A Florida man deliberately put the kibosh on a Starbucks "pay-it-forward" altruistic initiative, ending a 10-hour, 457-strong customer streak of Starbucks patrons paying for the next person in line. The petulant man made his peevish move after hearing of the good-natured objective, which in his estimation, was simply “ridiculous and cheesy.”
Writes ABC News: "A Florida man put an end to another 'pay it forward' streak at a local Starbucks because he said he thinks people were participating out of 'guilt,' not 'generosity.' Peter Schorsch, a blogger, drove to the Starbucks drive-thru in St. Petersburg, Florida, on Thursday after hearing about the pay it forward phenomenon… After he ordered two Venti Mocha Frappuccinos, the barista told him his first drink had been paid for by the previous customer and asked if he would like to pay for the next customer.”
Schorsch, defender of conformity, said the act is no longer a spontaneous gesture of kindness when the barista asks you to pay for the person next in line. He called it a Starbucks “marketing ploy,” and claims after a few people do it, customers simply keep it going “out of a fear of guilt” at being the one doofus to end the chain.
A role Schorsch happily stepped into, traveling to the Starbucks in St. Petersburg on Thursday specifically with his evil plan to end the benevolent giving. Just to prove he’s not all bad, Schorsch did say he tipped the barista $100.
“I just don’t want to be forced into doing something,” Schorsch said. “This is turning into a social phenomenon and I had to put an end to it... This is turning into something ridiculous and cheesy,” Schorsch added. “It just seems like a ‘first world’ problem to me. Middle-class people sitting in their cars at a drive-thru, sipping a $5 drink and worrying about someone breaking the ranks.”
Writes the Daily Mail:
Schorsch thinks that if people really want to be charitable, helping the homeless would be more useful than paying for people's coffee in a drive-through queue.
While no one can argue that, why become a one-man army against something that in reality is simply an innocuous little sidebar in the hum-drum lives of many coffee drinkers? By his same argument, we can say that Schorsch’s efforts would be better spent, not halting little openhanded gestures at coffee houses, but perhaps hitting the streets to raise awareness of real issues in our society.
“There is a little humor being a contrarian, but I think if you really want to help, find someone that obviously needs help, like the homeless,” said Schorsch, a blogger and part-time political advisor.
What do you think about Schorsch and his munificence-ending maneuver? Sound off below.