Newsweek Writer’s Silly ‘Starbucks Theory of International Economics’

Posted by Baylen on Oct. 22, 2008

There have been lots of cockeyed pop-food theories to emerge recently. I’m talking to you Morning Banana Diet, and a little less so to proponents of the Bugs Will Save Us All worldview.

But those schemes are nothing compared to Newsweek writer Daniel Gross’s Starbucks Theory of International Economics.

…I propose the Starbucks Theory of International Economics. The higher the concentration of expensive, nautical-themed faux-Italian branded frappuccino joints in a country’s financial capital, the more likely the country is to have suffered catastrophic financial losses.

Gross goes on to list several economically souring countries that have tons of Starbucks, and several economically sound (or mediocre) countries that have very few Starbucks.

Presto! Theory affirmed. Sort of. Because while Gross does admit the “theory isn’t foolproof,” he calls it “close enough.”

Close enough to what or, specifically, where?

How about to Iceland, a country with exactly zero Starbucks, but whose bizarre banking system has wreck(ya-vick)ed the country’s economy faster than an Albanian pyramid scheme? Or how about North Korea? No Starbucks there. No economy (or food), either.

So the theory’s corollary is untrue. The number of Starbucks in a country (or its capital) doesn’t have much to do with the country’s economic situation.

But there may be something to a Starbucks Theory of International Economics. It’s just not what Gross thinks it is. And so I’m stealing the theory named by Gross, and re-defining it thusly: