and sometimes an afternoon cup (though I've been starting to switch that with tea). When I'm going out with friends at night, I'll have an espresso at the cafe.
Of course, this will all change when I finish getting in the habit of waking up early and eating breakfast at home. We have a total of six different coffee-making apparati in our apartment (french presses, percolators, drips, espresso machine).
I think that map is calculating per capita based on square footage of the state. They should do it per population of the state.
Per Capita is always per person, Scott.
Wikipedia:
Per capita is a Latin prepositional phrase: per (preposition, taking the accusative case, meaning "by, by means of") and capita (accusative plural of the noun caput, "head"). The phrase thus means "by heads" or "for each head", i.e. per individual or per person. The term is used in a wide variety of social sciences and statistical research contexts, including government statistics, economic indicators, and built environment studies. It is commonly and usually used in the field of statistics in place of saying "for each person" or "per person".[1] It is also used in wills to indicate that each of the named beneficiaries should receive, by devise or bequest, equal shares of the estate. This is in contrast to a per stirpes division, in which each branch (Latin stirps, plural stirpes) of the inheriting family inherits an equal share of the estate.
If it's actually per person, then how come Pennsylvania doesn't have more? Their huge swaths of empty forest with no people wouldn't be counting against them.
If it's actually per person, then how come Pennsylvania doesn't have more? Their huge swaths of empty forest with no people wouldn't be counting against them.
Just going to be a guess, but I'm going to say that it's probably because there's fewer Starbucks in Pennsylvania than in other places.
If it's actually per person, then how come Pennsylvania doesn't have more? Their huge swaths of empty forest with no people wouldn't be counting against them.
Just going to be a guess, but I'm going to say that it's probably because there's fewer Starbucks in Pennsylvania than in other places.
If it's actually per person, then how come Pennsylvania doesn't have more? Their huge swaths of empty forest with no people wouldn't be counting against them.
Just going to be a guess, but I'm going to say that it's probably because there's fewer Starbucks in Pennsylvania than in other places.
Compare the Philly map to the Boston map (this apparently is just mapping every Starbucks visible at that zoom level). Eastern Mass is basically one giant Starbuck at that zoom level, Philly clearly has only a few. Plus, it seems that the more "rural" areas of Philly have few to no Starbucks, whereas Massachusetts barely has rural areas.
Also, that's just raw numbers of Starbucks, when what we need is Starbucks/person.
Also, the point is moot because it literally says on that map that it's per capita, which is a specific term with a specific meaning.
I would not base your opinions on Philadelphia. Consider Pittsburgh. I know it's not so much blue collar steel man town anymore, but I'm going to assume for the moment that Starbucks is less popular there. They still have them, but it's not the "Starbucks on every corner" phenomenon that some cities experience, hence PA being #35 on the list.
Edit: And here's a stretch for you. Amish represent 0.5% of the PA population. Don't see them sippin' Starbucks.
PA is also ranked #24 in terms of income, and Starbucks is expensive. Throw in a couple factors affecting its popularity, and it's not unreasonable to fall from #24 in income to #35 in Starbucks consumption.
My states are number 33 and 42. I won't say that's a point of pride, 'cause that just feels bitchy and pretentious, but I can't say I'm disappointed either.
If it's actually per person, then how come Pennsylvania doesn't have more? Their huge swaths of empty forest with no people wouldn't be counting against them.
Comments
Yes I'm completely aware of chocolate coated coffee beans. They don't count, the joke is about coffee the beverage, not the general term.
Granted, I usually take my espresso in some sort of froofy mocha form, but blame my sweet tooth for that one.
Of course, this will all change when I finish getting in the habit of waking up early and eating breakfast at home. We have a total of six different coffee-making apparati in our apartment (french presses, percolators, drips, espresso machine).
Edit: it's per capita. Nevermind. Seems a bit misleading.
Wikipedia:
Per capita is a Latin prepositional phrase: per (preposition, taking the accusative case, meaning "by, by means of") and capita (accusative plural of the noun caput, "head"). The phrase thus means "by heads" or "for each head", i.e. per individual or per person. The term is used in a wide variety of social sciences and statistical research contexts, including government statistics, economic indicators, and built environment studies.
It is commonly and usually used in the field of statistics in place of saying "for each person" or "per person".[1] It is also used in wills to indicate that each of the named beneficiaries should receive, by devise or bequest, equal shares of the estate. This is in contrast to a per stirpes division, in which each branch (Latin stirps, plural stirpes) of the inheriting family inherits an equal share of the estate.
http://goo.gl/maps/rzH7
Also, that's just raw numbers of Starbucks, when what we need is Starbucks/person.
Also, the point is moot because it literally says on that map that it's per capita, which is a specific term with a specific meaning.
Edit: And here's a stretch for you. Amish represent 0.5% of the PA population. Don't see them sippin' Starbucks.
PA is also ranked #24 in terms of income, and Starbucks is expensive. Throw in a couple factors affecting its popularity, and it's not unreasonable to fall from #24 in income to #35 in Starbucks consumption.