29
votes
Soaring coffee prices have Italians ‘afraid and panicking’. Poor harvests are pushing up costs up for a nation that consumes 6bn shots a year in bars and cafés.
Link information
This data is scraped automatically and may be incorrect.
- Title
- Subscribe to read
- Word count
- 41 words
Accept that you cannot have anything and everything cultivated on the other side of the planet. Try to live locally and reset your expectations. We are truly in a period where you can get everything so incredibly cheap due to exploitation and penny pinching capitalism, it's downright ridiculous.
I love to buy from local manufacturer.
In case of textile, electronic, and some other items it will cost x2, x3, x5 of costs of items from other countries and will be lower quality.
Some types of food items I always buy from local farmers because cost is better, quality is better, etc.
Sorry, but your message is to broad for me to agree.
I'm sympathetic to the sense of cultural loss of tradition. But why aren't they focused on how the purchasing power of their salaries have not kept up with inflation, which has been driving the recent increases, though this particular supply chain disruption is different.
At 59.3 million Italians and 132,000 coffee bars, they have one coffee shop for every 450 people.
Clutches pearls
Ah, yes, of course. Which is why soup kitchens in Italy dispense crema dripping ladles of espresso to the needy.
I'm sad their cultural tradition is in jeopardy, but this reads like an onion article and a first world problem, and I think they should focus on wage growth to match inflation.
As a funny aside, I live in a high cost of living area, and I was traveling back home to visit friends in a low cost of living area in the US. I ordered a large Americano and it came to just under $2, and it took me a second to process that they hadn't rung the order up wrong. That would have been $6 where I live, plus a $2 tip.
Consequently, I make most of my coffee myself.
Who is "they"? This is just an article reporting on a slice of the italian economy.
The people upset at the cafe's for raising prices, the people referenced by the article as expecting fixed "political" prices, and the people equating espressos to bread.
Maybe they are? But they’re being interviewed about rising coffee prices and how they feel about. They replied about how they feel about it. Seems appropriate.
I can't imagine ever being interviewed about the rising cost of getting an espresso out, not even buying coffee to make at home, and calling it a necessity like bread.
I don't think I made any sweeping generalizations of the Italian people in my comment, and I think the statements in the article read like an onion piece. You are welcome to feel different.
Exactly, so that's why it's interesting to read about a different culture, with different cultural norms. It's enriching to read and imagine, and it casts a different light on what would be a fairly mundane supply shortage in other countries.
Also, it's just a figure of speech. The speaker is trying to impress upon you the relative importance of espresso shots via exaggeration.
I did express appreciation for the feared loss of a cultural tradition. I can appreciate the cultural aspects while also finding it silly to equate take out espresso with food staples.
This seems like a uniquely online "well actually" interpretation of what I wrote.
I think you're constructing strawmans here. What do you think my "interpretation" was of what you wrote? My points were 1) it's out of scope to expect the people in the article to talk about trying to raise wages 2) it's a common turn of phrase, using exaggeration to impress upon a point.
Straw man: An argument or opponent set up so as to be easily refuted or defeated.
What argument an I setting up? I suppose I can quote from our comments, but generally that is considered argumentative and discouraged on Tildes.
The article specifically quotes different industry groups arguing over whether it is reasonable for baristas to raise prices.
As a commenter, I think it is perfectly reasonable to feel that the blame on baristas is misplaced, and the people blaming them should redirect their frustration elsewhere. I would expect that an economic article would reasonably give rise to any discussion around economic issues.
And I'm allowed to find it silly. I could interpret harshly by saying that it is making light of the many food insecure families around the world. But I didn't.
So did I address your points? If not please point out the bits of straw I missed. Because it mostly seems like nitpicking my comments.
The strawman was that I had somehow "misinterpreted" your posts when there was little to no re-intrepretation of any kind.
Yes, and it's out of scope to discuss "raising wages" in that context. The article showed debate over whether or not baristas should or could raise prices, and both sides were represented. In what area would "raising wages" be in any way relevant? Neither baristas, nor espresso buyers have that kind of power. Baristas can price as they wish, and consumers can choose not to buy.
No one said you're not allowed to find it silly, I am rather opining that your view is silly.
Because it's an alternative way to view the problem of rising prices. If purchasing power has not kept up with inflation, then the problem is wages not baristas rising prices due to rising electrical costs.
The problem is one that baristas own nonetheless, as they would need to make the decisions between potentially falling off the demand curve and being underwater in their margins.
Or another way to put it, this is an example of price stickiness. Consumers have a price in mind that's stuck, and that is "artificial", in that it's not auto-responsive to supply curves, pinching producers as a result. That's really what this micro-economics episode is about.
I don't disagree that this is one economic lens to view it through. What I object to is the notion that it's wrong to discuss any aspect of the economics that feed into the addition. And since economics is interconnected, that leaves a broad swath of macro and micro economics that could be discussed. Reasonable people can disagree about what is most relevant, but telling people what is and is not in scope to talk about, rather than simply saying you think another view is more relevant, seems rude and prescriptive.
Again, though, back to the topic of "they" - if they are the people being interviewed, as you said, I think it's very strange for them to talk about macro-economics. "They" are suppliers and consumers at a micro level. Their decisions do not revolve around wages and inflation and interest rates.
My point is that it's strange to think that the omission of talk about wages is odd, which is what you said - "it's weird that no one talked about raising wages" (sic).
Not that no one can talk about wage rises. If one of them had talked about it, it is what it is. Rather, it's perfectly normal for normal people to talk about things through the lens of what they can control.
The "they's" in this particular context include the president of a prominent consumer rights organization, who I'm sure it's very capable of discussing many types of economics.
People don't need to be personally in a position to fix a problem to talk about it, be educated about it, or feel it is a problem. Individual decisions are the atom of economics, so what individuals think and decide do matter in aggregate.
Again, as a commenter, I think it reasonable to say that I think they should focus on something other than specific prices. In no way did I use perjorative language to criticize their price discussion when I said it seems misplaced.
Again, I can talk and think about whatever I think is germaine in an economics discussion.
But why would they? Because they have a fancy title? The president of a consumer rights organization is neither the finance minister nor the prime minister. Like I said, it's normal for people to see things through the lens of what they can control. Additionally, from the interviews it seems like they view it as a soft price floor resulting from cultural stickiness around a particular price, a story we see quite often.
I think the optics of any non-consumers talking about wage increases would also be quite poor - to consumers, it sounds like "have you considered having more money".
Sure, and that's why the FT asked a locals about their beliefs without further prompting, and they expressed them as is, and what they express is what you would expect.
I'm not sure why you keep pressing on this - no one is impounding upon your ability to opine on italians. Rather, I am expressing my ability to opine on your opinion, which is equally unfettered.
Because you seemingly keep arguing that it is somehow inappropriate to discuss wages, purchasing power, or other topics in the discussion. Unlike you, I haven't categorized any of your economic views or lenses of viewing the situation as "out of scope" or inappropriate.
You are welcome to an opinion on my opinion; I never said otherwise.
However, you've pivoted from talking about cultural appreciation to talking about how "it's out of scope" to talk about wage stagnation in a discussion about affordability of a good, to accusing me of straw man arguments, and voiciferously critiquing my subjective hot take on an article.
Yes, and as I stated above:
If you disagree, that is fine. But arguing about what is or is not "out of scope" is pretty presumptive.
Edit: also, people don't have to be a finance minister to advocate for wage growth. We'd never have unions if the common person didn't recognize that issue and act on it.
I'm fairly certain that they're equating as a necessity because it's a social experience necessary for the Italian.
It's a strong cultural tradition that feels necessary. The coffee is a vehicle, but a necessary one, like you would eat bread at breakfast/lunch as a social thing too.
What's strange to you is a normal statement for these Italians. Having their espresso is a necessity like bread, it's how their socializing functions.
I get the cultural aspect, I do. I mentioned it twice in my comment. And I read the necessity statement more as silly hyperbole stemming from cultural traditions, rather than saying it's actually as important as staple foods to survival.
That said, pressuring baristas to keep any fixed price point is misplaced blame in a world where inflation, slow or otherwise, is the norm. Prices will need to rise. What they should do, IMO, is ensure that wages keep up with cost of living so the purchasing power needed to afford their important cultural tradition remains affordable.
It didn't read as such, you came across rather dismissive of the reason why they're calling it a staple by equating it to a soup kitchen. You say you understand that it's a cultural thing, I say you may just underestimate just how ingrained in social dynamics it actually is. It's more than just a caffeinated beverage in a cup to them.
I'm otherwise in agreement with you.
Tone is hard to convey in text, and everyone brings their own context to it's interpretation.
Every Saturday I have coffee at my Italian friends restaurant and coffee bar. He has an espresso while we talk about kids, his mother's health back in Italy, etc. I understand it is culturally important. I tease him about it all the time.
And yes, I do find the idea of not having an espresso as being big deal humorous in the same way I find it funny when a French person gets upset at making a sandwich with a croissant. Yes it's all culture. That doesn't mean we can't find bits of it funny.
And if you objected to my top level comment, you should have replied to that directly.
I'm perfectly happy without bread; rice is far superior.
Coffee is a necessity. It's crucial for relaxation, focus at work, and coping with social situations. It also helps manage migraines, though triptans are still necessary.
Thus, coffee is more of an essential than bread.
Bread is often used as a stand-in for staple necessities. People that are food insecure might feel a little different about take out espressos being just as important as staple foods.
I'm doubtful people who are food insecure would ever find the concept of widening what's considered "essentials" a bad thing, instead of the punitive and patronizing situation some countries have created. It's more commonly snotty people who think others are less than them and shouldn't have access to the same basic things they do. I've certainly rolled my eyes at enough stories of state governors deciding what people "deserve" to buy with SNAP benefits in the US. We should be lifting people out of poverty, not creating an underclass.
The concept of "takeout" being a luxury is also very American. Street food vending and eating lunches out is absolutely normal in much of the world. Buying ramen from a stall in Japan isn't a "luxury." It's just eating a cheap meal. Going out to lunch at work in France isn't a luxury, it's a legal requirement that you not eat at work. In Pompeii, there were lots of public ovens and restaurants, and the homes lacked cooking tools. Clearly, Italy also sees picking up multiple espressos a day from cafes as a cultural norm, not something reserved for the "right people," and I'd lean toward respecting their culture over projecting American cultural hegemony onto them.
I actually grew up food insecure, and I intentionally didn't interpret the quote as making light of food insecurity. But I do find it silly and oniony. That's my opinion.
I won't speak for food insecure people, because it's a varied group and I don't think any of that has to do with my initial comment.
However, if you are seriously saying that the loss of ability to buy espresso is the same as not being able to feed your kids enough staple foods to not be hungry at night, then sorry, hard disagree.
We can equivocate over culture, and norms, and what is a luxury and where. But I think that seems a bit much and a bit serious for an off hand discussion about espresso.
Edit: and reading American cultural hegemony into my comment when my first line was about understanding the feared loss of tradition seems a bit much.
That's the thing...obviously those are not the same. But I simply don't believe that should even exist. It should be a given that our society prevents that situation from happening (and I can't speak for Italy, who knows what their situation is like). We should be at the level that we're ensuring everyone has access to affordable espresso, because it's certainly not a resource problem. It's that the concept of "luxury" is a cudgel used to prevent social progress. You'll see people equally argue that internet access or running water are not essentials, when they should be accessible to everyone, because we don't live in 1812. One goal encompasses the other, and we should be continually shifting that goal so we can live in the twenty-first century instead of the nineteenth.
Nor are price controls and subsidies purely about poverty. We in the US both simultaneously subsidize milk and keep the price from bottoming out due to overproduction (which would cause dairies to fold and then the prices would go up). Not just because it's considered a staple food, but because we want it to be readily available and not expensive. Successful economic policy doesn't just band-aid a failed market system that has priced demographics out of it, to keep them from starving, but ensures the most people can do the most. But that's definitely getting out there in terms of topic...
I'm not reading active cultural hegemony into your comment, which wasn't really unreasonable or anything, so much as pointing out that it's a pervasive force that I see shaping discourse about other countries a lot. Definitely not directing that personally.
The idea that espresso is even fancy or expensive is also an American one...it's just regular coffee grounds prepared with an appliance that costs a bit more/takes up more space than many people can justify at home. (Nor can you take it with you.) It's effectively the default coffee, not drip style, in much of the world. (And, again, I see it as a crucial mental health tool.)
If we're talking about things that get in the way of social progress, I don't think my comment suggesting that people should look at ensuring wages keep up with inflation and sustain purchasing power is the problem.
Indeed, that would solve more problems than just the affordability of espresso, and might help mental health far more than a caffeine hit.
I definitely agree on the point of the wages. I'm generally a proponent of all wages and salaries having a required annual CoL increase.
Though defining that CoL increase is tricky, as many costs (e.g. food) often outpace the model of inflation, and are inclined to go up as labor costs do. So you need to find a way to tightly couple that so they can't just drift apart again.
I think unions are important in that regard because it allows assessment of the landscape and appropriate negotiations that can factor changing circumstance.
There are plenty of high-functioning caffeine addicts who start suffering if they don't get their regular caffeine. It's arguably the most socially acceptable addiction! As you mention, they should just switch to making it at home if they're price sensitive. Though if there's a bean shortage, switching where they brew their coffee won't make much difference.
Oh, I'm sympathetic to the caffeine addicts; I remember working full time while in grad school full time. But they can wean off or use a reduced amount. Personally, I like to take a little caffeine break every once and a while, and avoid drinking it first thing in the morning so I don't fall into the "can't function without it" trap.
Maybe that's cultural anathema to Italians, but maybe some moderation would be a good change for them.
I buy a fancy bag of coffee, fair trade slavery free and such.
Then I cut it by about 1/3 with cheapy decaf. It balances out the cost while being less-flavor impacting than making weaker brews.
I've struggled to find a good decaf and have found the "counter culture slow motion" to be ok as far as it goes.
I tend to vary my main coffee a bit, and have found an appreciation for pinon coffee, which is flavored with roasted pinon nuts.
I don't know if it is fair trade but the Rio grande pinon roast has a wonderful chocolatey flavor I haven't tasted in another variety.
Cheers!
My supplier does a lovely Swiss process decaf bean, which I mix with their regular single origin product.
Italy runs on espresso, this is a huge part of their culture and I can completely understand why this is a huge deal for them. Depending on where you're at, wages can be very low, and any change in the price of commodities can have a huge impact.
I definitely get that, especially the cultural tradition piece. I just think it would help them more to address wage stagnation relative to inflation than pressure the baristas to maintain prices when they themselves are facing increased costs.
Reminder, the Italians previously took to the streets en masse when the price of an espresso was raised beyond 1 euro. They were successful then.
I do not know if they will be as lucky this time. It seems that harvests are forcing the issue beyond their control.
It's even noticeable here in the Netherlands. One of my favourite daily driver coffee brands is an Italian brand and the price shot up in recent months from ~13 euro per kilo to ~16, even though I don't think we've seen the real ramifications of this yet.
I'm with the Italians on this.
Article is paywalled so I’m not sure if this was covered, but from the headline, I can’t help but think “get used to it”. As a stereotypically coffee-obsessed Seattleite who roasts my own coffee and spent a ton of time working, studying, and hanging out in cafes in my life, it brings me absolutely no joy to say that.
Coffee is a delicate and particular crop, and with the climate tailspin we’re currently in, I fear it’ll be one of the early organic commodities to become prohibitively expensive and fall outside of the typical consumer’s reach.
Yeah, climate change is (as I understand it) the biggest driver here tipping the supply/demand scale, and it's not going to get better.
While some farmers or companies could try to set up enclosed-conditions coffee farming (greenhouses / hydroponics / aquaponics, etc...) and while that might work, I do not see that kind of farming actually driving down the price of coffee given it will be more resource and infrastructure intensive than traditional coffee farming.
If i can add my point of view, Italians ain't really lamenting about the increasing price of the coffee from a mere economical point of view and neither about a vague sense of culture disappearing.
I try to explain a little bit more what I mean.
Sometimes I read about the loss of the so called third places. Places that aren't home or workplace and where people get to know each other (like churches, libraries, etc.).
The bar is most likely the main third place for the italians. And the cheap coffee espresso is probably the conduit that makes it possible.
At the bar you start to know your workmates, at the bar you meet your friends, if your boss wants to talk with you he takes you to the bar and offers you a coffee, if it's your birthday you gather everyone at the office and offer them an espresso at the bar... you got the gist... This culture, this social aspect of Italian life that orbits around the espresso, is so ingrained that if you make a favour to someone probably his answer is not only "thank you" but also " I own you a coffe" meaning that next time he'll take you out in a bar and your coffee will be on him, so you can also talk and you will know each other more.
Some companies have a coffee break because they also know it helps to have more cohesive groups. They go out, socialise and during the working hours release a bit of steam.
When the Italians say coffee is like bread they don't mean the drink... because they can always put a moka on the stove and consume a cup of coffee at home. And believe it or not.... they do it too. They mean that if the espresso gets expensive they will lose the ability to socialise in the same way they are doing now.
And that hurts more their hearts than their wallets.
It's not about the cost of the coffee, it's about having a place where to meet and talk.
Mirror: https://archive.is/MKc4a
cc: @frowns, so you can read it
I've been noticing the price of coffee go up here recently - I buy whole bean from a local roaster and where a 5lb bag used to be $80 and held there for years, it then recently went to $85 and then up again to $95 as the current price.
Multiple factors (and secondary, tertiary... etc factors) cause this. The prime causative factors driving the increase of coffee price to my understanding are Climate Change and War. Every other cause I know of is in whole, or in part, a knock-off effect at least partially driven by one or both of those.
Not looking forward to the upcoming cocoa price increase....