Slashdot Mirror


American Eating Habits Are Changing Faster than Fast Food Can Keep Up (bloomberg.com)

Home cooking would be making a comeback if it ever really went away. From a report: Restaurants are getting dinged by the convenience of Netflix, the advent of pre-made meals, the spread of online grocery delivery, plus crushing student debt and a focus on healthy eating. Eighty-two percent of American meals are prepared at home -- more than were cooked 10 years ago, according to researcher NPD Group. The latest peak in restaurant-going was in 2000, when the average American dined out 216 times a year. That figure fell to 185 for the year ended in February, NPD said.

Don't be fooled by reports of rising U.S. restaurant sales at big chains like McDonald's. Increases have been driven by price hikes, not more customers. Traffic for the industry was down 1.1 percent in July, the 29th straight month of declines, according to MillerPulse data. "It's counterintuitive because you see a lot of things in the press about restaurant sales increasing," said David Portalatin, a food-industry adviser at NPD. "America does still cook at home." The shift is weighing on the fast-food industry. Eateries already are struggling with higher labor and rent costs that they're passing along to customers, which in turn makes home cooking more economical. McDonald's, Jack in the Box, Shake Shack and Wendy's have all raised prices in the past year.

374 comments

  1. So... by silentbozo · · Score: 2

    The whole article can be summed up in a single sentence... Americans are eating out less?

    Why is this on Slashdot?

    1. Re: So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why are you here then?

    2. Re:So... by The+Original+CDR · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Slow news day. Plus everyone is still dizzy from the Apple iPhone XS Max Headroom announcement.

    3. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple has a new 'phone? I missed that! That's what happens when you actually take vacation time. You don't get critically important news that will affect your family unto the third generation.

    4. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Netflix should buy Blue Apron and develop shows that pace with the meal prep and cooking time....

    5. Re: So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. If I bothered to log in on my phone, my id would be admirably low. Time to quit Slashdot.

    6. Re:So... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Funny

      Why is this on Slashdot?

      Why is there an article about fast food on a site for nerds? Are you kidding?

      I would bet that there are more readers of Slashdot who eat fast food than there are readers of Slashdot who compile their own Linux kernels.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    7. Re:So... by reboot246 · · Score: 0

      Do you talk like you type? You sound like a waiter at a Chinese restaurant.

    8. Re:So... by silentbozo · · Score: 2

      Damnit, you're right...

      *hands in geek card*

    9. Re: So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn. Thatâ(TM)s a good idea.

      Or have a cooking show about that meal.

    10. Re:So... by supremebob · · Score: 1

      I think that the real question to ask is why... I'd imagine that companies that sell meal delivery kits like Blue Apron and Plated would like to take credit for some of it, as would home grocery delivery services like Peapod and Instacart. A lot of VC tech money went into those companies.

    11. Re:So... by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      Americans are eating out less but prices have risen

      FTFY.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    12. Re:So... by DogDude · · Score: 1

      Suck it. I'm a sociology & economy nerd.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    13. Re:So... by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      How dare you!
      The two are not mutually exclusive
      I eat fast food while my kernel compiles!

    14. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is this on Slashdot?

      As inequality widens, tech is increasingly ending up on the higher end of the payscale, and in more urban enviornments like San Francisco.
      Money and status -- dining/drinking out -- are becoming a bigger and bigger part of the tech landscape, especially for the "softer" tech fields like design and AI.
      Articles like this are meant to reinforce the growing sense of social status amongst the Nouveau-nerds.

    15. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >_ The whole article can be summed up in a single sentence... Americans are eating out less?

      No, it is just that you are shortsighted and cannot see the bigger picture.

      That's an excellent news article to illustrate my point to every friend of mine who is "liberal" (egocentrics like to picture themselves as good for the community).

      Every time I ponder things with them, there it comes those inevitable "truths" they repeat like recordings:

      -- "There's no free lunch" and
      -- "Companies only think about profit".

      Well, as it becomes now more evident, it's not just profit. There is something called Marketing and anyone who doesn't know how to do it will die (sorry, cannot help but be clear about that).

      If you have a traditional operation to serve people who were on the street, maybe it's time to up things somewhat and either go to people's homes or get them out again with some attractive service. Like Ford once said, profit is consequence not an aim.

      If you're that foolish kind of "liberal" (like those who want less government label themselves), stop babbling about "professionalism" and start thinking about "excellence".

      Or die: it is always an alternative.

      >_ Why is this on Slashdot?

      Because social trends are also "stuff that matters". Big corps missed the personal computer when it started; Wozniak was even allowed to do whatever he wanted, because HP didn't take home computers seriously; IBM had to create an independent task force who would source components from outside (e.g. Intel) -- for they were late to the party.

      People staying at home change a lot of the economic environment, not just food. Get the bigger picture!

    16. Re:So... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 3, Funny

      Suck it. I'm a sociology & economy nerd.

      Who eats fast food. You know I'm right.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    17. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Almost no one compiles their own kernels.

      I would bet that there are more readers of Slashdot that are bronies than there are readers of Slashdot who compile their own Linux kernels. That does not mean we need to read about the latest My Little Pony fleshlight release.

    18. Re:So... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 3, Funny

      That does not mean we need to read about the latest My Little Pony fleshlight release.

      Say, you wouldn't happen to have a link, would you? Asking for a friend.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    19. Re: So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's racist!

    20. Re: So... by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      I getgetmy fast food from the Kernel. Does that count?

    21. Re: So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure the kernel has a counter or two.

    22. Re: So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess appart from embedded developers and kernel devs there is little point in recompiling it since you can download ready to go binaries.

    23. Re:So... by Drishmung · · Score: 1
      If you Google for "My Little Pony fleshlight" you get "About 473,000 results (0.53 seconds) ". Will that do?

      I suppose I shouldn't be surprised, but actually, I am. Sigh.

      --
      Protoplasm. Quiet Protoplasm. I like quiet protoplasm.
    24. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aren't you the guy who kept writing about marrying a teenager from a third world nation?

    25. Re: So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you mean the Colonel.

    26. Re: So... by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Thank you captain obvious.

    27. Re:So... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      If you Google for "My Little Pony fleshlight" you get "About 473,000 results (0.53 seconds) ". Will that do?
      I suppose I shouldn't be surprised, but actually, I am. Sigh.

      Of course. Everyone knows that. But the GP specifically said, "latest My Little Pony fleshlight release". How is my friend supposed to know which one is really the latest so I...I mean "he", doesn't buy the wrong one?

      Got an answer for that, bright boy? I didn't think so.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    28. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you seen creimer's children band video? Holy shit! That video got hundreds of view with 95% coming from outside of the United States and the top three nations are well known for sex tourism. It doesn't surprise me that Slashdot has so many pedobears.

    29. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You bet he is! Here is the link to his post:
      https://slashdot.org/comments....

      If all my assets were liquidated, I would still have enough cash to buy a new car and head off to Mexico to find a chica to marry.

    30. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks C.D.Reimer!!! You are the man!

      My Ukrainian buddies and I really enjoyed your video, great work!

      When is your next kid video scheduled? I can't wait to watch it. We liked the video so much that we have all saved it with youtube downloader.

      Thanks again!

    31. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks C.D.Reimer!!! You are the man!

      My Ukrainian buddies and I really enjoyed your video, great work!

      When is your next kid video scheduled? I can't wait to watch it. We liked the video so much that we have all saved it with youtube downloader.

      Thanks again!

      +1 informative! Thumbs up C.D.!!! :)

      I especially like the part at the beginning where there is a close up on a 4-5 years old kid off stage and he touches his thing! Oh my God! Great work!

      Keep on the good stuff C.D. I will chat with you you know where. See you soon buddy!
      --
      P.T.
       

    32. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you seen creimer's children band video [youtu.be]? Holy shit! That video got hundreds of view [twitter.com] with 95% coming from outside of the United States and the top three nations are well known for sex tourism. It doesn't surprise me that Slashdot has so many pedobears.

      So basically, you are bragging about providing video material to pedophiles and sex tourists and you do not see any problems with it as long as it brings views to your youtube channel.

      Poor Chris, sad, very sad...

      How long will it be before you do the right thing and take that video off line?

    33. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I especially like the part at the beginning where there is a close up on a 4-5 years old kid off stage and he touches his thing! Oh my God! Great work!

      Agreed, I watch it with zoom in on frame by frame mode, great!

    34. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's a much safer link!

    35. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your latest video shows a defeated creimer. It's amazing how dedicated you are to your Titanic of a channel.

    36. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A defeated creimer trying to teach us how to pronounce while we can barely understand what he says! CROFLOL!

      Creimer sure knows how to make himself look stupid, that must be the only thing he knows.

    37. Re: So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Americans are eating out less?

      Those poor American women. Get your shit together, guys.

    38. Re: So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're welcome.

      p.s. You would have gotten the +funny you wanted if you'd spelled it with a C. "The more you know! o/~~"

    39. Re: So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not racist if based on fact my flied lice eating flend.

    40. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And now this is on your permanent Google record. You gonna get relevant advertisement. Maybe PopeRatzo doesn't want it.

    41. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Suck it. I'm a sociology & economy nerd.

      Who eats fast food. You know I'm right.

      Just deep fry that shit.. nomatter what it is.. .and americans will eat it... deep frying mars chokolade bars...?? really? I mean... Really?

    42. Re: So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please try again. I would suggest a rewrite focusing on -

      a) making sure you have a clear focus and understand the point you want to make

      b) explaining your point in a coherent manner

    43. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would have thought the my little pony vibrator would be more popular based upon what ponies and horses are known for.

    44. Re: So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you meant nouveau moderately wealthy. We've always been nerds. It's why we're on here.

    45. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think that the real question to ask is why... I'd imagine that companies that sell meal delivery kits like Blue Apron and Plated would like to take credit for some of it

      Which is a pretty niche market for people willing to spend twice as much on groceries as they would spend if they went out and bought the ingredients for a recipe on their own.

      I looked at those things, and the economics of it makes absolutely no sense.

      It may help you try new things, but it isn't cost effective to let someone else do your grocery shopping for you.

      A lot of VC tech money went into those companies.

      And as a result, you will pay a lot more for the ingredients to make a single recipe than you would to make several dishes.

      The only people for whom they make any sense are people who know damned well they're paying a premium for recipe ideas, but once you've made it, you can make the same meal for a whole lot less by simply buying the ingredients.

    46. Re:So... by Not-a-Neg · · Score: 1

      The Mars Bar was discontinued in the US in 2002. What is sold as a Mars Bar in Europe is not the same recipe as what was sold in the US either. Attend any county or state fair in the US and you will see plenty of deep fried treats including: Snickers, Oreos, Twinkies, bubble-gum, beer, butter, Cinnabon, and more.

      --
      -==- Buy a Mac and leave me alone!
    47. Re:So... by lsatenstein · · Score: 2

      In the spring, a "trio lunch" was around $6.00 tax in. That same meal today is 9.00. A 50% increase in 5 1/2 months

      For a family of 5, thats $15/meal

      Supermarkets are able to provide "meals for two in a tray" for for the fastfood price of a meal for one.

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
    48. Re:So... by minstrelmike · · Score: 1

      The whole article can be summed up in a single sentence... Americans are eating out less?

      Why is this on Slashdot?

      Beause it's a statistical story. Restaurant sales are up 1.1% !!!!!!!!!!
      The seems to imply more people are eating out.
      Restaurant prices go up 3% means people are actually eating out less.

    49. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those are called Sybians.

    50. Re: So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >_ I would suggest a rewrite focusing on

      The issue certainly is important and deserves deeper consideration, but there many more qualified than me to expose the fallacies I mentioned. Also, with the growing success of the Sharing Economy, less and less people still insist on TANSTAAFL -- and the few that still do are becoming themselves the weirdos.

      Thanks for the suggestion; for now, due to constraints on my time and workload, I guess people will have to connect the dots... ;-)

  2. or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by xpiotr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    because they are poor.
    Even when working 2 jobs.
    Somethings gotta give...

    1. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      But I thought the economy was doing great?

      Why don't they just cash in some of their trust funds, or ask a family member for a loan to start their own business?

    2. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe they should eat cake.

    3. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe they should eat cake.

      whoa, Mitch McConnell posts on /.

      Or is it Paul Ryan?

    4. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Calydor · · Score: 2

      And yet according to the summary, the average American eats non-home made dinner every other day.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    5. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but there are 3 meals a day, so the person who always eats at home because they are poor are averages with the NYC jet-setter who grabs a breakfast sandwich from McDonald's, lunch at a nearby food joint, and grabs take out on the way home. With the number of meals in a day in mind, I'm actually surprised the average number is higher. What would be real interesting to see is what the median is, not the mean.

    6. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It just doesn't make sense to go out when the equivalent meal can be had for fifth of the money, alcohol and meat in particular being exceptionally expensive. Oh, this was in US. But maybe the same applies to the US, and people go out to eat things that can't be had or made with the help of a well stocked supermarket. The inexpensive lunch restaurants have been rapidly disappearing after the 80's as more people eat their at the place of work.

    7. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Somethings gotta give...

      Hillary's campaign?

    8. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the US, we have an infestation of GMO franken-foods that are heavily dosed with glyphosate herbicides (Round Up Ready crops means farmers spray excessive amounts of Round Up). Food allergies and illness are rampant among those who are sensitive to these engineered toxins and bad practices. The best way to avoid it is to grow and prepare food yourself rather than eating out. For those who have not found themselves affected, it seems like a mystery why anyone would bother to prepare their own meals, but for those of us who are afflicted, there is really no choice. It's either adapt and cope, or don't and die.

    9. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by magarity · · Score: 0

      In 2000 there was also a recession going on thanks to the dot bomb crash. And yet that was when the average American dined out 216 times a year ? No wonder so many people get trapped in a cycle of poverty. That's more than every other day! And the latest figure is still more than every other day. WTF people, the fastest way to save money is to not eat out; doesn't everyone know that??

    10. Re: or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by c6gunner · · Score: 0

      Food allergies and illness are rampant among those who are sensitive to these engineered toxins and bad practices

      Which is nobody. However hypochondria seems to have become hip of late, which manifests with the same symptoms.

    11. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If one refuses to acquire marketable skills, one will remain poor even in a thriving economy.

      You don't have to run your own business to do well. You just need an actual skill, of the kind that you need to go to school and work hard to get, in order to do well. Then, of course, you need to get a job using that skill.

      Plumbers pull an easy 51 k per year, and you only need two years of trade school for that. Demand for plumbers is on the rise.

      So, what's the problem? 51k is not enough for you? In that case, I'd say your concept of "poor" needs some examination. Or maybe you think that kind of work sucks? Well, being poor sucks worse, doesn't it?

      Sheesh.

    12. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I know plenty of people who stuck worse off because of having to pay for the schooling in a trade that wont hire new workers in my area, one is a cousin that did what you said and went for CNC, 5 years later, still no job actually doing CNC work, because every company from Milwaukee to Chicago wants him to have 5+ years of experience minimum to even look at his application.

    13. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Sique · · Score: 4, Informative

      In this case, it's Marie Antoinette, Queen of France. Jean-Jacques Rousseau claimed that she once said "S'ils n'ont pas de pain, qu'ils mangent de la brioche." -- If they don't have bread, they should eat cake. Brioche, a special type of white bread baked with much butter and eggs, is mostly translated as cake, without really being one.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    14. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Sique · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If one refuses to acquire marketable skills, one will remain poor even in a thriving economy.

      It's often stated but wrong nonetheless. If you don't have the opportunity, the time and the money to acquire marketable skills, you will remain poor. If acquiring marketable skills takes more time than the time window the market wants those skills, you will remain poor. If you don't have the personal ability to acquire marketable skills you will remain poor, e.g. if you are shorter than 6', you can train as much as you want, you will never have marketable basketball skills.

      Your statement simply ignores the sheer amount of luck you need to have the personal abilities, the opportunities, the financial background and the time to acquire the right skills at the right moment. And it comes with a big dose of Survivorship bias. It might be that most people you know have had that luck. But you would never have met them anyway if they didn't have that luck. This makes it easy to totally overlook the amount of chance that played a role in their and your life.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    15. Re: or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you saying that food allergies aren't real? My brother developed a food allergy in his 50s and has been to the ICU twice because of them. The second time was due to his reaction to the tiny pin prick the allergy doctor gave him to see what he was allergic to.

    16. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Drethon · · Score: 1

      because they are poor.

      Even when working 2 jobs.

      Somethings gotta give...

      Heck, I ain't poor but eating out 185 times a year is close to $1k for one person as cheap restaurants, even $2-3k isn't too nuts depending on where you eat at. That is a pretty fair amount of extra money to spend if you can avoid some of it.

    17. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, some feebs/fools/snowflakes let chance determine their life. Suck dikk grasshopper and eat soy. Other folks generate their own good fortune, by superior productivity at whatever task before them. Fellow producers will trade value with these self-valued folks while letting unproductive SJW feebs die-in-the-gutter. To the producer belong the spoils ... eat steak BATTLESHIP BOY.

    18. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by IWantMoreSpamPlease · · Score: 1

      While I agree with almost all of your points, choosing a height requirement for being successful in the NBA was a bad one....

      https://www.complex.com/sports...

      --
      So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
    19. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can have a 1,500 calorie dinner from McDonald's for $3. That's $555 per year.

    20. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by nasch · · Score: 2

      No, it says the average is 216 times a year. That doesn't mean most people eat out every other day. More likely is there are people who eat out every day, even multiple times a day, people who almost never eat out, and people in the middle. Just from that one number we can't tell what the distribution is.

    21. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But I thought the economy was doing great?

      Where the fuck did you hear that?! People have been bitching about the economy for years, decades in some situations.

      That said, the reason I eat at home so often is: my wife and I carpool; we work about 10 minutes from home. Going home for lunch together is a no-brainer. And then once we're there mid-day, it's so damn easy to turn on a crockpot or something.

      Restaurants are fine when you're lazy, but you can't really get food as good as you make yourself, and money doesn't help with that. We don't consider ourselves to be particularly good cooks, but we make better food than what is typically for sale out there. And how the hell can any restaurant ever possibly compete with CostCo steaks on the grill in the back yard? I don't care what kind of master chef-fu you have, that's going to be hard to beat, even if the home cooker is just average quality. Most restaurants' only hope is that we're just too tired to want to bother.

    22. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Drethon · · Score: 1

      You can have a 1,500 calorie dinner from McDonald's for $3. That's $555 per year.

      Not to mention no need for money during retirement after the heart attack.

    23. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      price hikes too... $5 for a chicken shawarma sandwhich?! WTF?! I remember when they were $2.50* and on top of doubling in price they also have shrunk noticeably. Probably doesn't even cost a dollar to make the sandwhich give the paucity of the filling now...

      Back in the day two of those would fill me up, but not the other week...

      * a year or so ago they were c. $4 but still decently filled, so the size decrease and $1 hike are from sometime in the last year... at $5 a pop they're just not good enough... the shawarma dinner plates are now $16 whereas they used to ce c. $11 again not worth it as I suspect that they decreased size of those as well, but I rarely ever ordered the dinner plates.

      The lamb shawarma was even more disappointing very few onions and one or two small slices of not super fresh tomato... this is or was a decent lebanese restaurant too BTW now it's just a ripoff. On top of that everything was dry... I remember shawarma as being incredibly messy and juicy... time to check out some of the newer ones in slightly seedier areas I guess... or go back to try the one that enough of a hike that I never went to very often...

      I'd already started experimenting making shawarma at home (chicken, lamb is a PITA) w/a some bottled marinades.

    24. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your statement simply ignores the sheer amount of luck you need to have the personal abilities, the opportunities, the financial background and the time to acquire the right skills at the right moment.

      I think you're confusing acquiring the skills you want for the skills that are commanding a price premium. Just because lawyers earn a lot of money and you want to be a lawyer doesn't mean you should try to become a lawyer. Perhaps you don't have the necessary skills or financial resources, or perhaps you don't have the means to support yourself through law school. That doesn't mean you are cut off from well-paying jobs, it means you are cut off from the particular well-paying job you want. There are countless well-paying jobs. Sometimes getting one means being willing to relocate, work a different schedule, or make some other sacrifice, but nobody is going to force you to make that choice. If you don't want to move, work a different schedule, or make the required sacrifice, then you don't get the well-paying job. That's not for lack of opportunity, but a conscious choice you made.

    25. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But I thought the economy was doing great?

      It is doing great, if you're part of the 0.1%

    26. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by jeff4747 · · Score: 2

      You don't have to run your own business to do well. You just need an actual skill, of the kind that you need to go to school and work hard to get, in order to do well. Then, of course, you need to get a job using that skill.

      We've spent the last two decades shouting that everyone needs to go get a STEM degree, and then they will have the marketable skills you describe.

      We now graduate 1.5 STEM students for every entry-level STEM job opening...with piles of student debt to do so. And then we ponder why, oh why does that 0.5 not dine out as often?

      So no, it's not just dumb people getting degrees in fields you do not like, or people not going into plumbing. It's kids doing exactly what we told them to do.

      (It's also coupled with the requirements inflation businesses now apply to entry-level jobs. There was a time where you did not need a college degree to get a job as a secretary...or a plumber.)

    27. Re: or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      51k is poor.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    28. Re: or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      I can eat out way cheaper than cooking a decent meal at home. Little Caesars and domino's will make you shit all day that will feed a family of four for $10. Good idea? No way in hell.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    29. Re: or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      It isn't toxins it is the consumption of imflamatory foods like refined flour, oil, and sugars which cause the problems you cite. Science.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    30. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      No wonder so many people get trapped in a cycle of poverty. That's more than every other day! And the latest figure is still more than every other day.

      There are 1,095 chances to eat out in a year (3 meals * 365 days). So a little less than 20% of them are "eating out"....on average, over the entire country.

      Let's average Jimmy, the poor guy who always eats a sandwich from home (0 times), Mark, the not-quite-poor guy who eats out twice a month, usually somewhere where his meal is $5-10 (24 times), and Joe the banker, who has a private chef cook and deliver all of his meals (1095 times). That averages to 373 times "dining out" per year. More than once a day!!! Outrageous!! Jimmy needs to stop eating out so much!!!! Oh wait.....

      Also, consider something like picking up a cup of $1 coffee is "eating out". So is spending $2 buying a hamburger and small fries at McDonalds as you run between your first and second job, because you don't have time to prepare a meal, nor do you have any way to safely store your food. And I'm not just talking about temperature control there.

    31. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Marie Antoinette very likely did not say this. The phrase originated long before her time, and she was a philanthropist in life.

    32. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go to the grocery store. The cake is cheaper than the bread! Yes I know it's not what Marie Antoinette intended.

    33. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by avandesande · · Score: 2

      Or you could be one of the 50% of all people with less than average IQ. In an increasingly complex society what are we going to train these people to do?

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    34. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The most important marketable skill is to be about 34 years old. That's a hard skill to acquire if you are 55. More useful marketable skills are being female and/or black. Some have tried to acquire these skills after lacking them, but it's a difficult course of endeavor.

    35. Re: or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks to women's liberation, the oligarchs no longer have to pay men a living wage. They can get both family members to slave away at dead end jobs untill Social Security takes over.

      Hooray for progress

    36. Re: or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not our problem. We're nerds with the empathy of a brick.

    37. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by imrahilj · · Score: 1

      There are at least a few players in the NBA right now under 6 feet tall, Isaiah Thomas being one of them. Shortest pro ever was 5' 3" which is considerably under 6'.

    38. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Yes but this allows us to look down on the deplorables. Isn't that what's important? Speak truth to the powerless!

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    39. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Historians have mostly debunked that. Marie Antoinette cared about the poor. The earliest references to that phrase said "a great princess", not Antoinette herself. So it could have been a pure allegory. The phrase got attached to Antoinette a century or so later as part of anti-monarchism/national mythmaking.

    40. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If one refuses to acquire marketable skills, one will remain poor even in a thriving economy.

      It's often stated but wrong nonetheless. If you don't have the opportunity, the time and the money to acquire marketable skills, you will remain poor. If acquiring marketable skills takes more time than the time window the market wants those skills, you will remain poor. If you don't have the personal ability to acquire marketable skills you will remain poor, e.g. if you are shorter than 6', you can train as much as you want, you will never have marketable basketball skills.

      Your statement simply ignores the sheer amount of luck you need to have the personal abilities, the opportunities, the financial background and the time to acquire the right skills at the right moment. And it comes with a big dose of Survivorship bias. It might be that most people you know have had that luck. But you would never have met them anyway if they didn't have that luck. This makes it easy to totally overlook the amount of chance that played a role in their and your life.

      You're just making excuses in the opposite direction. There's always a way to excuse a situation if you assign the right presumptions. People want it both ways but it's just not. Either everyone can learn to do something better or the people that can are in some way special and apparently warrant special consideration since they are inherently more useful than others. But these "lost" people don't want that either. If people claim "well I" the other side can claim survivor bias. The irony there is the people that actually truly know what that means are the people that aren't really trapped in their situation because they CAN'T improve it. The people that can never improve aren't generally educated enough to know a very philosophical topic like that.

      You ascribe changing your circumstances to luck but it's more perseverance. It's suffering in the short term to improve the long term. Sure, some people are in their situations due to unfortunate circumstances but most are there because of (many) bad choices that put them in a situation it will be extremely painful to get out of. I don't mind helping these people escape but these are often the same people that vote against any help and try to destroy what's already there. It's not luck to network. It's not luck to keep up with trends and adapt. Anyone still in a factory job at this point is there of their own accord. "Timing" is irrelevant for most industries. While tech changes, for example, the core concepts remain the same. C has been around for decades and if you know it you can get a job in any number of languages in the same paradigm pretty easily. IT as a whole grows but it doesn't change so much old skills can't apply. College curriculum just isn't updated that frequently either.

      We as a global society have to choose and do so very soon. Is everyone equal or do we have classes of people that are physically and mentally incapable of adapting to the future? Is someone inherently more capable and therefore valuable than another? Can we effectively devalue entire casts of people? Should we? The questions only get worse from there and they're hard questions to answer. What is absolutely ineffective and asinine is making excuses as to why people can't improve and then continuing on like everyone can.

    41. Re: or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      You need to work on your reading comprehension skills.

    42. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Sique · · Score: 1

      As I wrote: It was Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who attached the words to her. And it wasn't a century later, he was a contemporary of Marie Antoinette. And yes, with a high probability, Marie Antoinette never said it. Jean-Jacques Rousseau made it stick anyway.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    43. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      What's economy doing great have to do with people not having money to spend on eating out?

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    44. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He didn't say CNC he said plumber. A CNC operator is not a trade. It's a low level technical job, like the guy has who coughed up $30,000 to ECPI so he could be a network security guy.

      Plumber, electrician, bricklayer, carpenter. These are real trades. The work is hard. The work is dirty. And it pays real money, as the top post said 52K, or a lot more if you get your license and become a master electrician, master plumber, etc.

      And you're going to have to spend a couple of years *after* trade school doing the shittiest jobs under the supervision of a master craftsman.

      So no. You're not going to be able to drop $30,000 on some for profit diploma mill and slip into a position without paying your dues.

    45. Re:or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He didn't say CNC operator, he just said CNC. Are you claiming that a machinist isn't a "real trade"?

    46. Re: or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Srill, i don't get their numbers. Or vocabulary. If half the people dine out, it means that on a three meals a day plan, already about 17% of meams are not home made ? Then people take all theirbother meals home made, with no prepared meals ? This 82% looks weird to me next to the other figures

    47. Re: or maybe less people can afford to eat out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does dine out include all meals, or only dinner ?

  3. Itâ(TM)s easier now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When we were younger we used cook books. There might be nuances not included or it was poorly written. In some cases it is a single version of the recipe.

    I can source dozens of ways to slice the proverbial pie in an instant. It lets me tweak things a bit. I have to believe itâ(TM)s so much easier to learn things these days.

  4. What about spread of recipe sites? by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We usually make food at our house, and have for years.

    But over time it's gotten easier and easier to just say something like "I feel like some dish that has apples and rice" and boom, within seconds have some recipes to choose from.

    It makes making food at home a lot easier when you don't need to do any work to dig up a recipe and can easily just bring together a few things you have on hand into a full meal.

    Also the other aspect I would think helps is that produce in grocery stores is better than it used to be, with more variety as well. There's honestly a lot of stuff I make at home I'd way rather eat than most restaurant food.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:What about spread of recipe sites? by mentil · · Score: 2

      Indeed. My mom uses an Alexa app that lets her ask for a recipe for X, and it'll say recipes for that. Very convenient if your hands aren't clean.
      I agree that places like Whole Foods are encouraging people who can afford it to eat more at home. There are higher-quality prepared mixes nowadays that you can just throw in a skillet, heat, and eat. That said, brick and mortar retail sales are also going down steadily, so that raises the question of where people are buying their food (maybe grocery stores are bucking the trend?).

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    2. Re:What about spread of recipe sites? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      That said, brick and mortar retail sales are also going down steadily, so that raises the question of where people are buying their food (maybe grocery stores are bucking the trend?).

      . . . homemade Soylent Green . . . ?

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    3. Re:What about spread of recipe sites? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you shop at a normal grocery store, it's actually more affordable to eat at home than to go to a restaurant, even fast food.

    4. Re:What about spread of recipe sites? by alvinrod · · Score: 1

      I would add that video cooking tutorials on various sites make it even easier, especially for novices. I've used some a few times when making foreign dishes when I'm not familiar with the cooking style or if the preparation seems a bit more complicated. Cooking can be quite enjoyable, especially if you have someone who's willing (or in the case of your offspring has no real choice in the matter) to do the dishes for you afterwards.

    5. Re:What about spread of recipe sites? by viperidaenz · · Score: 4, Informative

      The trend in New Zealand is weekly delivered food and recipes. No more meal planning, no more big grocery shops. People pay for convenience.
      Maybe that's happening elsewhere too?

    6. Re:What about spread of recipe sites? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We also prefer cooking at home to eating out, and we can certainly afford eating out (family of two software engineers in Silicon Valley). But the food cooked at home tastes so much better and we know most of the ingredients that we put in (not counting ready made things like pasta sauce). Cooking is just like any other skill, the more you do it the better you become at doing it. One can cook simple dish like pasta and pasta sauce from canned tomatoes in shorter time than it would take going to a restaurant and getting your order served. I can cook and eat a simple pasta dish in 30 minutes and another 7 to cleanup.
      Watching videos you can pick up some tips and tricks and after a while it is not even worth going out - you get worse food for more money and spend more time. The only time I eat out if I am hungry and already near the place or I am busy with something else and don't have time to cook.

    7. Re:What about spread of recipe sites? by zilym · · Score: 1

      Nah, it's far simplier than that: Grow your own food and you may not have to buy much at retail anymore. Right now, we've got piles of tomatoes, potatoes, broccoli, peas, green beans, carrots, bell peppers, beets, corn, apples, raspberries, blueberries, strawberries, rhubarb, basil, etc all waiting outside to pick 24/7. No waiting in lines, no fighting traffic, no third parties mishandling it, etc. Even people stuck in an apartment can grow some lettuce and herbs indoors hydroponically, thanks to all the advances made by potheads doing the same for their favorite 'herb.'

    8. Re:What about spread of recipe sites? by indytx · · Score: 1

      But over time it's gotten easier and easier to just say something like "I feel like some dish that has apples and rice" and boom, within seconds have some recipes to choose from.

      This. Especially if you already know how to cook, getting some quick ideas based on ingredients, rather than reading a recipe, is almost too easy, and as a reference guide, it's hard to beat the internet. We have well over 100 cookbooks, but it's to the point where you can just pull up almost ANYTHING online. Need to know how long to smoke a pork shoulder? It's just as easy to do a quick search than to thumb through a barbecue cookbook. Beans in a pressure cooker? Why look it up in a cookbook?

      --
      Make love, not reality television.
    9. Re:What about spread of recipe sites? by Not-a-Neg · · Score: 1

      I haven't been able to find a delivery service that offers corn dogs and tater tots.

      --
      -==- Buy a Mac and leave me alone!
    10. Re:What about spread of recipe sites? by Khashishi · · Score: 1

      Using recipes is more expensive than just winging it. You can just throw together what's on sale or what is seasonal. And winging can be less wasteful since you can use what you have on hand. Also, I don't really find food that is crafted from recipes to be any better.

  5. 82% seems low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That means the average person eats a non home cooked meal at least once a week.
    That seems like a lot to me.

    1. Re:82% seems low by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Location, Location, Location.
      Country and Suburbs will eat at home much more, City Folks will eat out more.
      Due to greater availability of restaurants, and smaller kitchens in their apartments, which makes cooking more difficult.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:82% seems low by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      The average person I know certainly eats a non home cooked meal at least once a week. How many people do you know who never buy breakfast or lunch at work? I mean, never? It doesn’t have to be a steakhouse to count. You can get two small burgers for under $2.50 most places; not good quality, but it’s cheap, it’s reasonably filling, and it takes almost no time.

    3. Re:82% seems low by DogDude · · Score: 1

      I eat exactly *0* homecooked meals a week. My time is worth more to me than the $$ is costs to get a (good) restaurant meal. But, I would imagine I'm an outlier. I would guess that most people eat at home most of the time because they simply can't afford to eat out.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    4. Re:82% seems low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you decide everything you do based on the time vs cost?
      How about eating at home simply because it's more enjoyable than a restaurant, and actually getting to control what and how much you get?

    5. Re:82% seems low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > How many people do you know who never buy breakfast or lunch at work?
      Hmm. I forgot about lunch at work since I work from home so I just always eat food prepared at home.
      However, if they count that, then 82 seems incredibly high. I doubt many office workers are bringing food to work.

    6. Re: 82% seems low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is, to me, an astonishingly high average number. I've had maybe 2 or 3 take away meals in the last year, but that's because I enjoy cooking.

    7. Re:82% seems low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The average person I know never does, mainly because the food choices around here for lunch suck. This is mainly because no one else eats out for lunch either, is willing to drive for food, or already has their favorite (many of which pre-cook the food for the regulars so they don't have to wait).

    8. Re:82% seems low by alantus · · Score: 2

      For me it's more about eating healthy than saving money. Restaurants don't really care about your health, they care about their profit. They will use ingredients that taste good but aren't necessarily healthy, so that you will like it and visit frequently.

    9. Re:82% seems low by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      City Folks will eat out more.

      How does location change what they do in the bedroom?

    10. Re:82% seems low by neurocutie · · Score: 2

      "I eat exactly *0* homecooked meals a week. My time is worth more to me than the $$ is costs to get a (good) restaurant meal. "

      Unless you live in NYC and go around the corner to your fave restaurant (and even if this is true), I don't believe you actually save much time given your "good restaurant meal". It is fairly simple to prepare a very high quality meal with a wide variety of foods in well under an hour, in many cases under 30minutes. No "good restaurant" experience that I know of is less than 60mins, usually at least 90mins. And if it is truly "good" and in NYC, you are going to be waiting for a table for at least 30mins.

      So no, even if time > $$$ (which I might agree in many scenerios), I don't believe you are actually saving time. The caveat would be decent take out/delivery where you still eat at home, but you can work while a restaurant cooks and delivers.

    11. Re:82% seems low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I eat exactly *0* homecooked meals a week. My time is worth more to me than the $$ is costs to get a (good) restaurant meal. But, I would imagine I'm an outlier. I would guess that most people eat at home most of the time because they simply can't afford to eat out.

      Your time is worthless when you're sick.

    12. Re: 82% seems low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I eat at home to protest the Americam expectation of a tip for table service. It has gone from an expected 10%, to 15%, and now 20% under the guise that "things cost more now." That's right - waitstaff thinks that the percentage tipped should rise along with the base cost of the meal.

    13. Re:82% seems low by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      At a restaurant you can read while waiting. If you're cooking for yourself, reading is not an option.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    14. Re: 82% seems low by ChrisMaple · · Score: 2

      When was the standard tip ever 10%? In 1960 in the US the tip for average service was 15%.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    15. Re:82% seems low by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 2

      I eat exactly *0* homecooked meals a week. My time is worth more to me than the $$ is costs to get a (good) restaurant meal.

      Given how unhealthy most restaurant meals are, you're probably hacking far more time off the end of your life than you'd ever save by not cooking.

    16. Re:82% seems low by neurocutie · · Score: 1

      so you're going to go to a "good restaurant" and READ while you wait? How gauche... Read while driving to the restaurant? read while waiting for your table?

      Ok, so when you're cooking, you can listen to music OF YOUR CHOICE (or even TV if you must).... not possible at a restaurant (unless I suppose you're going to do the earbud thing and continue to be gauche...)

    17. Re:82% seems low by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      How many people do you know who never buy breakfast or lunch at work?

      The place where I work doesn't sell food. Either I bring some home made lunch in a box, or I just skip it. At home we cook all our meals, except on birthdays when we go to a restaurant (where they sell healthy food)

    18. Re:82% seems low by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      My time is worth more to me than the $$ is costs to get a (good) restaurant meal.

      I really doubt your off time is a valuable as what you assign it. As stated elsewhere, this is a very common /. attitude. Your off time is no more valuable than the garbage man's.

    19. Re:82% seems low by Terwin · · Score: 1

      When I was single, I kept my pantry stocked with meals that took less time off my computer to prepare than it would take me to get in my car and drive to the end of the block.
      Occasionally I would cook more involved dishes, but not usually.
      I also never ate out by myself as it took too much time away from other things.(Social eating was different because as an introvert I would force myself to do social things even when they felt like a waste of time, because otherwise I would never engage in activities where I might meet someone)

      If you plan ahead, it is easy to cut total prep-time(including shopping) to less than the time lost to eating out(mostly transit, but also lines, ordering, paying, and any time needed to set-up or tear-down your work environment if you bring it with you)

      Now that I am married(and she likes to cook), I spend even less time cooking.(I also eat out a lot more, but once again, not alone)

      The only exception I have had to this policy is business trips with meal reimbursement(with caps), as opposed to a straight per-diem, as that makes doing things efficiently too much of a headache to bother with.

    20. Re: 82% seems low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless you were my grandfather in which case the standard tip (he would leave) was 10 cents regardless of the bill total. Any time my parents tried to leave a normal tip he would swipe the cash off the table and call them crazy. I tend to tip 20% just out of being so ashamed of his tipping.

  6. It's the Economy, Stupid by mentil · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Back during the Great Recession, I recall a survey that asked people what they'd cut back on in order to make ends meet. Right at the top of the list, people said they'd eat out less at restaurants. People are feeling the squeeze economically, so fewer people are eating out.

    --
    Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    1. Re:It's the Economy, Stupid by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      Even if they are doing well now. The Great Recession had made eating at home a habit.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:It's the Economy, Stupid by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      Even if they are doing well now. The Great Recession had made eating at home a habit.

      Misconception. The economy is doing great ... for you and corporations. Jobs are here. The elephant in the room are 2 things. 1. Mellenials represent the biggest population size since the baby boomers. 2. Student loan debt is catistrophic! When you owe $60,000 and and pay $1000 a month while making only $45,000 for the privileged of not working at McDonalds it means you can't afford to eat there.

      Since this is the largest demographic sector it means production and lots of jobs but people too broke to spend it.

      The numbers used for U6 are bs and do not count people out of work nor debt or spending habits. Just gross income.

    3. Re:It's the Economy, Stupid by alvinrod · · Score: 3, Informative

      I think it's also coinciding with more public consciousness regarding health. I started eating out a lot less after learning that carbs weren't as good for you as the FDA had been suggesting. Most restaurants are still offering low fat dishes that are loaded with carbs because that's what everyone thought they needed. That it's probably cheaper to make high carbohydrate dishes likely factors into it as well. Since I started cooking more at home and adjusted my diet, I lost about 30 lbs. and that was without having to be a gym rat or super active.

    4. Re:It's the Economy, Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am a millennial. My student loan debt is 30k and I am paying $200 on it this month. I make $30 per hour as a tutor while looking for a "real" job (I generally work less than five hours per day).

      I am moving from a city where I pay 900 a month in rent, which allegedly has software jobs, to a city where I pay 375 a month in rent and can live off my tutoring wages.

      Even if I were not finessing my loan to pay less, I don't see 1000 a month on 60k in debt as realistic unless you are making close to six figures. That's about a six-ish year payoff scheme. 400-500 is a more realistic number, and even then if you amassed 60k in debt you went to a fancy four-year school with all expenses paid.

      Sorry Billly, pretty sure you're spreading FUD. Don't forget to invoice the russians for your time.

    5. Re:It's the Economy, Stupid by hey! · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you visit a supermarket that caters to working class clientele, you'll find a vast ocean of convenience foods surrounded by a narrow fringe of regular food. For example if we call a foot wide section of one level of shelving a "shelf foot", my local supermarket has at least 75 shelf-feet dedicated to numerous variations on boxed macaroni and cheese. The same market only about ten or twelve shelf-feet dedicated to root vegetables.

      The reason this market is dominated by prepackaged convenience foods is government subsidies. Take all that pasta and cheese; it's just subsidized wheat and milk industrially converted into a highly palatable food that is cheap because it's largely already been paid for with tax dollars. It'd be easy and cheap to stock up on enough of this kind of food to get you through the week, but doing that all the time would be courting obesity, hypertension, heart disease and stroke.

      In other words, many home cooked meals are just crappy fast food, prepared at home. Vegetables, which are not subsidized, are surprisingly expensive when compared to this crap. On a per pound basis they're more expensive than meat, which is just subsidized grain converted into cows and chickens. Consequently it doesn't sell well, and it's not stocked well. I learned home cooking from my Cajun Mom back in the 1960s, but a lot of young people I know would have no idea how to prepare vegetables from raw.

      I obviously have to rely on a more distant upscale supermarket to get the stuff I need to cook, but surprisingly this market's ratio of prepared convenience food to ingredients isn't much higher. It's just the the market is vast. You may find yourself buying a yanagi ba knife for cutting your sushi fish. You're not likely to be eating enough sashimi to justify this, but the whole place is a engine designed to provoke impulse purchases.

      In the end this tells me wealthier people are eating a lot of junk prepared food too, but they're doing occasional stunt cooking where they reproduce stuff they've bought at restaurants or seen on TV.

      It's no wonder we have an obesity epidemic. It's our tax dollars at work.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    6. Re:It's the Economy, Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I disagree with your premise that the high price of perishable goods is responsible for the obesity epidemic.

      It's pretty widely acknowledged that (a) "super size" food portions, and (b) the food pyramid's improper weighting of carbs are the main reasons for the obesity epidemic. Super-size portions are pretty self-explanatory. Food pyramid taught people to binge on carbs, which just makes you hungry again when the sugar high wears off; plus, the out-of-balance proportion of proteins and fats will cause you eat more until you get the amount your body wants.

      Consider the textbook example of a healthy individual: a 160 lbs 5' 10" male with "perfect" 23.0 BMI only needs about 2410 kCal at age 30, and his daily requirements drop to about 2130 kCal by age 60. If that same individual 30-year-old over-eats by an average of 425 kCal/day (to 2835 kCal), then about 2-3 years later he will weigh 210 lbs and have an "obese" BMI of 30.1. If he keeps eating that same amount until age 60, he will weigh 230 lbs and have a BMI of 33.0.

      Conclusion: Basically most Americans need cut 500-1000 kCal/day -- by diet and/or exercise. To help accomplish that, we also need to stop eating "low fat" foods that substitute carbs for fat and cause us to eat more.

    7. Re:It's the Economy, Stupid by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Most restaurants are still offering low fat dishes that are loaded with carbs because that's what everyone thought they needed.

      WTF? I thought America is the land of the big steak? Go to a restaurant and get yourself a 600g T-bone and skip on the fries and you won't need to worry about carbs.

      Seriously though have a look at a typical restaurant menu. There's plenty of low carb things on the menu, and most of the dishes you'll find the carbs are in some ignorable sides anyway. .... Unless you're at a Pizza Hut.

    8. Re:It's the Economy, Stupid by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      Pick some better markets. All three of the ones I shop at have an entire fresh produce section.

    9. Re:It's the Economy, Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      soo swesome writing
      best railway coaching in jaipur/

    10. Re:It's the Economy, Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's no wonder we have an obesity epidemic. It's our tax dollars at work.

      Agreed, but it would be more to the point to say "unchecked government power at work". How exactly did they aquire this power to reward certain industries at the expense of others? That's the root of the problem: they had the ability to do it, and that's all we need to know about why it was done. The more important question is HOW, because that's the only path to stopping it.

    11. Re:It's the Economy, Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought America is the land of the big steak? Go to a restaurant and get yourself a 600g T-bone

      I guarantee you there are zero resraurants in America where you can get a "600g T-bone". There are probably several thousand where you can get a "600oz T-bone", though. I can't even imagine an American measuring their steaks in grams!

      What country are you from, anyway?

      dom

    12. Re:It's the Economy, Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes sir! That's the same information America's been getting since the 1960's when a recession hit and someone sent out a pollster to find out what things Americans were cutting back on.
      America is a great nation, folks, and this just proves it. When the economy starts to tank we just tighten our collective belts and eat at home more. No going without meals or telling little Johny he can't go to college or not paying utilities like those "other" nations. No, Americans are a resourceful lot.

      What's that? You're having trouble making ends meet citizen? You can't make those car payments or buy medical insurance just by eating meatloaf twice a week? What's wrong with you? Work harder! Knuckle down, son. Shoulder to the wheel! Nose to the grindstone! No one else is having troubles.
      The poll proves it.

      When times get tough people go without. Yes, one of the things they go without is eating out, but mostly it's education, health care, paying bills. This whole article is just another smoke screen to make us all feel better about stripping away the safety net that was supposed to protect people when times get bad.

    13. Re:It's the Economy, Stupid by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

      WTF? I thought America is the land of the big steak? Go to a restaurant and get yourself a 600g T-bone and skip on the fries and you won't need to worry about carbs.

      1) Just about anyone can make a good steak at home for less than the steak restaurant. There are three methods for cooking steak at home, each one better than the last, that produce best results. The only time steak restaurants are worth it, are the very expensive ones that can slow roast over longer periods of time, and they are really damned good, but very expensive and in my case located inside urban areas that are inconvenient to reach. Given that, most steak restaurants try to get you on the non-meat dishes, sides and of course, alcohol. Everyone knows the price of the meat they're serving, but they also have labor/rent to pay.

      2) Yes, I can run down to the store right now and get a 24oz ribeye that's almost 2" thick and drop about $30 on it. I can prepare it per #1 above and it will taste very good. I can afford it. But I really shouldn't except maybe a few times a year, it's not a healthy and sustainable lifestyle. The recommendation I get from dietitians is 6 oz of meat max, most of it not red meat.

      3) There's confusion out there about what it means to be healthy. Vegetarians and vegans are not necessarily any more healthy than me. I have a few friends from India who will gladly point out "hey, we're all vegetarians here, but look at how fat we are!". It turns out lots of milk, butter, sugar and starchy foods also will put the weight on, and isn't any better for you. Restaurants do the same sort of things, they want you to enjoy what you eat, but of course most of us enjoy what is bad for us.

      4) The ignorable sides are probably the ones you should be eating. At least for me, those are: broccoli, asparagus, green beans, cauliflower, etc.

      My take away from the dietitian I'm compelled to see at work is 4-6oz of meat, half a plate of vegetable matter of some variety or another, and like 1/4 cup of grains (way, way less than the usda recommendation). Not very many restaurants prepare meals like this, I'm not sure if many people would buy it right now. I personally would if it was fast and convenient on my way home, I don't have a lot of free time but recognize a need to eat better. To me this is the big problem right now with restaurants: they are either once in a while things you go to, or they're places that serve meals to go on a more frequent basis, and the latter is just not cutting it.

    14. Re:It's the Economy, Stupid by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

      They'd probably call it 24-oz t-bone (680g technically). Definitely something you can buy, and something I've even eaten, but yeah...nobody would use metric.

    15. Re:It's the Economy, Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The reason this market is dominated by prepackaged convenience foods is government subsidies. Take all that pasta and cheese; it's just subsidized wheat and milk industrially converted into a highly palatable food that is cheap because it's largely already been paid for with tax dollars.

      Your conclusion doesn't follow from your premise. Just because wheat and/or dairy is subsidized doesn't mean the inevitable consequence is a glut of pasta and cheese. This may be what you choose to believe to explain why so many people don't choose to make the same choices you make, but it's not supported by the evidence.

      There are a million things that milk and wheat can be made into that aren't pasta and cheese, and those million items would have the same discount owing to government subsidies. In other words, the subsidies don't require or incentivize creating cheese and pasta any more than they would incentivize creating couscous, wheat bran muffins, and buttermilk. What incentivizes cheese and pasta are sales. That's how the market is supposed to work. Businesses interested in making money make more of what sells. The more of a product is made, the lower the price (supply and demand and all that magic).

      Vegetables, which are not subsidized, are surprisingly expensive when compared to this crap. On a per pound basis they're more expensive than meat, which is just subsidized grain converted into cows and chickens. Consequently it doesn't sell well, and it's not stocked well.

      You are obviously maintaining a diet that contradicts your biology (i.e., vegetarian/vegan). If you had ever bought meat you wouldn't make such a stupid statement. Even the shittiest discount ground beef costs more than most organic vegetables on a weight basis. Vegetables don't sell well because people don't want them. Nobody's standing there at the grocery store thinking to themselves, "Man, I can buy some kale or the rib eye steak, and I sure would rather have the kale except that it's too expensive." What moron thinks that's happening anywhere on this planet?

      In the end this tells me wealthier people are eating a lot of junk prepared food too

      This statement nullifies all of your previous claims about diet choices being forced upon consumers who are just victims of their socioeconomic status. People like what they like, and they buy it. The market responds by making more of what they like, which means lower prices. End of story.

    16. Re:It's the Economy, Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The economy is doing great ... for you and corporations. Jobs are here

      Wow, that's some pretty fast self-contradiction. If leisure is being destroyed, that's bad for the economy. If the economy were doing well, you'd be hearing about increasing unemployment, more people being able to stay at home or spending less time at work, etc.

    17. Re:It's the Economy, Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I started eating out a lot less after learning that carbs weren't as good for you as the FDA had been suggesting.

      The FDA never recommended a high carbohydrate diet. That was the USDA. The FDA cares about your heath, the USDA cares about the health of the farming industry.

    18. Re:It's the Economy, Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's because value-added foods have a higher profit margin. Sugar costs more in a Kool-Aid packet than it does in a sugar package. The most economical way to make Kool-Aid is to add your own sugar, but people like the convenience of presweetened drinks or they don't realize how much they're paying. Plus when you add your own sugar you can add less of it. I routinely add half or a third as much sugar in cookies as the recipe says and they taste sweet enough.

    19. Re:It's the Economy, Stupid by Khashishi · · Score: 1

      It's not that carbs are bad, it's that people are a lot more sedentary than in the past and eating more calories. Carbs are an energy filler. That's good if you actually need the energy.

    20. Re: It's the Economy, Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The government should really stay out of food production.

    21. Re:It's the Economy, Stupid by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      1) Just about anyone can make a good steak at home for less than the steak restaurant.

      Errr something which applies universally to any restaurant meals so why even mention it.

      4) The ignorable sides are probably the ones you should be eating. At least for me, those are: broccoli, asparagus, green beans, cauliflower, etc.

      Do you even live in America? The ignoreable sides are typically deep fried slop served with extra thick sauce. Even the salad will be covered with a million calorie dressing. All of that is also beside the point since the GP specifically talked about carbs vs protein, not "health".

  7. We are ditching the stupid Boomer Ways! by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Eating out is suppose to be a special occasion thing, or for convince when you are not near a kitchen.
    However for the most part we just cook our own meals. Guess what for a basic meal it isn't that hard and you can cook for a family for about as much as one serving at a fast food restaurant.
    Heck when I was laid off back in 2008 I got a whole chicken for about $5.00 baked it. Then after we had our dinner, I shaved off the extras for sandwiches, and boiled it down with the bones to have chicken soup for a couple days. Yes by the end of the week I was sick of chicken, but it was a good idea that I had money to pay the mortgage and car payments. Granted I was lucky enough to get an other job in a couple of weeks, however I needed to save up.
    For those pesky millennials who are still trying to save up for this middle class life style, cooking at home vs wasting money on prepared food is a good plan.
    Even if you are not a chief of even a good cook you can normally make yourself a decent meal. Unlike the boomer time and before, we now can google how to cook nearly anything now.
    This is how our grandparents/great grandparents lived, very few went to a restaurant every day for their meals. It was a special thing, for every once in a while. The Boomer generation who didn't want to force women to cook, and were too manly for the men to do the cooking, had a generation who ate out more. And now in their 70's suffering from diabetes and demanding their Social Security Checks or are still working, because where did all their money go.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    1. Re:We are ditching the stupid Boomer Ways! by olsmeister · · Score: 1

      One chicken (or even a turkey) goes a long, long way. It's amazing.

    2. Re:We are ditching the stupid Boomer Ways! by Dusanyu · · Score: 1

      Funny my parents were "boomers" And we rarely ate at a restaurant. Living in the mid west We had access to fantastic food at the market and Every night we gathered around the table a home cooked meal. I dont know were you get your ideas about "Boomers" but in my area of the of the US home cooking was common. But we were a Blue collar community most families There Fathers worked at the Engine plant downtown. And had to live form paycheck to paycheck.

    3. Re:We are ditching the stupid Boomer Ways! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is your shift key malfunctioning?

    4. Re:We are ditching the stupid Boomer Ways! by reboot246 · · Score: 1

      I am a boomer and I nearly always cook at home . . . . when I'm there. Right now home is about 300 miles north and I'm eating a microwave meal in a motel room. That's why I cook at home. I crave home cooking when I'm out of town.

      One of the best cooks I've ever known in my life was my dear grandmother (1906 - 1996), and she never, ever looked at a recipe and she never measured anything. I guess when you've cooked tens of thousands of meals it kinda becomes a real skill.

    5. Re:We are ditching the stupid Boomer Ways! by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      I will point out your grandmother almost certainly started with a recipe and measurements, even if those recipes were oral instructions from a relative, and the measurements were someone overseeing and correcting her eyeballing.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    6. Re:We are ditching the stupid Boomer Ways! by skam240 · · Score: 1

      "Eating out is suppose to be a special occasion thing, or for convince when you are not near a kitchen."

      No, eating out is and has always been up to individual will. No one has ever opened a restaurant and said "this place is for special occasions only"

      Also, use your freezer and you don't have to eat everything you make from a chicken all at once.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    7. Re:We are ditching the stupid Boomer Ways! by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      Yes. Especially as jellomizer said, you learn how to render the rest of it down. My late wife could take a turkey and make damn near half a month's meals from it; turkey dinner, sandwiches (cold and hot half-plate with gravy), and the gallons of gravy (she froze the stock and used it for literally months afterward), then soups and stews. .

    8. Re:We are ditching the stupid Boomer Ways! by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      My wife would make baked goods by pouring a mound of flour on the counter, making a crater and adding the other ingredients by "feel". Once the dough was done (bread, cake, pie crust, biscotti; didn't matter - and neither did volume) the excess flour was swept back into the bag.

    9. Re:We are ditching the stupid Boomer Ways! by houghi · · Score: 1

      The thing I am always need to remind myself is that in the US fastfood is in the same category as a 3 star restaurant, In Europe that is not the case.

      You would have 3, not 2 options to eat:
      1) Self made
      2) Fast food
      3) Restaurant

      I seldom go to a fast food place, because it is not good quality for the price you pay.
      e.g. I rather have a pizza at an Italian mom and pop place than one at Domino's. I pay about the same (or even less) for something that tastes much better.
      The added bonus is that I can sit somewhere, have a glass of wine with it and not doing the dishes. And that is when I go alone.

      When I go with friends, it is more about sitting together and have a bottle of wine and just sit and talk. The whole reason is to spend time together.

      And if time is a factor for you, learn to wok. Look up some recepies online (I bought a second hand book) and make a meal in 5 minutes. OK, the first month it will take a bit longer as you will find your ways, but I can have a meal in the time it takes to boil water + 1 minute.
      And no, a WOK pan is not needed, just a deep pan. Making it is fast and cheap and as tasty as you want it.

      And I still go out and eat it in a restaurant and not order it out.

      About these old people. My parents lived in Spain and went out EACH day for the last 30 years about 95% of the time. If you pay 10EUR for a meal, including the wine and coffee, there is no reason not to. And you have social contacts while you are at it.

      Nope, no diabetes. They where healthy as can be (Mom died of cancer, dad from a fall). Healthy as a 65 year old when they where 85.
      Obviously (almost) never fast food.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    10. Re:We are ditching the stupid Boomer Ways! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Eating out is suppose to be a special occasion thing, or for convince when you are not near a kitchen."

      No, eating out is and has always been up to individual will. No one has ever opened a restaurant and said "this place is for special occasions only"

      Also, use your freezer and you don't have to eat everything you make from a chicken all at once.

      I think it depends largely on your country of origin. In the US, yeah, people eat out based on their desire to eat out or not. Growing up in the UK, we would only ever eat out on special occasions (and there were very few restaurants at the time because of that besides take-outs and chippies). The UK is more like the US now in terms of people eating out.

      Other countries in Europe though, eating out remains (for most people) just a special occasion thing. Different cultures- different attitudes towards eating out.

    11. Re:We are ditching the stupid Boomer Ways! by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      For those pesky millennials who are still trying to save up for this middle class life style, cooking at home vs wasting money on prepared food is a good plan.

      That not always true. It depends on what you are preparing. Kraft can make Macaroni and Cheese way cheaper than I can.

      Also, my Grandmother had a lot more time to cook. It wasn't so much that we are "making" people not cook, it's that we went from single-income households to dual-income households.

    12. Re:We are ditching the stupid Boomer Ways! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same here. Of course, Mom stayed home through Elementary School before moving into the working world out of necessity to cover for the bad times when Dad was out of work. Even throughout Middle School and High School there was always something to eat in the house. It wasn't uncommon to have instructions left for what to cook for dinner ourselves. Whether it was my brother or myself, we would get home from school and start preparing dinner so that it was ready by the time our parents got home. Weekends were the only time we ate out at a restaurant and typically we would only eat out for an early dinner. After I got a job I started treating the family to breakfast once a week at a restaurant as well until I moved out.

    13. Re:We are ditching the stupid Boomer Ways! by eddeye · · Score: 1

      Why stop there? We should make our own clothes at home too! Quit throwing your paycheck at the Sewing-Industrial Complex.

      And light sources, please. You still waste your hard-earned dollars on commercial light bulbs? Those are for suckers. Real do-it-yourselfers raise bees to harvest the wax and make their own candles.

      Specialization and division of labor is the hallmark of civilization. Why does it suddenly become good and noble to ignore that when it comes to cooking?

      I went to school and studied hard so that I don't have to fix my own car. I'm sure as hell not wasting my time making meals that can be done better and more efficiently by a professional cook.

      --
      Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch.
  8. Uh- what? by Brett+Buck · · Score: 1

    I am as mystified as to why this is even here as the rest. But "crushing student loan debt" is influencing eating habits in a sigificant way? When it affects a tiny fraction of the population, and only those who did something really stupid?

    1. Re:Uh- what? by Patent+Lover · · Score: 1

      Well, at least in the U.S. it's over 40 million with student loan debt. Not a tiny fraction of the population.

    2. Re:Uh- what? by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      "Did something really stupid" means "trying to get an education because public education in the US has gradually become worthless?"

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    3. Re:Uh- what? by hey! · · Score: 5, Informative

      Tiny? About 1/3 of adult Americans have college degrees, but here's the kicker: about 60% of adult Americans have attended college, but a large fraction of them never finish. If you include technical schools that don't grant degrees but which students take out loans to attend, the number goes up further.

      Americans owe over 1.3 trillion dollars in student loan debt -- more than they owe in credit card debt by a good margin. That's why cracking down on unscrupulous or misleading educational institutions is important. Education -- both college and trade -- is a huge industry with a big impact on the economy.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    4. Re:Uh- what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Did something really stupid" means "trying to get an education because public education in the US has gradually become worthless?"

      You mean "trying to get a sheet of paper that allows me to get a real job".

      I didn't learn much of anything in college, but I paid a lot for it, and that was all to earn a degree so I could get paid more.

      OTOH, I do get paid more.

    5. Re:Uh- what? by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      It's too bad that's how you approached it. You could have learned something at no extra cost.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    6. Re:Uh- what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The real problem is that college kids don't understand the value of a dollar yet, and they view it as spending someone else's money. Predictable result: The average state college tuition has increased to meet 100% of available financial aid. Basically every loan raises the average price a tiny bit.

      IMO if we were to forbid education loans, tuition rates would eventually drop to the point where working part time at a local business will be sufficient to pay for tuition and food. Unfortunately the housing market bubble and sustained real-estate growth rate will effectively make it makes it permanently impossible for students to pay for their own housing (now, or at any point in the future). I think the only solution to the student housing problem is to build 10x as many on-campus high-rise dormitories, and subsidize the housing with federal tax dollars.

    7. Re:Uh- what? by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      You left out "crushing". There's a difference between overall student loans being paid off and "crushing" ones. That 40M (44.2) is overall.

    8. Re:Uh- what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The average student loan debt is in the $20k-30k range, the people who ran up $80k+ bills are in the minority but used to get mentioned much too often.

    9. Re:Uh- what? by hey! · · Score: 1

      If you forbid educational loans, the economy would collapse as the flow of scientists, engineers, actuaries etc. into the entry level ranks dries up. Unless we open up to more immigration.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    10. Re:Uh- what? by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      I am as mystified as to why this is even here as the rest. But "crushing student loan debt" is influencing eating habits in a sigificant way? When it affects a tiny fraction of the population, and only those who did something really stupid?

      20-somethings were the prime market for people dining out, since the largest percentage of their income is disposable and they were less likely to have a nice kitchen.

      So student loan debt is a big deal to the restaurant industry.

    11. Re:Uh- what? by terrycarlino · · Score: 1

      Naw. "Did something really stupid" means paying $80 grand for a degree in political science or library science or literature. Just so you could work as a barista at Starbucks.

      "Did something really stupid" means not working during high school, during the school year and during the summers, because it cut into your ability to spend your nights and weekends drinking and screwing off, and putting all of your living cost on credit.

      "Did something really stupid" means you decided to stay at the palatial dormitory, with it's access to the health club facilities at the private student gym (with it's additional fee) and it's amazing rock climbing wall, not to mention the array of gorme eating places. So much better than home, where mom would feed you for free, and you could stay in your room for no cost. But of course they bitch about your weed and prohibit those drunken orgies you engage in on weekends.

    12. Re:Uh- what? by Viceroy+Potatohead · · Score: 1

      That deserved to be modded up. A great deal of the university "experience" is a shuck, a narrative, a romantic notion, sold to unwitting children just entering adulthood by institutions all too happy to take their money. Blowing that kind of money, university is the absolute last place anyone should be motivated to do that sort of thing. Save it for after, if you were unlucky beforehand, or get all your drunken, pot-smoking orgies out of the way in high school like responsible teenagers, instead of pissing around by driving yourself into "crippling debt" for as long as you've already lived. The entire university (or college for the USians) narrative is a shuck. Add to that the sheer number of ridiculously unpractical majors, and a climate where students actively suppress actually hearing anything they don't agree with, and it makes me wonder why people of my generation are willing to encourage their kids in that direction. Become a plumber or a YouTube pop sensation seem far less damaging advice to their future. What kind of insane system even allows a 20 year old to assume $100000 or a quarter million dollar debt? That's fiscally irresponsible.

  9. I'm now a poor slob. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I now work white trash jobs. Yes, plural.

    All of my co-workers buy fast food because they are jumping from job to job and work too hard and too long to have enough time to cook for themselves. Yes, too hard. They work harder than any CEO who gets an eight figure salary and bonuses.

    Why am I stuck in those jobs? Because I was a good employee. I drank my employer's Kool-Aid, devoted myself to my company's "technology" and focused on my employer.

    When my employer decided that what we did can be done cheaper overseas, I lost my job. However, since my skills were very very specific to my employer - because I was so loyal - they weren't transferable: or so I'm told.

    I should have drank the Microsoft Kool-Aid years ago. I'd be OK now. Or better yet, never went into technology. I should have went into finance. Yeah sure, '08 -'10 sucked - but they're humming along again!

    Kids: your employer will cast you to the side on a heartbeat. Don't ever - EVER - think you're essential.

    1. Re: I'm now a poor slob. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The parent post is correct. Sadly, kids will not get the lesson when it is combined with a story about an adult. You have to explain it in a way they can understand.

      A job is a deal between you and your employer. You agree to do work. Your employer gives you money in exchange.

      Your employer would prefer to pay you less. Before you call them evil, name a time you bought something and paid more than the asking price. Yea, I thought not ;)

      How can you make sure you can demand a decent wage? Always have a plan to go get a different job. Interview every two years. You never know when your employer will decide to pay you less. Have a backup plan.

      If you interview, and get a better offer, take it.

      If you interview, and get equivalent offerers, then you have a backup plan.

      If you interview, and donâ(TM)t get offeres, or get offers that pay less, you have a problem. Fix it ASAP. Perhaps your skills are not in demand: ask what the in-demand skills are and learn some of them. Perhaps you are not interviewing well: practice!

      If you always have a backup plan, you can dramatically reduce the risk.

    2. Re: I'm now a poor slob. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ask what the in-demand skills are and learn some of them

      "Just go be a heart surgeon."

      Actually, you can just "go learn" medicine and begin service within a reasonable degree of time, money, and exclusivity.

      Unless you want to meet the certs/demands/accreditation for licensed practice in the USA. Then those three flip right over. Seeing as parent's context was for "getting cash money" I suppose he wrote the paradox.

      Whatever source of "go get easy money" you offer, it's in demand for a reason. Even drug dealers weigh other options.

      The only easy money is rent seeking, free money, but only a small slice of the demographic pie can control large capital. By definition.

    3. Re:I'm now a poor slob. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, what, you can't learn new skills? Are you incapable of hitting the department of labor website and seeing what kind of jobs are in-demand, and what they pay, and how to get them?

      I should have went into finance.

      You should have gone to English classes first, as proper English is important for many high-paying jobs. And even where it is not so important, people will judge you by how you speak. It isn't fair, but it's real, and it makes a difference when you are hunting for real jobs.

    4. Re:I'm now a poor slob. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      08-10 didn't suck for finance because in finance you can make money in down markets with shorting. The financial engine can extract wealth out of any value gradient.

    5. Re:I'm now a poor slob. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should have just educated yourself, instead of relying on your employer to educate you.

    6. Re: I'm now a poor slob. by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      Nope. They are too tired because they eat fast food. Fact. I stopped eating shit and I can work all day and knock out a healthy whole foods dinner for an entire family.

      People who are active and eating right can do anything, work any hours, and keep going for more. Fact.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    7. Re:I'm now a poor slob. by David_Hart · · Score: 1

      I should have drank the Microsoft Kool-Aid years ago. I'd be OK now. Or better yet, never went into technology. I should have went into finance. Yeah sure, '08 -'10 sucked - but they're humming along again!

      Kids: your employer will cast you to the side on a heartbeat. Don't ever - EVER - think you're essential.

      Actually, I'm still kicking myself for not going to work for Microsoft immediately after university in the late 90's. I'd be retired right about now with a ton of money in the bank from stock options, etc. But I did do two things right, I bought into the Microsoft ecosystem and their certifications from the beginning (Windows, Exchange certifications) and then I moved on to networking and Cisco certification. Now it's WiFi (specifically Aruba).

      My advice is that If you are going into tech, make sure that you land a job at a company that is refreshing or rolling out new technology and is willing to train you. You'll learn about both the old tech and the new tech, giving you experience that you can leverage at other companies.

      But, yes, finance seems to be where the real money is.

    8. Re:I'm now a poor slob. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I now work white trash jobs. Yes, plural.

      All of my co-workers buy fast food because they are jumping from job to job and work too hard and too long to have enough time to cook for themselves. Yes, too hard. They work harder than any CEO who gets an eight figure salary and bonuses.

      Why am I stuck in those jobs? Because I was a good employee. I drank my employer's Kool-Aid, devoted myself to my company's "technology" and focused on my employer.

      When my employer decided that what we did can be done cheaper overseas, I lost my job. However, since my skills were very very specific to my employer - because I was so loyal - they weren't transferable: or so I'm told.

      I should have drank the Microsoft Kool-Aid years ago. I'd be OK now. Or better yet, never went into technology. I should have went into finance. Yeah sure, '08 -'10 sucked - but they're humming along again!

      Kids: your employer will cast you to the side on a heartbeat. Don't ever - EVER - think you're essential.

      How do you know you work harder than the CEO? Was that your last job?

    9. Re:I'm now a poor slob. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All of my co-workers buy fast food because they are jumping from job to job and work too hard and too long to have enough time to cook for themselves. Yes, too hard.

      Jeez, that sounds terrible.

      In that situation, I'd say a slow cooker might be a good investment to save yourself a lot of time and money. You can do the prep the night before, throw the crock into the cooker before you leave, and by the time you're getting home you have a fully cooked meal. It's literally the most idiot proof method of cooking on the planet, and has the added benefit of not needing to run the oven in the summer.

      People say they don't have time to cook, but a slow cooker really will allow you to make a good meal with very little effort and not much in the way of cost ... I mean, you can do 10 pounds of pulled pork for under $30 bucks, literally just take the pork, pour some BBQ sauce over it, and come back in about 10 hours. Some tortillas, onions, and pepper and you can make enough pulled pork tacos for a *ton* of meals. I did that for a dinner party this Spring, and after 13 people grazed on it for a few hours, we still had several pounds of meat leftover, much of which we froze and could just thaw a pack and make a meal in 20 minutes.

      Some carrots, onions, and potatoes, and you can do an entire roast with vegetables for the effort of peeling a few vegetables -- you can literally prepare an entire meal in about 20 minutes of work. Throw in a bunch of chicken thighs and drumsticks, cover it with a sauce of your choosing, and in 4-5 hours you've got several pounds of chicken to eat.

      It's sad when people say they have no time to cook for themselves, because there really are a lot of ways to make food quite cheaply and without a whole lot of effort or culinary skill. Instead people end up spending more money on less food of lower quality.

      With a slow cooker, that cheap cut of meat with tons of connective tissue just slowly melts and becomes awesome after a bunch of hours.

      I understand how people get stuck into this pattern, but the easy/cheap means of cooking large amounts of food are so easy it isn't funny.

      I sincerely hope your situation improves, but the ability to cook good food cheaply isn't that difficult ... there are things I do in the slow cooker which are better than anything any local restaurant has, and which end up having such small costs per serving it's ridiculous.

    10. Re:I'm now a poor slob. by samdu · · Score: 1

      This is actually a two way street. Learn enough at your current employer to demand higher wages at a different employer and jump ship. It's not all on the company side. You just have to know how to play the game (a game that has changed remarkably in the last 50-60 years).

  10. Americans going back to normal at home cooking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It will be a golden time for Aldi.

    Here in Germany, simple home cooking and buying cheap food at Aldi/Lidl/... is the normal everyday routine for every student or poor person, and richer people also still prefer home-cooked meals, and only eat out if they have less time than money.

    To us, US culture is rather strange. You really go out to eat each day, every day? And if you "cook" at home, it’s ready-made convenience food? How do you even survive? Isn't that extremely expensive? Don't you miss real food?

    And then we hear, how much you Americans are forced to work, just to survive.
    Guys, you're the closest thing to enslaved one can be, without officially being enslaved!
    NORMAL is 8-9 to 16-18, with 1/2 to 1.5 hours of lunch break, and going for a pee, a snack, some fresh air, or a chat whenever you like, because what matters is the end result. If not necessary, you can come between 7 and 10, and leave when you're done for the day or it's too late. (>18:00 is too late.)
    NORMAL is 20-30 holiday days a year, and ideally Christmas and summer holiday bonuses. And your boss telling you to go home or to the doc if you do not feel well. With an employer-provided healthcare ensurance that you can keep even if you switch jobs or become unemployed. And getting paid for the free/sick days too!
    NORMAL is not being harassed by your boss if you don't work hard enough. (Or do you get to harass him to, if he doesn't pay you high enough??)
    (And GOOD is having not just a job, but a profession. Something that matters, and that is your passion (which kinda implies that it matters).)

    And "hard working" is a BAD thing. Only stupid people and slaves work hard. Especially on /., with its computer experts, that should be clear. Smart people's goal is to get as much done as necessary with as little effort as possible. (But not less, as that is when efficiency becomes laziness.)
    The best company is one, that is so good at that, that everyone can sit back and relax, while the money comes in.
    Your boss knows that. Because that's exactly the point of management. Look busy while commandeering people around, and calling their work yours. YOU are their automation. That's why they want you to work hard. So they don't.
    Sure, there are bosses that actually work hard. But only at small companies or unsuccessful companies where the boss gives a fuck. But the bigger the company, the more that "hard work" only becomes the "work" of making others work for you.

    *ramble ramble ramble* ... ... It's true though.

    1. Re:Americans going back to normal at home cooking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GOOD is ruling the world.

    2. Re:Americans going back to normal at home cooking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To us, US culture is rather strange. You really go out to eat each day, every day?

      Hell no.

      Also, there is no single US culture, especially in this aspect. I imagine (imagine because I have no fucking idea) that someone in New York or Chicago might go out to eat every day, or nearly every day.

      I'd also guess that they don't have a grill out in their back yard, because they probably don't have a back yard, or even a grill. That makes city folk nothing like the rest of us.

    3. Re:Americans going back to normal at home cooking? by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      slaves work hard.

      If that were true, slave systems would be more productive than capitalist systems. They're not.

      Smart people's goal is to get as much done as necessary with as little effort as possible.

      Wise people understand that you get out of life what you put into it.

      You have no understanding of what most managers do and what they have to put up with.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    4. Re:Americans going back to normal at home cooking? by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      You really go out to eat each day, every day? And if you "cook" at home, it’s ready-made convenience food? How do you even survive? Isn't that extremely expensive? Don't you miss real food?

      Dude or dudette, you need to talk with actual, average Americans more. Don't develop your world view from news clips.

    5. Re:Americans going back to normal at home cooking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To us, US culture is rather strange. You really go out to eat each day, every day?

      In this regard, at least, there is no such thing as US culture. Some people do one thing, other people do other things. We have every kind of person that exists. There are people just like you, here. There are weirdos that you wouldn't understand at all. Some people do go out to eat every day, and a lot of other people don't. If the US has a culture at all, it's "anything goes." I work 30-35 hours per week.

    6. Re:Americans going back to normal at home cooking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      slaves work hard.

      If that were true, slave systems would be more productive than capitalist systems. They're not.

      Smart people's goal is to get as much done as necessary with as little effort as possible.

      Wise people understand that you get out of life what you put into it.

      Bullshit, only the lucky or the ones who start out with a massive advantage get out of life why they put into it. Life is made of failure after failure and if one gets very lucky some of those efforts become a victory or two. Most have just enough victories to get by.

    7. Re:Americans going back to normal at home cooking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A normal job in the US would be 40 hours a week, 8 hours a day, with a 30 minute or 1 hour lunch break and 2x 10 minute bathroom breaks. 10 days paid sick leave, 10 days paid vacation. Medical, dental, 401K, life insurance.

      Those jobs don't exist anymore.

      Thanks to the "gig economy", I now work 35 hours a week, 7 hours a day, with a 1 hour lunch break and 2x 10 minute bathroom breaks. Zero sick leave, zero paid vacation, zero medical, zero dental, no 401K, no life insurance. I've been doing this "gig" long enough that I get a "length of service" bonus equal to 1/3rd of a 1-week paycheck, twice a year.

      My retirement plan is to immigrate to Europe and leech off of one of your universal healthcare (done right) countries. Leaning towards Finland due to all of the terrorist attacks in Britain, Germany, Belgium, France, etc...

    8. Re:Americans going back to normal at home cooking? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Currywurst...

      German street food is terrible. What we call hotdogs, they call bratwurst. Then they cover it in Catsup and Madras curry, currywurst, just awful. McDonalds can't make anything that bad, not even McRibs.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  11. Re:Yeah by youngone · · Score: 1

    I know a lot more millennials these days that starve themselves to be like the Kardashian girls

    Just like my sisters did in the 1970's. It's not exactly a new phenomenon.

    Also, there used to be roughly 2 gender choices and sexual orientations. Now there are about 70 or something

    No there are not, no matter how much "conservatives" want it to be true, no-one really thinks like that, except trolls on the Internet.

  12. To expensive bleh quality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Eating out has turned to expensive and the food quality here at least for mid line places is shear hit or miss. Burger and beer for $20 I better enjoy it. Canâ(TM)t find anyone who does fries reliably well. Screw it Iâ(TM)ll eat at home and cook with care, not a kid burger slinging who really doesnâ(TM)t care

  13. GMO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't forget that we have to buy expensive food that actually explicitly SAYS it is not filled with weed killer. So yes. WHat you get at the restaurant is probably full of everything a diligent, intelligent consumer avoids. MSG, glyphosate, sugar, salt, smoke/burnt, etc

    1. Re:GMO by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Any guesses as to where food is most likely to be coated with pesticides? A roadside farmstand, where those fresh picked vegetables come straight from the field to dusty bushel baskets, unwashed.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    2. Re:GMO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You ain't visiting the right roadside stands. Some big commercial operations have third party roadside stand vendors -- you want to avoid those. I visit places where I'm actually talking to the farmer himself and paying him directly without any middlemen. This is the best way to find out how he manages his crops and make sure nobody is mishandling the produce. Otherwise, anybody along the commercial supply chain can spray your food with chemicals to prolong it's shelf life and they likely never have to face you eye-to-eye about what they did.

    3. Re:GMO by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      Roadside stands are typically from the farmer's own field that is used to feed said farmer's family. In those, treatment is usually not done or is so with tobacco-juices and such, not commercial pesticides. Large conglomerates and farmers harvesting for General Mills don't have roadsides. And unless you're a moron, you wash your veggies anyway.

  14. It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There have been continuous price increases in the United States.

    The grocery stores and food producers are extremely hostile toward customers. Cans of Tuna, for example, went from 6.5 ounces to 6 ounces and the reduction continued to 3 ounces. They found a weakness in the customers. The customer may remember the price, but may not notice that the can size has been reduced by 0.5 ounce, and the amount of water has increased.

    It's good to make your own bread. For example: Adm Whole Wheat Flour # 17688, $13.98 / Unit (50 lb). When you buy bread, it may be $2.50 per pound or more, and the weight includes the water in the bread. You can buy the flour used to make bread for $0.28, 28 cents per pound.

    There are many examples like that.

    1. Re:It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      There have been continuous price increases in the United States. ... Cans of Tuna, for example, went from 6.5 ounces to 6 ounces and the reduction continued to 3 ounces. They found a weakness in the customers. The customer may remember the price, but may not notice that the can size has been reduced by 0.5 ounce, and the amount of water has increased.

      Similarly, toilet paper went from being (typically) 4.25" x 4.25" to slightly smaller (and now often not square) without a price reduction - which is, effectively, a price increase. People often simply shop by package price w/o noticing the unit values.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    2. Re:It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by kamapuaa · · Score: 1

      I guess you also have to consider how much your time is worth to you. If you make a very basic loaf it will take about 10 minutes of your time to prep it, cook it, clean up afterwards. Even if you are somebody like creimer or 10101101010, 10 minutes of your time is worth maybe $5.

      Which doesn't even consider the cost of energy.

      I suspect people are just buying more ready-made food at the supermarket. Cooking for yourself doesn't make economic sense - it's more like a hobby.

      --
      Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
    3. Re:It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by Drishmung · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Cooking for yourself doesn't make economic sense - it's more like a hobby.

      If you cook for yourself though, you will probably use less salt; you will almost certainly use far less sugar; and you will not add any of the commercial preservatives, emulsifiers, bulking agents and dyes that are added to the majority of store-bought meals. Your food should therefor be healthier and significantly less fattening.

      People have hobbies because they enjoy them. They are objectively good for you because they reduce stress and increase happiness. If cooking is in fact your hobby, that's a good thing for your health and sanity.

      --
      Protoplasm. Quiet Protoplasm. I like quiet protoplasm.
    4. Re:It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by quenda · · Score: 1

      FYI, bread is made from high-gluten flour, which costs a lot more than plain flour around here.
      If you ever tried to make your own bread from cheap flour, you should have noticed it is not at all the same.

    5. Re:It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      When you buy bread, it may be $2.50 per pound or more, and the weight includes the water in the bread. You can buy the flour used to make bread for $0.28, 28 cents per pound.

      Did you amortise the time value of you cooking the bread and the electricity needed to run your oven?

      The goal in life is not to do everything as cheaply as possible. I could build my own house for a small fraction of the cost of buying a place too. I don't because I want to do other things with my time.

      Sidenote: I actually love cooking, but baking sucks badly. Give me an expensive cake from a patisary any day.

    6. Re:It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by Custard+Horse · · Score: 1

      FYI, bread is made from high-gluten flour, which costs a lot more than plain flour around here. If you ever tried to make your own bread from cheap flour, you should have noticed it is not at all the same.

      Or you could make soda bread which uses plain flour and no yeast. Just saying...

    7. Re:It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      False comparison. That ten minutes you spend cooking you are **not** spending at work. This is a very common mistake that /.rs make - all their time is worth whatever they make at work. It ain't. You are simply not that important.

    8. Re:It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by quenda · · Score: 1

      Or you could make soda bread which uses plain flour and no yeast. Just saying...

      So eat bad bread, AND go to the effort of making it, for maybe 30 cents. Using proper flour and yeast will cost me $1/loaf but make delicious fresh bread.
      Or I could buy a loaf of supermarket's cheapest bread for $1 (Australia - so I assume less in the US?)

      Pasta and rice are very cheap too. Why would anyone go to the effort of making their own bad bread, even with a machine, to save a buck or less? Even on US minimum wage that makes no sense.

    9. Re:It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

      Interesting, I thought this was only happening in Brazil. Here they are also constantly reducing the size of the products without reducing the prices, a little more and a bar of chocolate will be the size of a "free sample" but with the price of the full product.

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    10. Re:It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, toilet paper was even larger than 4.5x4.5 before the great recession: I've tracked the market's transition to niggardly butt-floss.

    11. Re:It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's an epidemic in the US. It's gotten to the point where I basically don't buy anything but the bare essentials, because I know I'll get ripped off. Go to a restaurant in the US today and you'll receive a portion suitable for a little old lady. If you expect to leave full and satisfied, you are in for a rude awakening. Better stop and get a sandwich on the way home.

    12. Re:It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

      Or I could buy a loaf of supermarket's cheapest bread for $1 (Australia - so I assume less in the US?)

      $1.28 for the cheapest store brand, $2.18 for what I consider best of breed for the mass mfg variety, around $5 for fresh baked.

    13. Re:It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

      Trying to equate your time with money is often folly, given that whether you are salaried or paid by the hour, generally you are expected to work about X hours and you cannot easily give up some time at work (and the associated money).

      Baking is pretty time consuming, although without any question produces the very best tasting results even if you lack skill.

      Cooking dinner on the other hand has a minimum entry of 1 hour to cook, eat and clean even the simplest of meals (and the same doctors who tell you to eat healthy, will also tell you to eat slowly, which most of us don't do). 1 hour is a lot of time for this task, and some things if you want them to taste good, take well over that in prep alone. This says nothing about the taste of the food in question, which does depend quite heavily on the skill of the cook, his access to appropriate and fresh ingredients, and what shortcuts he took to get it done fast (microwaving a potato, in my opinion, is sinful, but it brings a 2 hour process to a few minutes). Eating out makes a lot of sense.

      Unfortunately you can't eat out for less than like 1000 Calories a meal, and the meals aren't very healthy. So people are doing some pretty uncomfortable things to try to make it all happen. Restaurants are still caught in various dilemmas, one of which is that their costs are labor+rent driven, food is fairly cheap, but if they don't give a lot of it, people think they're being cheap. Another of course is that the only notion of healthy food they have are salads, and nobody really wants to spend $10 on a salad.

      If they can get around their confusion about what it means to be healthy, and start focusing on delivering healthy meals that don't require a lot of time from their customers I think what was formerly the "fast food" industry could transform into a more successful "pick up food" industry.

    14. Re:It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

      Not sure what restaurant you eat at, but I was looking over the menu at one chain and not a single thing there was less than 1000 calories, when as a middle aged man my budget there is around 500-800.

      I find they serve too much food, because food is cheaper than their rent and labor. Alcohol is the only thing i've noticed seems to come in smaller packages for the same price.

    15. Re:It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by dargaud · · Score: 1

      Cans of Tuna, for example, went from 6.5 ounces to 6 ounces and the reduction continued to 3 ounces.

      I was also noticing that cans of sardines now look spacious. The old saying "packed like a can of sardines" no longer applies as you can easily add one or two in most cans while in the past there was absolutely no space.

      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
    16. Re:It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      Cooking for yourself doesn't make economic sense - it's more like a hobby.

      Absolutely NOT true.

      I generally eat better, more healthy and cheaper than most anyone that eats out.

      I do happen to like to cook, but you don't have to have the interest and go as exotic as I do some times.

      I basically use my Sundays to cook most of the day, while also cleaning the house.

      I cook 3-4 different things that I can eat on for most all of the coming week. It isn't rocket surgery....and you can switch up the leftovers so that you don't get bored with the same thing all week for lunches and dinners.

      I didn't go all out this weekend, but here's a sample of what I did.

      I made a big batch of cole slaw.

      I have a ceramic grill (you don't need this a simple grill will work too)....and I found whole turkey breast on sale for $0.99/lb. I brined it before I went to bed Sat night. I got up Sunday and drained it and put it on a spit and on the rotisserie...I also threw some chunks of hickory wood in there for a slow smoked turkey. Once I put that out there, I pretty much left it alone for 4 hours.

      While that was cooking , I put a pot on the stove, and with some ground beef and italian sausage (beef was on sale), I raided the pantry for tomato sauce and tomato paste (stocked up on when on sale)...and made Italian meat sauce.

      I ate that last night with some pasta as a carb treat. As the week goes on, I'll eat the meat sauce on spiralized zucchini for low carb meals, I can grill some eggplant later in the week..takes minutes, and do a grilled eggplant parm. dish.

      In the meantime, I can take the turkey and eat slices as is with sides of slaw,or I can make great sandwhiches out of it with slaw on the sandwhich....and I'm sure I can find something else to do, maybe a lettuce salad with smoked turkey?

      OH yeah, I saved the smoked turkey carcass....one night this week, when I have some down time or while TV is on, I'll throw that carcass into a pot on the stove, and boil it and make smoked turkey stock, and either freeze that or can it (I do pressure can, again, not necessary you can easily freeze the stuff)....and use that later as that it makes a WONDERFUL chicken and sausage gumbo base.

      This isn't rocket surgery.

      You do need to learn and hone cooking skills. If you do like I do (learned as a poor college student)....you look at the weekly grocery store ads, and base your menus off of what is on sale. You buy canned goods, etc...when on sale and keep them handy for cooking.

      You buy meats on sale and throw in freezer....often all I really HAVE to buy at any given time, are my fresh veggies as that often I have pantry and freezer of foods that were bought on sale and I can make what I want with them.

      If nothing else, a good grill helps in that you can just grill veggies and meats and eat them throughout the week....in sandwiches, salads, stews, mixed up and do tacos with them, etc.

      All healthy, and most of the cooking time and work was only invested in one weekend day.....while doing other house work.

      It does take a little effort, but just do things similar to what I've described, and you can eat healthy...and save money.

      We all have 24 hours in a day, you just have to plan what to do with them.

      A couple less hours in front of the computer or TV often can be put towards other activities....AND, if you are a family person, cooking can be a family bonding activity....get the kids in to learn to cook with you, etc.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    17. Re: It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This - and if even if it were - do you really want to spend 100% of your time working ?

      Take a break, cook some food, have a glass of *whatever*

    18. Re: It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Alcohol generally comes in standard sizes - how do they decrease it and keep cost same ?

    19. Re: It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

      At restaurants it comes in cups, and the cups seem to shrink.

      Maybe at a bar a pint of beer is a pint of beer and a shot glass is a shot glass. But restaurants do their own thing, particularly in mixed drinks.

    20. Re:It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      It's good to make your own bread. For example: Adm Whole Wheat Flour # 17688, $13.98 / Unit (50 lb) [smartfoodservice.com]. When you buy bread, it may be $2.50 per pound or more, and the weight includes the water in the bread. You can buy the flour used to make bread for $0.28, 28 cents per pound.

      Bread is more than water + flour. Sugar, yeast and some sort of fat are generally required, and that increases the cost to you. And no, you can't eliminate all of those ingredients, because there's some chemistry going on that requires them.

      Also, it takes a lot of time and physical effort (If you don't have a KitchenAid kneed for you), and requires a reliable oven. All three of those are in quite short supply unless you're in a position where $2/pound bread is not a significant cost....And you'll probably value your labor at more than $0.

    21. Re:It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      I've got a bread machine that actually reduces the whole process to measuring ingredients and then slicing the bread when it's done. And of course it hasn't been used in years now, though I mainly feel that comes down to the fact that we don't use a lot of bread in my house and that slicing the bread evenly by hand is kind of a pain in the ass. I don't know what is going on but the only bread knifes I can seem to find have an edge that is only beveled on one side and so the blade constantly tries to cut on a curve. When I was a kid we had a bread knife with saw like serrations interspersed with smooth bits beveled on both sides, the serrations alternated sides.

    22. Re:It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      slicing the bread evenly by hand is kind of a pain in the ass

      Try something like this: https://smile.amazon.com/Kenle...

    23. Re:It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by Rob+Bos · · Score: 1

      I bake bread every other weekend, and I use AP (12% protein) flour, not bread (15% protein) flour. Bread flour isn't necessary, but it does give you a denser crumb, all things equal.

    24. Re: It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      American nanny state is misdirected.

      At least the euro versions have one right priority. Making sure booze glasses are standard sizes.

      American 'pint' glasses are basically never actual pints. You can pretty much count on it.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    25. Re:It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by Khashishi · · Score: 1

      I find the fresh baked bread is not substantially more expensive than the sliced conditioned crap. $2 for a baguette. $3 for a boule. $4 for a loaf.

    26. Re:It's easier now to cook, and FAR cheaper. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When it comes to food, quality (including health impact) is completely unrelated to quantity. Both are critically important, but I'm focusing on quantity here. There has been a definitive trend in skimping over the past 10 years. They're pushing to see how far they can go, and they've already convinced me to buy as little as possible. Bottom line: the less I buy, the less I get ripped off. On the bright side, that has a very positive impact on my savings.

  15. This. by rsilvergun · · Score: 0

    Cooking and cleaning are harder than people like to admit, especially when you have a tiny, crappy apartment kitchen, fridge and feezer. Your pans take forever to heat on your (unlevel) stove, your microwave can barely pop corn (if you have one) and there's not enough room to store things unless you want to spend hours organizing. Plus you better clean up ASAP or it's bug city.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:This. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That makes no sense. If their kitchen is small and crappy, they'd eat out more, not less.

    2. Re:This. by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      I have a tiny (ish) apartment kitchen with 24" stove. Pans don't take "forever" to heat -- it works as well as any other gas stove, just smaller. Burners are the same size with less space between them.

      Cleanup is easy -- wash the pans used, dump everything else into the dishwasher, throw some powder in, and turn the knob to "RUN." Cut/chop things on old plates that you don't care about scratching -- they're dishwasher-safe, unlike cutting boards.

    3. Re:This. by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      That makes no sense. If their kitchen is small and crappy, they'd eat out more, not less.

      Indeed. In many dense Asian cities, small apartments don't even have kitchens. But street food is available on every block, and is inexpensive and very good. I'd love a steamed mushroom-leek-fennel baozi right now.

    4. Re:This. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "unlike cutting boads" - Nope - These glass boards are only one type. Nylon exists as well.

    5. Re:This. by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      Cooking and cleaning are harder than people like to admit, especially when you have a tiny, crappy apartment kitchen, fridge and feezer. Your pans take forever to heat on your (unlevel) stove, your microwave can barely pop corn (if you have one) and there's not enough room to store things unless you want to spend hours organizing. Plus you better clean up ASAP or it's bug city.

      Where the heck do you live with such crappy apartments?

      I lived in a number of apartments, many of them while in college, cheap college apartments, and I never had it as bad as you described?!?!

      I cooked back then, had room for all my cooking gear and a pantry that was decently stocked.

      Nothing as small and nightmarish as you describe...are you only talking apartments in crappy urban areas where you are piled on top of everyone else like NYC, etc?

      Most of the US is nowhere near that bad, even for a lower end apartment.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    6. Re:This. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you don't mind your food cooked with gutter oil. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gutter_oil

    7. Re:This. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean the ones that are subpartitioned into 100 cubicles and the people sleep inside locked cages like some bizarre Chinese Pet Store?

      No kitchens, no bathrooms, no dignity, etc. Top rate accomodations

    8. Re: This. by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      Revise your strategy. You sound like someone who bumped into a problem and gave up. Rethink. Keep trying.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    9. Re:This. by samdu · · Score: 1

      Your knives must hate you. :p

  16. 216!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    216 times a year! That's astonishing. I think I average 10-20 times a year. I can't imagine how obese I would be if I ate out that often.

  17. Re:Hitler by pslytely+psycho · · Score: 1

    Oh, that guy with the talk show?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH-QqV1Fjak&ab_channel=timecapture

    --
    Donald Trump, on a crusade to make Nixon look respectable
  18. Americans are fat pigs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/adult.html

    39% of the population is overweight. A lot of people keep shoving shitty food in their mouths and not burning calories by exercising.

    1. Re: Americans are fat pigs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      https://m.medicalxpress.com/news/2018-09-european-life-undermined-obesity.html

      Don't worry, Europe is working on surpassing us. Maybe when you're excised wages can allot you a living share you'll be able to afford some food, too, Pierre.

    2. Re: Americans are fat pigs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Have you considered the possibility that government interference in diet might be the smaller problem vs industry interference in government?

    3. Re: Americans are fat pigs by datavirtue · · Score: 0

      High fat diet can cause or help fat burning but it is not healthy...at all. Consumption of any fat or oil causes arterial hardening immediately and for some time afterward. Repeated exposure causes heart disease and early death. Sugar (refined cane, HFCS, raw, honey, and refined flour are all sugars) triggers an insulin spike and repeated exposure results in diabetes and a very slow and painful unfulfilling life until early death.

      The medeterranian whole food diet without gobbling down olive oil leads to a healthy cancer free life including a sharp mind and reversal of the above noted ailments.

      There is no fast food restaurant and no chain sit down restaurant that can provide you a healthy meal.

      Are the rolls and wraps and buns whole grain? Unprocessed? Wheat is not good enough...might as well be white. Whole wheat, whole grain only suffice. Is the food prepared with oil of any kind? Extra virgin is better but still unhealthy. Does the food contain any added sugar? Nearly every dressing or condiment is a big gulp of the worst mass of oxident, free radical generating insulin spike imaginable. Safe? No. Worse, it slowly ruins your life and ends up costing everyone tons of money just to save your life when the symptoms are overflowing from your body.

      This epidemic is the worst poisoning the world has ever seen and has the ability to crash our society. Hyperbole? Fact.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    4. Re: Americans are fat pigs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mustard, mayonnaise can be done with no added sugar, salad topping can be done with oil and vinegar and then have some eschalot or onion. Bread is served on the side and is not mandatory to eat. You can ask for bread if you need more, such that someone who is really hungry or really needs the calories can eat it. Some people have physical activity through leisure, transportation or work.

    5. Re:Americans are fat pigs by samdu · · Score: 1

      Doesn't really matter how shitty or not shitty the food is, purely from a weight standpoint. Burn more calories than you consume and you'll lose weight. The problem, as you touched on in the second part of your comment, is that Americans eat far more calories than they consume. At least the fat ones. I was once one of those people.

  19. I'm being dinged by by Snotnose · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    being over 50 and taking a job at a startup. Startup failed, suddenly I can't get an interview, let alone a job.

    I even hacked 10-15 years off the top of my resume, didn't help. I'm not alone, I know a few other people in the same boat.

    1. Re:I'm being dinged by by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      being over 50 and taking a job at a startup. Startup failed, suddenly I can't get an interview, let alone a job.

      I even hacked 10-15 years off the top of my resume, didn't help. I'm not alone, I know a few other people in the same boat.

      Apply to companies that are expanding not ones producing job postings.

      Seems like companies are in two mode. First mode is staff up and fill up seats with smart people who will grow into the roles. Step two is wait for unicorn (or a friend employee really wants to work with) that exactly fits the company's major pain points.

      Throughout all of this they are still producing the same job listings.

  20. Re:Yeah by Scarletdown · · Score: 1

    How are they going to get that just right size booty if they are starving themselves? I think they have it bassackwards.

    --
    This space unintentionally left blank.
  21. It's Gordon Ramsay's fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ever seen one of his restaurant shows?

  22. Food Doesn't Match Ads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The advertised food looks better and better. The actual food gets worse and worse. I stopped eating out because the food was simply bad. You can't trust anything they say nor any of their pictures, so there's no way to know the real quality of their food before you order. Better to just not go. The race to the bottom is a lose-lose situation.

  23. Home cooked. Better food, cheaper. by GrBear · · Score: 2

    I just finished making lunches for the week.

    Grilled garlic and herb chicken breast sliced up over pasta tossed in roast garlic olive oil. Total cost, $13*, time spent, 20 minutes.

    Eating out at McDonalds or Wendys, processed food, fillers, tastes bland, high in fat. Total cost, $11-15*/meal, 15 minutes to drive and get it.

    So in the end, it's $50-75* a week to eat out, vs $13* for home cooked.. for better food, and substantially less time spent.

    * Prices are Canadian, YMMV.

    1. Re:Home cooked. Better food, cheaper. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      time spent, 20 minutes.

      Bull. Shit.

      Shit of a bull.

      Bollocks.

      In short, You're lying (possibly to yourself).

    2. Re:Home cooked. Better food, cheaper. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It can be 20 minutes, assuming parent either purchased pre-cooked chicken at the store, or is not factoring in the time the chicken spent cooking in the oven, as that time is essentially free time to pursue other projects.
      Prepping chicken for the oven/slicing cooked chicken, boiling a pot of pasta, and roasting a little garlic in oil in a pan can easily be done in 20 minutes, especially if you are a practiced cook, simply doing the pasta and the garlic/oil simultaneously shortens the time easily, and prepping the chicken is literally put it in a pan, sprinkle seasonings, insert in oven.

    3. Re:Home cooked. Better food, cheaper. by GrBear · · Score: 3, Informative

      How's that?

      It takes exactly 6 minutes to grill the chicken to 170 degrees, and about 10 minutes to make the pasta.

      Let's break it down then for you..

      0:00 Turn on the grill ( https://www.amazon.ca/Breville... ) and pre-heat to 420 degrees. While grill is heating, open chicken and season.

      0:04 Grill is ready, put chicken on grill. Cook to 170 degrees. While cooking pull out a pot, fill with water, pull out the pasta and portion it out.

      0:10 Chicken is done, pull it off and put pot on the stove and bring it to boil.

      0:16 Water is boiling, add pasta. Slice up the chicken breasts.

      0:26 Pasta cooked, pull off stove and drain. Dump in bowl and add roast garlic olive oil.

      0:28 Portion meals into containers.

      0:32 Done.

      Ok, so it takes 32 minutes.. big deal.

      I could cut that time down more if I didn't put the grill on the stove top to use the hood vent to vent the grill. That water would almost be at a boil by the time the chicken was done.

      Point being, it's still a hell of a lot quicker than spending 75 minutes a week driving to get food, only to have to scarf it down once I get back to the office.

    4. Re:Home cooked. Better food, cheaper. by GrBear · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I'm not baking the chicken, just grilling it. It takes considerably less time than baking. Searing gives it a nice light crisp outside, while super tender on the inside.

    5. Re:Home cooked. Better food, cheaper. by jabuzz · · Score: 1

      Twenty minutes you total slow coach.

      https://www.amazon.co.uk/Jamie...

      Or you could do it with random ingredients in 20 minutes

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      And I have a random Jamie Oliver app that I got free on App of the Day back when I had a Kindle Fire HD

      https://www.amazon.com/Zolmo-J...

      My take is that none of these times include clear up and you need good knife skills to make the times.

      The alternative approach I like is to make a large batch of food that I then freeze as individual portions. So I next weekend I will be making a batch of bolognese source. It will be enough for 12 portions and will take about two hours all told. So that's 10 minutes a meal, and it takes 2 minutes a portion to heat in a microwave, and 10 minutes for the pasta in a pan.

    6. Re:Home cooked. Better food, cheaper. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just finished making lunches for the week.

      Grilled garlic and herb chicken breast sliced up over pasta tossed in roast garlic olive oil. Total cost, $13*, time spent, 20 minutes.

      Eating out at McDonalds or Wendys, processed food, fillers, tastes bland, high in fat. Total cost, $11-15*/meal, 15 minutes to drive and get it.

      So in the end, it's $50-75* a week to eat out, vs $13* for home cooked.. for better food, and substantially less time spent.

      * Prices are Canadian, YMMV.

      When I go to Wendy's it normally costs me about $3.24 USD. I get two budget sandwiches off the budget menu as I find that is the best food per dollar ratio - and leaves me fuller than ordering one of their expensive burger combos. (plus despite more calories- it is healthier to eat a second sandwich than a side of fries and will leave you fuller longer so you eat less later).

    7. Re:Home cooked. Better food, cheaper. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or, put another way:

      Breville Smart Grill - $300 plus shipping. / 100 (expected life of unit is two years so use of 50 weeks per year x 2) = $3
      Chicken Breasts - $10
      Pasta - $6

      With other costs thrown in (the pot, the cost of electricity, the cost of a container and something to keep everything cold during transport) let's call this $20. That IS a big savings.

      You are not making this every week, kid, and those of us who have kids and real jobs and lives outside of work will laugh and laugh and laugh.

      It's a good idea and commendable, but not realistic. That other $30 you spend? That's your "real world life" tax. Eat up!

    8. Re: Home cooked. Better food, cheaper. by houghi · · Score: 1

      Now do the same with wok foid. 5 minutes. And remember that you can do dufferent things while something is in the ioven.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    9. Re:Home cooked. Better food, cheaper. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You make pasta for a week? Why? Isn't it disgusting on day 2 and turns into garbage next day?

    10. Re:Home cooked. Better food, cheaper. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You just don't get it. It might take exactly 16 minutes to make, but it takes a fucking hour to clean up the mess. It isn't cool to have a stay at home mom-slave anymore and I can't afford even an illegal immigrant to be a servant.

  24. Great point. by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    That's really true, along with those time-lapse videos of different food items being made that seem to be really popular sharing on Facebook.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  25. That experience seems to be poor in the U.S. by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The trend in New Zealand is weekly delivered food and recipes.

    I've seen that approach for a while in the U.S., in various forms.

    But it seems to stay niche. in part because you are at the mercy of what they decide you should eat, along with you not being the one picking out produce.

    The last aspect is what really has killed it for me every time, there's always something about the stuff that is delivered that I would have never picked that item at the store - like overly wilted lettuce, or especially bananas that are way, way to overripe for me.

    It's really 1000x better to go into a store and see what looks good, so it totally puts the balance away from delivery being convenient or useful if you can't rely on what is being delivered to be usable or good.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re: That experience seems to be poor in the U.S. by c6gunner · · Score: 2

      But it seems to stay niche. in part because you are at the mercy of what they decide you should eat, along with you not being the one picking out produce.

      From what I've seen it's also expensive as fuck. I got a $60 coupon in the mail from one of those companies once which encouraged me to look into it. Doing some math, my grocery budget would have to almost quadruple were I to use their service. Even with the "free" $60 I got from them, ordering the first weeks food would have been more expensive than what I normally spend in a week.

    2. Re: That experience seems to be poor in the U.S. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But it seems to stay niche. in part because you are at the mercy of what they decide you should eat, along with you not being the one picking out produce.

      From what I've seen it's also expensive as fuck. I got a $60 coupon in the mail from one of those companies once which encouraged me to look into it. Doing some math, my grocery budget would have to almost quadruple were I to use their service. Even with the "free" $60 I got from them, ordering the first weeks food would have been more expensive than what I normally spend in a week.

      Yeah we tried it once on one of those offers, not only did I not think that the recipes and ingredients were anything special but I was also astounded at the full cost. I'm not that lazy and going grocery shopping once a week isn't that big of an inconvenience.

    3. Re:That experience seems to be poor in the U.S. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      New Zealand is smaller than New Jersey so yea those little niche things would work better there.

    4. Re: That experience seems to be poor in the U.S. by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      From what I've seen it's also expensive as fuck. I got a $60 coupon in the mail from one of those companies once which encouraged me to look into it. Doing some math, my grocery budget would have to almost quadruple were I to use their service. Even with the "free" $60 I got from them, ordering the first weeks food would have been more expensive than what I normally spend in a week.

      This. I too was curious about the services (and hell, I would like it to be able to cook more at home), but they are expensive. It was shocked when it was quoted as $60 or week - that's my general grocery budget for myself a week! And they only offered 3 meals during that week (yes, I could save the leftovers and made it a full week) but damn, that I felt was quite pricey.

      Cook at home I get - it's cheaper in general (if you spend $20 eating out, you can prepare a similar meal for about $5 in ingredients at the grocery store), but damn, the markup of those services make it so each meal ends up being close to $20 again. May be healthier than eating out, but it certainly isn't cheaper.

      Maybe if it was closer to say $30 for an entire week's worth of meals I would've jumped on the chance to learn to cook and do that, but at their current prices, it's excessive.

    5. Re: That experience seems to be poor in the U.S. by Khashishi · · Score: 1

      It's also incredibly wasteful. They come boxed in big styrofoam boxes. I suppose the market is a particular kind of yuppie poseur who has more money than integrity.

  26. Have to eat in, if you want to save anything. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Has nothing to do with food being healthier, there are plenty of restaurants you can order menu items to eat just as healthy as anything you can cook at home.

    It's all about money. For me in Philadelphia area it's about ~30$ a day to eat out. 10-15 lunch, 15-20 dinner (who the heck has time for 3 meals today???). 30x30 that's 900$ per month, maybe throw in another 100$ for a few nicer meals in that month, so 1k a month. This is actually very modest. For one person.

    If shopping at supermarket and making everything on your own, 1 person can easily eat 300-400$ a month without pinching coupons of any kind. Though you're spending roughly an hour each day between shopping trips and cooking, if you do everything at home.

    If you make 70k a year (which is a little above national average), your net pay is about 3300 a month (depending on area and taxes), after taxes, 401k, medical insurance, and all the other BS (all this s...t is roughly 45% of your pay....which is ridiculous...).

    So each month rent and basic utilities ~1k $. Other essential for normal living miscellaneous nonsense, like periodically buying clothes (so you don't look like a hobo), car insurance, gas, paying off car (or saving for next car, or repairs), small household and hygiene stuff, cell phone bill, internet bill, your niece's birthday gift, all this stuff another ~1k a month. So lets count, 1k food, 1k roof above your head, 1k miscellaneous = 3k. You are free to save maybe $300 at the end of the month, if lucky and nothing unusual happens (which is effectively NEVER).

    Moral of the story, if you want to save anything at all, you pretty much MUST eat at home and cool your own food. That way you can actually put away another 600-700$ a month for future (maybe for wedding, maybe for engagement ring, maybe for a house, vacation etc).

  27. 215 restaurant meals a year? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sheesh. That's an *average* of 4 meals / week. I find that mind-boggling, and quite expensive (even as a 1%er). It's much harder to eat well at restaurants.

    I admit that I likely eat out about 1 per week when, for unplanned reasons, I can't get to my kitchen.

    1. Re:215 restaurant meals a year? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know if this counts as "eating out" but I probably pick up a bag of freshly cooked wings from the grocery store and an apple, orange or peach about once a week during my work week. It is usually $3.49 for six wings and the fruit varies but usually less than $1. I then take it back to my office and drink a cup of tea with it. (50 teabags for $3 from TJ Maxx).

      All in all, less than $5 for fresh cooked food I don't have to wait for. That, whereas not particularly healthy. is healthier than most fast-food, fresh prepared and instant for me. Even if I ate that every work day- that would be less than $25. Hardly a critical expense, especially if you are indeed a 1%.

  28. Re:Yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Also, there used to be roughly 2 gender choices and sexual orientations. Now there are about 70 or something

    No there are not, no matter how much "conservatives" want it to be true, no-one really thinks like that, except trolls on the Internet.

    Facebook and ABC news seems to disagree with you.

    https://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2014/02/heres-a-list-of-58-gender-options-for-facebook-users/

  29. Because the Food Tastes So Bad by WindowsStar · · Score: 2

    I have noticed over the past 5 years that the fast food is tasting worse and worse. We have slowly stopped eating fast food because of this. Even my kids that LOVE fast food are telling me it is tastes worse than ever. In our household we now don't eat any fast food (McD, Wendy, BKing, Taco Bell, etc.) anymore. We do go to some good locally made food restaurants but that has come way down from once or twice a week to once a month, and are are not going to any of the sit down chains either, seems their prices have become way to high and now servers want a 25% tip, just can't do it. So I would agree that people are cooking more at home, but I wonder if it has more to do with the food tasting so bad now-a-days. ????

    1. Re:Because the Food Tastes So Bad by hai_Priesty · · Score: 1

      I'm not from the west but I wonder if multiple gourmet foodstuff becoming "mainstream" take-outs (some also served in fast food like fashion) having some effect of people's perception.

      If one has eaten a good $13 lobster roll off the back of a Manhattan truck, or take-out steak salad or a decent Wagyu burger - the take-out from a shop counter during lunchtime not dissimilar to the Mac - which they view as fair comparison (as opposed to family restaurant) against the Mac, and one start to acknowledge cheap, dry, crappy-tasting fast food for what it is.

    2. Re:Because the Food Tastes So Bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and now servers want a 25% tip

      Bullshit. Servers "want" whatever you're willing to give them, but nobody has gotten bad service because they "only" gave 15% in the past. The guideline is still 15% for good service, and 20% for excellent service -- but that's really only just to show off.

      You must just be listening to affluent friends who tip 25% to show off, or perhaps those friends used to be servers and now over-tip to compensate for tips they wish they had received years ago.

    3. Re:Because the Food Tastes So Bad by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

      I also noticed that. As example, a BigMac here is getting smaller and more and more tasteless.

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    4. Re:Because the Food Tastes So Bad by Not-a-Neg · · Score: 1

      It tastes worse because they try and make it healthier and more accessible to people with dietary restrictions as a result of religion and/or hypochondria. McDonald's fries used to be fried in beef tallow but vegans protested and now they taste like crap. Almost all other fried foods used to be fried in lard, even Taco Bell refried beans and tortillas used to be made with lard. Burgers used to be made with regular ground beef and grilled fresh on the spot, now they are pre-made patties, refrigerated, and flash-grilled in ~42 seconds. Chicken Nuggets used to be made with dark meat, now it's all white meat, and more.

      --
      -==- Buy a Mac and leave me alone!
    5. Re:Because the Food Tastes So Bad by WindowsStar · · Score: 1

      Maybe it is where you live. I have friends that are Servers and they say the norm is 25% and if someone only leaves 15% they are considered a$$holes. Just passing on what I have heard them talk about. These are not affluent restaurants in fact some of them are chain restaurants.

    6. Re:Because the Food Tastes So Bad by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      It tastes worse because they try and make it healthier and more accessible to people with dietary restrictions as a result of religion and/or hypochondria. McDonald's fries used to be fried in beef tallow but vegans protested and now they taste like crap. Almost all other fried foods used to be fried in lard, even Taco Bell refried beans and tortillas used to be made with lard. Burgers used to be made with regular ground beef and grilled fresh on the spot, now they are pre-made patties, refrigerated, and flash-grilled in ~42 seconds. Chicken Nuggets used to be made with dark meat, now it's all white meat, and more.

      And you believe that's because of some health craze? They do it because it's cheaper. Much cheaper..Period.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
  30. And then there are special needs by OFnow · · Score: 1

    An unknown number of people have special eating needs. Driven, I suspect,
    by the total revision of what and how food is grown and created
    over the last 100 years. By needs I mean not hospital,
    necessarily, but at least discomfort and immune system issues.

    The Gluten Free and Paleo Diet consumers are a symptom of this great
    change. Big Food prefers not to know about any of this as
    it reflects on *all* their current product lines. Very
    uncomfortable for grocery stores and more so for
    restaurants.

    it's not going away. I and many others can no longer eat
    the 'Standard American Diet'. Period.

    1. Re:And then there are special needs by Oligonicella · · Score: 2

      I suspect the number of "special eating needs" derives much more from the psychological than biological (see "gluten intolerance").

  31. I need a Gyro... by Pezbian · · Score: 2

    Arby's did a good thing by selling Gyros. The Lamb "traditional" Gyros are damn good and I hope they're permanent this time.

    Pretty solid nutrition, too, especially for fast food. I ate worse in my teen years.

    --
    In a world of the blind, the one-eyed man is king--and the two-eyed man is a heretic.
    1. Re:I need a Gyro... by guacamole · · Score: 0

      If Arby's is so good, then why is Conan O'Brien always making fun of it? I'll pass.

    2. Re:I need a Gyro... by Oligonicella · · Score: 2

      Do you seriously craft your diet around late night comedians?

  32. Convenience, Selection, and Quality by StikyPad · · Score: 1

    My wife and I eat at home most of the time. We're each competent cooks, but not great. Even so, we find the experience of eating at home to be as good or better than most restaurants, especially where we live now. After all, the food we like is always on the menu at home, the ingredients are never poor quality, and we know the food has been handled and prepared safely. Eating out and ordering in, at this point, is mostly a fallback plan if something comes up. Even then -- with takeout in particular -- we frequently end up disappointed with our food. Yes, there are "life hacks" to give us better odds of getting fresher or better-prepared food, but these are often just as much of a hassle for everyone involved as just cooking it ourselves, minus whatever sense of accomplishment and mutual appreciation we get from preparing our own food.

    Honestly, I find most things in life to be like that.

  33. Sorry that happened. Misdiagnosed the cause by raymorris · · Score: 2

    I'm sorry that happened to you. Sounds like it was, and is, pretty rough. I hope something like that never happens to you again.

    To avoid really bad things happening, it might be helpful to be very clear about the cause.

    Hurricanes happen. Businesses get destroyed. Laws like HIPPA and GDPR change industries so that some products and even companies no longer fit, or the changes give new competitors an opportunity. Technology changes, major contracts get cancelled. Any product or company can become infeasible at any time. Even large companies can fail quickly. No job is guaranteed to stay the same or stay around, no matter how much your employer might want it to.

    > However, since my skills were very very specific to my employer - because I was so loyal - they weren't transferable

    I believe you've misdiagnosed the cause. You didn't end up with only skills that are useful only to one part of one business because you were loyal. You put yourself in a position where you'd eventually become unemployable either because:
    A) you were unaware that change happens, major change, unpredictably
    Or
    B) You were short-sighted

    Knowing that things WILL change, that whatever product you work with or work on will eventually get cancelled, someone thinking long term could do a few things:

    Think about what job you'd like to have in five years, assuming you need to make a move.

    Look over related job ads and note which skills employers look for.

    Make a list of the skills you're missing.

    Find opportunities within your company, in open source, or volunteering to learn the skills you're missing.

    Had you been prepared for the fact that at some point your company will be gone, and that could be because of an accounting scandal *tomorrow*, you wouldn't be screwed whatever happens.

    Setting yourself up for catastrophe if your job ever changes isn't loyalty, it's short-sighted.

    I keep my list of needed skills in Wunderlist. Actually I have two lists of job requirements to work on. One is skills that show up often in the want ads for my industry. The other list is what my two target companies are looking for. I'm loyal to my employer - I don't stab them in the back and I don't intend to leave any time real soon. I've ALSO thought about what happens when eventually I do need a new job, what work I want to do, and for which company. Boeing and Lockheed Martin fit what I'm looking for, so I'm keeping an eye out for opportunities to learn the things Boeing wants people to know.

    Perhaps I'll be at my current employer for the next three years. If so, I'll then walk into a Boeing interview saying "yes, for each skill you want, I have at least three years of experience in each one". (Obviously these aren't skills that ONLY apply to Boeing - Lockheed is looking for many of the same skills, as is Bell Helicopter).

    PS - if anyone works in IT or software development at those companies, particularly information security, I'd love to talk to you.

  34. No shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's because the Rich Fuckers, 0.1%, are keeping all the economic gains for themselves and the rest of us are more interested in just not going broke.

  35. Low end fast food is getting too pricey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Carls Jr/Hardees generally costs me $10 or more for a combo. Lots of fast food combos are around $7 - $10 after tax (at least in CA).

    For ~$10, I can get pretty good quality food, like a poke bowl, or a salad with grilled steak, or fresh fish. And it's actually made well instead of looking like someone literally threw the ingredients at the wrapper (looking at you, Burger King).

    All fast food really has left is convenience.

  36. Bland repetitive chow-chow ... by Qbertino · · Score: 2

    ... loses its "flair" once it becomes commonplace. Who would've thunk? MD's always was about indulging in something generally regarded as unhealthy and not something to do every day. That was no different in the 70ies when I was a small kid and we'd go there to treat the family to some junk food.
    Perpetual fast food has turned the US population into a flock of land-whales and the growing counter movement are hipster foodies and minimalist Paleo and quantified self geeks.

    That sort of thing only works emotionally if you actually prepare your meals yourself and steer clear of junk food.

    By and large this is a good thing IMHO.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
  37. Re:Yeah by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

    Seventy was an exaggeration. NYC only had 31 that they will fine you for for not using 'correctly'.

  38. good food? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Couldn't it be that home-cooked food is healthier and more satisfying to eat? Not just cheaper to eat.
    I don't think I reach 10 times eating out a year and when I do eat out, I hardly ever eat better than at home.

    learning to cook food is easier than ever (youtube and recipe sites), one just needs to give it a priority above overtime-work, tv-watching, gaming, etc...

  39. Eye opening by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This made me realize that I can't remember the last time I bought prepared food (even coffee!). It's been many months. Also I've become mostly vegetarian since I'm cooking for myself. Non of this was intentional, it's just what I slid into.

  40. fast food@home by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    cooking at home, but is it actually healthier?
    if you just use lots of butter/cream/gravy/... cheese, sugar and salt etc you're not much better of (except that it's cheaper, so you save some money for later, when you need a doctor :P )

  41. c6gunner IMPERSONATING me again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    c6gunner your FAKEname's on a post impersonating me & worse is you altering /. user's words https://linux.slashdot.org/com... as I challenged you to show you do better work and you can't after you tried to mock me you hypocrite LYING loser https://linux.slashdot.org/com... .

    * You're online FAKENAME trash c6gunner & a childish dishonest punk.

    (PUTTING WORDS IN MY MOUTH TOO saying what I don't (on spectre/meltdown) https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... )

    APK

    P.S.=> Impossible to deny FACT of your FAKEname (for your FAKE wasted lie of a so-called life) on that 1st post link above you unbelievable loser... apk

  42. Incorrect assumptions by sjbe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No wonder so many people get trapped in a cycle of poverty.

    You think eating out is what traps people in poverty? You might want to learn about poverty traps and their causes. There are lots of causes of poverty. Eating out is not a meaningful cause.

    That's more than every other day! And the latest figure is still more than every other day.

    If you look at the number of restaurants out there (and the obesity statistics) this should not surprise anyone. People like to look down their nose publicly at McDonalds and the like but the simple fact is that vast numbers of people eat at these places routinely regardless of what they actually say. You think they stay in business because people are eating at home? People LIKE to eat out, they like fast food, and honestly a lot of the food tastes better than what many people can cook themselves.

    WTF people, the fastest way to save money is to not eat out; doesn't everyone know that??

    Several points on that. Basically your thesis isn't necessarily supported by the facts.
    1) There is plenty of evidence to suggest that eating healthy tends to be more expensive than eating badly, at least in the short term. Even if you do manage to save money (which can be done) it's going to come at the cost of an investment of time and energy.
    2) There is also evidence to suggest that eating out can be cheaper than eating at home for many.
    3) Eating at home requires having the time to prepare the food. Speaking as someone with a young child and a working wife this time can be hard to come by for many people even if you would prefer it.
    4) Eating at home does not necessarily equal eating healthier nor does it necessarily equal costing less. It CAN but it often doesn't.
    5) Many people don't know how to shop economically in grocery stores and grocery stores have no incentive to help.
    6) Food culture is as subject to fads as anything else. One should expect to see variation over time in where and how people eat their food.

    1. Re:Incorrect assumptions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cooking for one, it's probably cheaper to eat out for some meals.
      Cooking for five. It's never cheaper to eat out.

    2. Re:Incorrect assumptions by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      3) Eating at home requires having the time to prepare the food. Speaking as someone with a young child and a working wife this time can be hard to come by for many people even if you would prefer it.

      Funny, while I was growing up as a kid, same situation, we STILL managed to have home cooked meals 99% of the time....in fact as I got old enough, as a young pre-teen and teen, when I got home from school before everyone else, Mom had notes for ME to do some things to start the evening meal and have some things ready and going for when she got in, etc.

      Seemed normal for us, and frankly, most everyone I knew growing up in my neighborhood with working parents ate home cooked meals Imost from scratch) with no problem.

      What's wrong with the families today...this isn't rocket surgery.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    3. Re:Incorrect assumptions by omfglearntoplay · · Score: 0

      As soon as the population was tricked into needing males and females both working full-time, Amercian life went to shit. Now both parents are required to work if you have kids in a normal household, and there is little to no time to cook right. Good luck! Some things people can try is to limit TV/movies/online time at home to half and hour a night and only after all the important stuff is taken care of. Also, buy a smaller home than your friends so you can pay it off sooner.

    4. Re:Incorrect assumptions by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      On the topic of knowing how to prepare your meals more cheaply than fast food. We get at least one rotisserie cooked chicken each week. When I get a few minutes I carve it up into the usual parts and strip whats left of little bits of meat for cooking with. Depending on the kids mood they might eat some pieces whole. At least some of it ends up being choped into bit size bits and cooked up with noodles and sauce or put in a soup. What's funny to me about that is you'd think it wouldn't take any skill or special knowledge to carve up a chicken without a lot of waste. But I'd never seen someone do it properly until I realized I didn't know how to carve a Turkey and turned to YouTube. Turkeys and chickens aren't so different when it comes to carving them and it is really surprising how quickly and easily you can carve and strip a fowl carcass once you know how. Whenever I had tried before it took much longer and the results hardly seemed worth the effort. The same is true in some degree to chopping various vegetables, even the proper technique for holding and moving the knife can make a huge difference. When I look back at it now my home econ class was woefully inadequate.

    5. Re:Incorrect assumptions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If we didn't subsidize corn and other crops it wouldn't cost that much more to eat healthy, if it cost more at all.

      On one side, we make it cheap for companies to fill everything with corn products, then on the other side we pay taxes for food stamps for people working 40 hours or more a week, because they cannot live on what fast food companies pay.

      So we're paying twice to ensure the owner's of the local fast food franchise can make 400K a year.

    6. Re:Incorrect assumptions by magarity · · Score: 1

      You think eating out is what traps people in poverty?

      I think poor budget decisions is a non-trivial contributor to being trapped in poverty and too-frequent eating out is a definite poor budget decision. The Business Insider article about cooking at home being more expensive is almost comical in their grocery pricing thanks to using an online delivery service.

    7. Re:Incorrect assumptions by neurocutie · · Score: 1

      that "plenty of evidence study" is totally ridiculous... didn't even include tax and tip (nevermind gas, driving costs).
      they list $3 for broccoli, that is way way off... around here (NY) $2 buys you 5X the broccoli included in one of those meals. Nearly every price listed is bogus.

      The only time eating out is going to be cheaper is for fast food, low quality mass produced meals, which pretty much means high-carbs and not healthy.

      And as far as saving time, other than fast food options, delivery would usually be faster, otherwise home cooking will be faster than most any decent quality restaurant. The high end, of course, requires skill and time that most cannot match at home.

    8. Re:Incorrect assumptions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your mistake is associating what people eat with their weight. Exercise is the most important factor in weight loss/gain. McDonald's is a healthier alternative since they at least list the calorie content of their food, allowing people to make smart decisions about how much they eat.

    9. Re:Incorrect assumptions by Khashishi · · Score: 1

      2) There is also evidence to suggest that eating out can be cheaper than eating at home for many.

      The linked article completely ignores quantity of food when comparing the supermarket price to the restaurant. The amount of groceries listed is sufficient for many dishes, compared to one for the restaurant.

      If you are willing to eat leftovers for days, it really doesn't take much time or money to cook. Just make a big pot and eat it for a week. Sure, if you want to get all extravagant, it's gonna take time and money. But then it isn't fair to compare it with fast food.

  43. Not about tax policy by sjbe · · Score: 2

    The reason this market is dominated by prepackaged convenience foods is government subsidies. Take all that pasta and cheese; it's just subsidized wheat and milk industrially converted into a highly palatable food that is cheap because it's largely already been paid for with tax dollars.

    This is not correct. That same wheat and cheese in their "raw" form share the same government subsidies but people don't buy those. The reason processed foods are cheap is because they can be produced at massive economies of scale, they don't require special handling or storage or refrigeration, they can use artificial (read cheap) ingredients, packaging is standardized, and they don't perish on shelves. A large company can buy cheese FAR cheaper than you or I can because they buy more of it and they can process it into food products FAR cheaper than you or I can because they have specialized mass production equipment to do so. So much cheaper that even with the packaging and marketing and branding it's still cheaper than you can do it yourself from raw ingredients even if you don't count your meal preparation time.

    While there are problems with government subsidies in foods in relation to healthy versus unhealthy options, this is a minor consideration in regards to why processed foods are as cheap as they are. McDonalds can sell you a hamburger with a bun and condiments for $1 for reasons that have almost nothing to do with tax policy. It's all about economies of scale and standardization of products, packaging and handling. I can make a BETTER hamburger than McDonalds but I cannot make a cheaper one. Tax policy is not the reason why.

  44. Non written recipes by sjbe · · Score: 1

    My wife would make baked goods by pouring a mound of flour on the counter, making a crater and adding the other ingredients by "feel".

    That's still a recipe. It's just not one written on paper. People who bake at home and who cannot control all the environmental conditions (humidity, temp, etc) for baking kind of have to do it by feel and experience. Particularly if they do things like measuring flour by volume instead of weight. (Professional bakers basically always measure by weight because granulated products like flour and sugar have variable packing densities) This has a lot to do with why home baked goods tend to be quite variable in quality even with experienced bakers.

    1. Re:Non written recipes by Not-a-Neg · · Score: 1

      My paternal grandmother purposely left out ingredients in recipes that she gave my mom, but purely out of spite. She didn't want anyone cooking for my dad better than she cooked for him herself.

      --
      -==- Buy a Mac and leave me alone!
  45. Germany by sjbe · · Score: 1

    To us, US culture is rather strange. You really go out to eat each day, every day?

    And to us, German culture is rather strange. Doesn't mean it's bad but it's definitely quite different. Understand that eating out in this context might mean getting lunch at the local fast food joint for lunch which is fairly common. Germany has an average of around 135 restaurant visits per person per year which is less than the US but still about one every three days.

    And if you "cook" at home, it’s ready-made convenience food? How do you even survive? Isn't that extremely expensive? Don't you miss real food?

    You talk about the ready made food like it's made of arsenic or something. It's fine. Not optimal but certainly will keep you going. And no it isn't really terribly expensive and for many people it's what they actually prefer.

    And "hard working" is a BAD thing. Only stupid people and slaves work hard.

    Really? You think Germans don't work hard? That's not exactly their reputation. Elon Musk seems like a pretty hard working guy and he is neither stupid nor a slave. Go ahead and find me a lazy CEO of a successful major corporation. Hard work is only a bad thing to people who are disinclined to work hard. (that means lazy) Working hard does not mean you cannot also work efficiently.

    The best company is one, that is so good at that, that everyone can sit back and relax, while the money comes in.

    And precisely zero of those exist in the real world.

  46. Control of ingredients by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you are health conscious, the only way to control what you eat is to control the ingredients. It is very hard to do that eating out, unless the meal is a raw salad or simple unseasoned meat, chicken, fish.

    I can have a better tasting steak at home. Better tasting fish at home for usually half the price of eat out. Grill a few veggies with seasoning that I control and WOW, it is an excellent meal for $8 that would cost $30 to eat out.

    That doesn't mean Americans never eat out. On vacation, we usually eat out unless staying at an AirBnB and even then, we are more likely to have "event" meals out.

    But when I'm at home, I limit eating out to 1 meal a week, or I'll get fat.
    Did a 10 day hiking trip in Patagonia TdP last year and gained 10 lbs because the food provided by the outfitter was too rich and too much. I even skipped a few dinners during the trip having provided snack nuts and fruit instead, but still gained weight. My family couldn't believe it.

    1. Re:Control of ingredients by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      We could control the ingredients through legislation. We don't necessarily have to allow businesses to put whatever the fuck they want in our food. I know this would runs counter to some God-given freedom to put corn syrup in sliced bread.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  47. Time by sjbe · · Score: 2

    It takes exactly 6 minutes to grill the chicken to 170 degrees

    Maybe if you slice it to be as thin as deli meat and don't care much about the end result. Properly cooking a reasonably thick chicken breast will take quite a lot longer than that. Roasting a whole chicken typically takes 30-40 minutes in an oven. Oh, and unless you are cooking dark meat, 170F chicken is (slightly) overcooked.

    Ok, so it takes 32 minutes.. big deal.

    32 minutes can be a lot of time to some people. Right now I have a young child under the age of 1 at home and my wife and I both work alternate shifts. There are quite a few days where 30 minutes to prepare even a simple meal is an unattainable luxury to us. If you can do it it is time well spent but it's not an easy thing to do sometimes. Not to mention I'm not particularly interested in eating exactly the same thing every day for an entire week. If you can then more power to you but I have a hard time with that.

    Point being, it's still a hell of a lot quicker than spending 75 minutes a week driving to get food, only to have to scarf it down once I get back to the office.

    Where are you driving? I have three fast food restaurants literally within walking distance of my office and even if I drive there every day it would take me less time than the 30 minutes you spent prepping food at home. Not to mention that several nearby restaurants deliver. Don't get me wrong, I'm very supportive of making your own food but it's pretty hard to beat the convenience of restaurants and fast food. It certainly doesn't save time to cook at home.

  48. Bingo! Instead of modding you up.. comment... by gosand · · Score: 2

    I am approaching my 6th year eating low carb / high fat. STILL feeling the best I have felt in my life, and I am in my late 40s. I know people like to call it a fad, but high-carb low-fat bullshit is the fad. We only eat huge amounts of grain/starch carbs in the absence of real food. We've only been farmers for 10k years, yet as a species we've been evolving for millions of years. We didn't get to where we are by accident. I've also been an avid home cook for 20+ years. Once you learn the basic principles, you can use them the rest of your life. Teach a man to fish, as it were.

    This is supposed to be a site for nerds, and if you REALLY want to nerd out on something read up on low-carb and a lot of the research going on. Learn more about lipidology and heart disease. Don't like reading? Listen to some of the podcasts on peterattiamd.com. Seriously fascinating stuff, lots of links to as much as you would want to learn and as deep as you would want to go.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

    1. Re:Bingo! Instead of modding you up.. comment... by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

      Personally the doctor talked me out of this.

    2. Re:Bingo! Instead of modding you up.. comment... by gosand · · Score: 1

      It would be silly to think that it is for everyone - because it may not be since there are variations in how people's bodies respond. But I think that would be the exception to the rule.

      But I am curious, what was the reasoning your doctor used to talk you out of it? I have found many doctors are sorely under-informed, and they cling to the flawed reasoning they were taught 30 years ago. Or they are as misinformed as everyone else, and think the food pyramid is a real thing that should be followed. If your doctor is not learning and keeping up on recent research (in the last 10 years) then find another doctor. Sadly, I STILL hear people saying to eat a low-fat diet. Even though scientific research proved that there was no benefit to low-fat diet, it was still recommended by our government because it 'made sense'. It just goes to show how nefarious misinformation can be and how hard it is to shake from public perception.

      --

      My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

    3. Re:Bingo! Instead of modding you up.. comment... by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

      She's fairly young, and not an advocate of the food pyramid, that's a discussion I already had. I get the meat should be "2 decks of cards" and half a plate of vegetables lecture. But the cited reasons are that my triglycerides are already high, but my glucose and A1C are just fine. I guess she'd rather I fixed the former than the latter. I would not say she's advocating more carbs at all, just less meat and more veg.

      So perhaps she actually agrees with you, I'm simply eating too MUCH meat ;) But she was quite adamant about not adopting a high fat diet.

    4. Re:Bingo! Instead of modding you up.. comment... by Daralantan · · Score: 1

      It would be silly to think that it is for everyone - because it may not be since there are variations in how people's bodies respond.

      Bingo. Low carb has potential to work great for some, but it doesn't do great for everyone. The most recent example I can think of is a friend of mine who is fairly healthy and works out often, but has always had a few extra pounds he couldn't get rid of. He and his wife both went low carb. Ate the same meals for pretty much everything. It worked great for him, meanwhile she had to stop for some health related reason I don't recall. I've also known of someone else who had cholesterol issues when doing the diet. I briefly did low carb a while back and had no issues, I quit that though because I'd rather not ban certain foods from myself. I do eat LESS carbs than I used to - just definitely not a "low carb diet." It also depends what my current workout goals are, as well.

    5. Re:Bingo! Instead of modding you up.. comment... by gosand · · Score: 1

      I'll just throw this out there... high cholesterol as it is currently defined is not necessarily bad for you.
      There has been a lot of research over the last few years in that field. It is usually over-simplified down to "good" and "bad" cholesterol. But what really seems to matter (in terms of risk to heart disease) is the type and particle size of the LDL. Unfortunately, normal lipid panels do a poor job of measuring what really matters. Things like LPa or apoB that are emerging as true indicators.

      Think about this: if "High Cholesterol is bad", then the converse is true that "Normal Cholesterol is good".
      1/2 of people who have heart attacks have "normal" cholesterol. HALF. My father had two stints put in last year, one artery was 98% blocked and further down the same one was 60% blocked. His cholesterol levels were perfect.

      My point is that "cholesterol issues" that you brought up may have been non-issues. Our bodies produce roughly 85% of the cholesterol in our blood, it doesn't come from our diet. (our diet can affect it though... and I'll give you a hint - it's not from the fat we eat) . Cholesterol is a building block of our body. It has gotten a bad rap by bad science.

      --

      My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

    6. Re:Bingo! Instead of modding you up.. comment... by gosand · · Score: 1

      Our bodies produce about 85% of the cholesterol in our blood... it doesn't come directly from our diet. Our diet CAN affect it of course, but not by fat.
      All fats are not equal. Cut out any grain/vegetable fats - anything highly processed. Basically eat dairy fat (if you can tolerate dairy), olive oil, coconut oil. I've been doing it long enough that I eat what I eat.. but there are variations on how much of your calories should be from protein, carbs, and fat. Depends on if you want to go full Keto (lower protein) or something more primal/paleo. But it is ASTOUNDING to me that people still think fat is bad for you.

      Less meat more veg isn't bad advice - keep away from really starchy veg though, they can be pretty carby.
      If you are comfortable with talking to her, ask her WHY she is against a high-fat diet.
      Have you also cut out sugar? It's a carb you know, and a very nasty one at that.

      --

      My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

    7. Re:Bingo! Instead of modding you up.. comment... by Daralantan · · Score: 1

      I know that cholesterol in itself isn't bad, but I don't quite remember what her issue was. I'm assuming it was a high amount of the "bad cholesterol," but it might've been completely different. I mostly wanted to simplify it down to say that the guy had great results, and his wife was told "You need to stop," by the doctor basically.

      Oddly, I seem to recall hearing of a few studies about somehow cholesterol even aids a lot in some muscle building and recovery? Good luck in that ever getting much attention.

    8. Re:Bingo! Instead of modding you up.. comment... by gosand · · Score: 1

      We would be dead without it. It is a building block of our body, and the reason our cells don't need cell walls.

      To the high amounts of "bad" cholesterol, that is precisely why the over-simplification of it is a terrible thing. The amount of LDL in your blood is not the problem, it is the type of LDL and the particle size that is the issue. (and you could argue the particle number in conjunction with size)

      Several years ago there were only a few labs in the country that were even equipped to perform the lipid testing required to get those numbers. I would be really interested to see mine, but without a good reason to pay for it, I am content just knowing that I am doing the right thing from a diet perspective.

      --

      My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  49. Fads != change by sjbe · · Score: 1

    An unknown number of people have special eating needs.

    There is a LOT of well validated science research on this topic. While we don't know everything, it's not as if our research is ignorant on the topic. We certainly have very good data on the prevalence of many special dietary requirements in the population.

    The Gluten Free and Paleo Diet consumers are a symptom of this great change.

    That's not a change. Those are food fads, mostly driven by an epidemic of hypochondria, not validated scientific evidence. Very few people actually have problems with metabolizing gluten and there is no evidence of change in this regard. There is very solid data available. A recent study indicated that 86% of people who thought they had a problem with gluten do not in fact actually have a problem. The paleo diet is based off the unsupported theory that we should eat what humans ate thousands of years ago. Never mind the fact that we have evolved since then and so has our diet.

    I and many others can no longer eat the 'Standard American Diet'. Period.

    There is no such thing. America is a big place with diverse tastes and menus. There have always been people who have trouble with certain ingredients (milk, wheat, etc) but that is nothing new and will likely never change.

  50. Depends on the meal by sjbe · · Score: 2

    Cooking for one, it's probably cheaper to eat out for some meals.

    You don't need the "probably" qualifier. It's DEFINITELY cheaper for quite a few types of meals. Not all, but a large number of them.

    Cooking for five. It's never cheaper to eat out.

    Not true at all. Again it depends on the meal. I can feed a family of 5 very cheaply at the local pizza joint for example. Not saying the food will be better but there is no single answer to the question.

  51. Eating out not quicker by KingAlanI · · Score: 1

    I've said that about packing a lunch ... saves time on going to a restaurant as well as saving money. But fast food is, well, fast - especially when not rushing through a 30 minute lunch break

    --
    I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
  52. No U by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Suck it. I'm a sociology & economy nerd.

    I'm a baseball nerd.

  53. Priorites matter by sjbe · · Score: 1

    Funny, while I was growing up as a kid, same situation, we STILL managed to have home cooked meals 99% of the time..

    Good for you. Guess what? Your situation is not identical to mine. We have a lot of home cooked meals but we also actually like eating restaurant food too. We could probably get it done if having every meal cooked at home mattered to us but we have other priorities and it is more time efficient for us to eat out some meals. We also happen to live in a location with some pretty darn food restaurants.

    Seemed normal for us, and frankly, most everyone I knew growing up in my neighborhood with working parents ate home cooked meals Imost from scratch) with no problem.

    Some places that is common. Others not so much. I can easily show you plenty of locations were home cooking is the exception rather than the rule. I coach a youth sports team and the parents are all over the map when it comes to how they feed their families.

    What's wrong with the families today...this isn't rocket surgery.

    Nothing is "wrong" with them any more than something is wrong with you. Just because people make different life choices and have different situations doesn't equate to right or wrong. A lot of families don't look like a Norman Rockwell painting and that is just fine. Your argument is wrong because the premise is false.

    1. Re:Priorites matter by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      We have a lot of home cooked meals but we also actually like eating restaurant food too.

      We liked eating out too, but we simply couldn't really afford to eat out very often...which is what a lot of people on this story are trying to say, that it is cheaper to eat out all the time.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    2. Re: Priorites matter by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      Eating out is not a time saver. Do a study. When you lack the mental fortitude and sit around waiting for food to appear it can take a long time. If you plan and execute it happens quickly and you move on. I can prepare several meals in the time it takes to order and wait on pizza or some other oil ladden sugary trash.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
  54. Mars Bars are no longer a common sight in the US by OrangeTide · · Score: 2

    We don't really have "mars chokolade bars" in the US, at least we don't call the kind you're referring to a Mars Bar. Perhaps you're thinking of Scotland?

    If you're looking for a vile American fried treat, then look no further than Deep-fried butter.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  55. I hate cooking but still rarely eat out by KingAlanI · · Score: 1

    I can cook, basics at least, but I can't stand it (especially washing dishes by hand). I still rarely eat out as I hate the cost and time. So I eat a lot of stuff that requires little prep, like deli meat and cheese sandwiches.

    --
    I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
  56. peak oil? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This was one of the predictions made by peak oil theory.

  57. c6gunner IMPERSONATING me again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    c6gunner your FAKEname's on a post impersonating me & worse is you altering /. user's words https://linux.slashdot.org/com... as I challenged you to show you do better work and you can't after you tried to mock me you hypocrite LYING loser https://linux.slashdot.org/com... .

    * You're online FAKENAME trash c6gunner & a childish dishonest punk.

    (PUTTING WORDS IN MY MOUTH TOO saying what I don't (on spectre/meltdown) https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... )

    APK

    P.S.=> Impossible to deny FACT of your FAKEname (for your FAKE wasted lie of a so-called life) on that 1st post link above you unbelievable loser... apk

  58. portion sizes shrinking too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I went to McDonald's for the first time in years for breakfast before a road trip.

    The egg McMuffin and hash brown was a lot smaller than I remember and the price was a lot higher.

      Me thinks I'll skip McDonald's next time I go on a road trip and skip my childhood nostalgia.

  59. No such thing as normal household by sjbe · · Score: 1

    As soon as the population was tricked into needing males and females both working full-time, Amercian life went to shit.

    Wow, where to start. "Tricked"? Women were prohibited from even entering much of the work force until not all that long ago. It wasn't even a choice. Believe it or not, not all women want to be stay at home mothers and spit out youngins'. That should be a choice, not a duty based on which genitalia you happen to have. In the US couples where both parents work are to a large degree because they want to and because they want a certain lifestyle regardless of gender. My wife and I both have careers because we WANT them. She's a doctor because she's smart and likes being a doctor. I'm an engineer for similar reasons. We don't need to both work but we choose to both work. We want our daughter to have the same choices and options and we're trying to set a good example for her. I don't want her to have to depend on someone else to fulfill some obsolete notion of gender roles like what you seem to prefer.

    As for "american life went to shit"... I have no idea what you are talking about. American life in general is great and I wouldn't trade it. And I've spent lots of time overseas so I'm not just imagining what life is like elsewhere.

    Now both parents are required to work if you have kids in a normal household, and there is little to no time to cook right.

    There is no such thing as a "normal" household and a family doesn't need to look like a Norman Rockwell painting to be a great family. As for "cooking right" there is likewise no such thing. There is healthy eating but this can be achieved many ways including eating out. Not everyone gives a shit about home cooked meals. I'm pretty sure most captains of industry are not spending a lot of time in front of a stove. People have lots of priorities and eating a traditional sit down meal every day at home is not always among them. Nothing wrong with that. You be you and let them be them.

  60. I don't want to be served by a manly... anything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    tbh, the reason I don't go out to restaurants any longer is that the waitresses, when there _are_ waitresses, far too often dress like men, and mostly otherwise, _are_ men.

    I used to go out to dinner at least partially as an experience in being pampered by people - females - who took care with their appearance and pampered the customer. it was nice. I tipped well, usually in the 30-40% range, and was polite and pleasant to them and enjoyed those aspects of reciprocal behavior. now that actually dressing in a feminine manner is "out", so am I. I'm not paying good money to encourage further erosion of femininity. yes, I _do_ expect my servers to be female, and I _do_ expect them to dress like they are female, and I _do_ expect them to be polite and pleasant and competent.

    fast food? not really. but I've turned into a pretty good cook.

    imho, the further this anti-femininity craze goes, the more these kinds of service industries are going to suffer. and yes, a restaurant provides service. they've just become confused about what that service consists of.

    I'm sure none of the PC crowd wants to hear anything like this (and I fully expect downmods from those same PC types), but honestly, they're a significant part of the cause of all this, so I really don't care if they're tweaked by my honesty. it's water under the bridge anyway. the shark has been jumped. if restaurants and female servers wanted my money, they should have kept up a standard higher than sexless monotony. too late now.

  61. False economy by sjbe · · Score: 1

    Eating out is not a time saver.

    Sometimes it absolutely is a time saver. Sometimes it is a money saver too. This isn't even up for debate. Whether it is a time or money saver depends on what food is being made, how much of it is being made, what recipe is being used, what pre-made or restaurant options are available as alternatives and what the price of all of the above happens to be. If the food you want can only be obtained by making it yourself that's fine but it's a choice you make. The rest of us may have different priorities and food requirements. Sometimes making food at home is the most economical choice but not every time. Pretending otherwise is to be willfully blind to the evidence.

    Do a study.

    Don't have to. There are literally thousands of scientific studies on the topic. Go look them up. Not to mention I'm nearly 5 decades old so I have a lifetime of first hand data on the subject.

    I can prepare several meals in the time it takes to order and wait on pizza or some other oil ladden sugary trash.

    You think when I order a pizza I just sit around doing nothing until it is delivered? I'm ordering a pizza precisely because I'm BUSY doing other things and I'm paying someone else to take the time and trouble. Ordering a pizza takes me all of 2 minutes of my time. Hell I can drive to my local pizza joint and be home with a ready made pizza in less than 10 minutes. You are not going to "prepare several meals" in less time than that. You aren't even going to prepare one meal in less time than that unless it is something stupid simple.

  62. Tip - go electronic by zarmanto · · Score: 2

    One of the very best thing I've ever done was to start using Chick-fil-a's mobile app, rather than waiting in line... not because I have anything against the in-person ordering experience, nor even because of a time difference between the two experiences. (There is often little or no time advantage, actually.) Rather, the critical factor which makes ordering from my phone worth doing, is the digitally e-mailed receipt. With all of those receipts already in a digital format and handily sent to me automatically, I don't have to really think about things like historic price increases, until the moment that such a thing becomes important to me. Nor do I have to guess at how often I frequent a given restaurant/store; the answer to that question is a simple word search away.

    Obviously, you could also go with one of those apps that attempts to read your paper receipts and collates them for you... assuming that you're going to consistently remember to add your latest receipt to the app. But I'm not Sheldon; I'm not nearly obsessive enough to remember every single time. For those of us who are more Leonard and less Sheldon, letting the computer do a bit more of the work for us is, perhaps, a good thing.

    As an aside: Chick-fil-a doesn't seem to change their prices very often; that's vaguely interesting to me, especially in light of this particular article. (Not that I ever actually eat at McDonalds, anyway...)

  63. Sous vide + brown in pan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are three methods for cooking steak at home, each one better than the last, that produce best results.

    We've tried pretty much every method we could find, and the best — by far — is to use sous vide to cook the steaks for several hours, then brown them in a pan with mushrooms, onions and butter. OMG. So much better than anything else - grills, ovens, smokers, panfry... just no comparison. And perfect every time, no exceptions. There's nothing than can beat sous vide.

    1. Re:Sous vide + brown in pan by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      The English like boiled meat, news at 11.

      Sous vide is for people that don't like meat.

      Steaks are 'fully cooked', in seconds on a hot grill. Low and slow is for tough meats, not steak.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    2. Re:Sous vide + brown in pan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The English like boiled meat, news at 11.

      Sous vide is not a "boil the meat" process, and the steaks are not boiled at all, they are slow cooked in their own juices, in a container. The meat never touches water even once.

      ...but you do get the the blue ribbon for answering with complete ignorance and presumption about something you clearly know nothing about.

      Congrats. I'm sure you can top it, though. The floor is all yours. By all means, let's see just how far you can shove that foot into your mouth.

    3. Re:Sous vide + brown in pan by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Boiled in a bag is still boiled.

      Good beef takes 5 minutes to fully cook. Maximum. But I _like_ the taste of beef.

      If you are slow cooking a steak, you are doing it completely wrong. That's for brisket, but smoke it don't boil it.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  64. Eating out in the USA is EXPENSIVE!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It feels like all the restaraunts have been watching those TV shows on how to improve their bottom line and jacking up prices everywhere. Getting a drink used to be nearly free, but now they usually run from $3.00 to $5.00 per person for just a Coke/fountain drink/iced tea.
    As an example, I took my 14 year old son and his friend out to Wendy's with me last summer and the bill was over $30.00 US!
    It really sucks because I live in a small house with a TINY kitchen and my wife an I both work, so at the end of the day, we aren't in the mood to stay in and cook. I used to be able to get a meal for roughly $20 if I didn't go to a "fancy" sit-down restaraunt and maybe $30 for a low end sit down one. These days it is closer to $30 for fast food and $40-50 for a "low priced" sit-down restaraunt.

  65. well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can make a BETTER hamburger than McDonalds but I cannot make a cheaper one.

    Well, you can if you use the same ingredients: cardboard and a vaguely meatlike substance, both with basically unlimited shelflife, the world's worst pickles, about 1% of an onion, and "ketchup" that may only have been within 100 feet of an actual tomato when it passed them in another truck. And huge amounts of salt.

    Seriously. McDonald's hamburgers? <shudder>

  66. Is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've been grabbing food from the gas station more than I ever did in the past. The rise of fresh-made breakfasts, sandwiches, pizzas, and cheap soda has replaced trips to fast food places. These days I only eat at a restaurant once a week, typically breakfast at the local diner, just to have an excuse to get out of the house on the weekend. I can't actually remember the last time I went to a restaurant for dinner. At least one of the diners near me stopped offering dinner altogether and closes at 4PM now.

    Typical week for me is: grab a donut, muffin, or biscuits and gravy from the gas station on the way to work, along with a pre-made sandwich to toss in the fridge at work until lunch break. Microwave something frozen at home for dinner. No fresh meals, not going to bother with doing dishes anymore, everything is eaten with paper plates/bowls, and plastic cutlery.

    Around 2010-2012 a lot of restaurants started closing around me. Applebee's, TGIF, Chili's, and so on. They all seem to decline in the 2-4 years after the banks collapsed. Even pizza places closed restaurants and moved towards delivery-only operations out of run-down strip malls.

  67. What Big Fast Food should do... by Tjp($)pjT · · Score: 1

    They should aggregate and create a delivery service that jointly operates across their restaurants. And lower end chains like Denny’s and Applebee’s as well. The delivery fee should be at the cost of delivery, so customer service not a profit center. They can then, at the regional “dinner time” and “lunch time” do free delivery for orders placed 1 hour in advance of desired delivery slot. Consumers still cover the delivery cost the majority of the time, the store covers delivery cost when they are having peak profits. Extend free delivery slots to major televisied events, possibly getting the televisied event to cover the delivery fee. This can be passed on to the purchasers of commercials to these premium events. Think different or get left behind.

    --
    - Tjp

    I am in wallow with my inner money grubbing capitalistic pig. ... Oink!

  68. Makes no sense to me by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Using recipes is more expensive than just winging it.

    That is totally not the case, since you can choose recipes that make sense for what you have, or have less ingredients. They are also just a basic guide, you do not HAVE to do everything the recipe says...

    If you think recipes cost more you are looking at the wrong sources.

    You can just throw together what's on sale or what is seasonal.

    Yes and you can bring more variety to what you do with that - using recipes!!

    That's part of my whole point. We have been collecting a lot of tomatoes from plats we have, so it's great to be able to browse through a huge assortment of things we can do with them. Otherwise we'd just be making tomato sauce for pasta or something, lame.

    And winging can be less wasteful since you can use what you have on hand

    Again my point about recipes being easy to search is that I can find recipes that use what I have on hand, or are close enough if I don't mind omitting a few things.

    Also, I don't really find food that is crafted from recipes to be any better.

    Better than what though? Recipes are great because they can bring a bunch of different perspectives on what do do with ingredients, and also give you a rough idea of what levels and kinds of seasoning might make a dish more interesting. Even if you don't follow a recipe just looking through them can give you lots of great ideas for what you can do yourself.

    Again, like the Pirate Code, just remember that recipes are more guidelines than rules you must follow. Do what makes sense to you and leveraging recipes can be an amazing tool.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  69. We all know why by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

    Minimum wage went up. Prices have increased. No kidding. I don't know how anyone can afford to eat lunch anymore.

  70. Haven't noticed it in my area by Daralantan · · Score: 1

    Over the past 7ish years I've worked at 3 different places. All 3 places had almost every employee (except me and a very small number of others) go out for fast food pretty much every single day. Maybe it's changing for some.... but definitely not enough.

  71. Petty by sjbe · · Score: 1

    My paternal grandmother purposely left out ingredients in recipes that she gave my mom, but purely out of spite. She didn't want anyone cooking for my dad better than she cooked for him herself.

    I've seen people do stuff like that before. I'm amazed how petty people can be sometimes.

    Of course that's why if you learn to really cook you become harder to fool when people pull shenanigans like that. You might have to do some detective work but it will be obvious that something is wrong if you know enough cooking or baking. Kind of like if someone hands you incomplete source code. Might take a minute to figure out the problem but you'll get the right result in the end. Sometimes even better since a lot of recipes are not actually all that good.

  72. You worked yourself over & FAILED c6gunner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    c6gunner SHOOTS HIMSELF down as your FAKEname's on a post impersonating me https://linux.slashdot.org/com... & worse is you altering /. user's words there.

    All because I challenged you to show you do better work and you can't TALKER after you tried to mock me https://linux.slashdot.org/com... .

    SEEING YOU DEMAND PROOF OF OTHERS "I've yet to see you provide any evidence of that." by c6gunner on Monday March 15, 2010 @10:02PM (#31490942) I DEMANDED IT OF YOU & YOU FAILED BIGMOUTH, lol!

    * You're online FAKENAME trash c6gunner & a childish dishonest punk + a DO-NOTHING "ne'er-do-well" CHATTERING dolt w/ ZERO to show for yourself other than your BLOWHARD bullshit, lol - you LOSE!

    APK

    P.S.=> Impossible to deny FACT of your FAKEname (for your FAKE wasted lie of a so-called life) on that 1st post link above WHERE YOU IMPERSONATED ME like a PETULANT CHILD, you unbelievable loser... apk

  73. c6gunner = Capt. STUPID blown away, lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    c6gunner SHOOTS HIMSELF down as your FAKEname's on a post impersonating me https://linux.slashdot.org/com... & worse is you altering /. user's words there.

    All because I challenged you to show you do better work and you can't TALKER after you tried to mock me https://linux.slashdot.org/com... .

    SEEING YOU DEMAND PROOF OF OTHERS "I've yet to see you provide any evidence of that." by c6gunner on Monday March 15, 2010 @10:02PM (#31490942) I DEMANDED IT OF YOU & YOU FAILED BIGMOUTH, lol!

    * You're online FAKENAME trash c6gunner & a childish dishonest punk + a DO-NOTHING "ne'er-do-well" CHATTERING dolt w/ ZERO to show for yourself other than your BLOWHARD bullshit, lol - you LOSE!

    APK

    P.S.=> You say hosts are shit here https://slashdot.org/comments.... ?

    50++ /.ers & security pros + RESULTS SAY DIFFERENTLY loser:

    Proof's here from /.ers https://slashdot.org/comments.... https://slashdot.org/comments.... https://slashdot.org/comments.... https://slashdot.org/comments.... https://slashdot.org/comments.... https://slashdot.org/comments.... from SECURITY PROS https://slashdot.org/comments.... & REAL RESULTS w/ hosts working vs. threats https://slashdot.org/comments.... so EAT YOUR WORDS & CHOKE on them... apk

  74. c6gunner SHOOTS HIMSELF down, lol... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    c6gunner SHOOTS HIMSELF down as your FAKEname's on a post impersonating me https://linux.slashdot.org/com... & worse is you altering /. user's words there.

    All because I challenged you to show you do better work and you can't TALKER after you tried to mock me https://linux.slashdot.org/com... .

    SEEING YOU DEMAND PROOF OF OTHERS "I've yet to see you provide any evidence of that." by c6gunner on Monday March 15, 2010 @10:02PM (#31490942) I DEMANDED IT OF YOU & YOU FAILED BIGMOUTH, lol!

    * You're online FAKENAME trash c6gunner & a childish dishonest punk + a DO-NOTHING "ne'er-do-well" CHATTERING dolt w/ ZERO to show for yourself other than your BLOWHARD bullshit, lol - you LOSE!

    APK

    P.S.=> You say hosts are shit here https://slashdot.org/comments.... ?

    50++ /.ers & security pros + RESULTS SAY DIFFERENTLY loser:

    Proof's here from /.ers https://slashdot.org/comments.... https://slashdot.org/comments.... https://slashdot.org/comments.... https://slashdot.org/comments.... https://slashdot.org/comments.... https://slashdot.org/comments.... from SECURITY PROS https://slashdot.org/comments.... & REAL RESULTS w/ hosts working vs. threats https://slashdot.org/comments.... so EAT YOUR WORDS & CHOKE on them... apk

  75. c6gunner = "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!"... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    c6gunner SHOOTS HIMSELF down w/ his FAKEname on a post impersonating me https://linux.slashdot.org/com... & w/ c6gunner altering /. user's words there.

    All since I challenged c6gunner to show better work than mine he did & you can't c6gunner "ne'er-do-well"!

    Right after you tried to mock me 1st https://linux.slashdot.org/com... for no good reason & I didn't bug you @ all!

    YOU DEMAND PROOF "I've yet to see you provide any evidence of that." by c6gunner on Monday March 15, 2010 @10:02PM (#31490942) ?

    I DEMANDED IT OF YOU & YOU FAILED!

    * You're FAKENAME trash you childish dishonest punk + YOU are a DO-NOTHING "ne'er-do-well" CHATTERING dolt w/ ZERO to show for yourself!

    APK

    P.S.=> You say hosts are shit here https://slashdot.org/comments.... ?

    50++ /.ers & security pros + RESULTS SAY DIFFERENT:

    Proof's here from /.ers https://slashdot.org/comments.... https://slashdot.org/comments.... https://slashdot.org/comments.... https://slashdot.org/comments.... https://slashdot.org/comments.... https://slashdot.org/comments.... from SECURITY PROS https://slashdot.org/comments.... & REAL RESULTS w/ hosts working vs. threats https://slashdot.org/comments.... so EAT YOUR WORDS... apk

  76. c6gunner = "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!"... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    c6gunner SHOOTS HIMSELF down w/ his FAKEname on a post impersonating me https://linux.slashdot.org/com... & w/ c6gunner altering /. user's words there.

    All since I challenged c6gunner to show better work than mine he did & you can't c6gunner "ne'er-do-well"!

    Right after you tried to mock me 1st https://linux.slashdot.org/com... for no good reason & I didn't bug you @ all!

    YOU DEMAND PROOF "I've yet to see you provide any evidence of that." by c6gunner on Monday March 15, 2010 @10:02PM (#31490942) ?

    I DEMANDED IT OF YOU & YOU FAILED!

    * You're FAKENAME trash you childish dishonest punk + YOU are a DO-NOTHING "ne'er-do-well" CHATTERING dolt w/ ZERO to show for yourself!

    APK

    P.S.=> You say hosts are shit here https://slashdot.org/comments.... ?

    50++ /.ers & security pros + RESULTS SAY DIFFERENT:

    Proof's here from /.ers https://slashdot.org/comments.... https://slashdot.org/comments.... https://slashdot.org/comments.... https://slashdot.org/comments.... https://slashdot.org/comments.... https://slashdot.org/comments.... from SECURITY PROS https://slashdot.org/comments.... & REAL RESULTS w/ hosts working vs. threats https://slashdot.org/comments.... so EAT YOUR WORDS... apk