A quarter pounder with cheese - in a cup
September 14, 2006 4:59 PM Subscribe
Coffee, anyone? PDF found here Everyone needs that nice pick-me-up in the morning, after all. Don't worry - have a nice espesso!
I don't know about you, but when I want to perk up in the morning, I just can't resist a big, steaming cup of those ingredients the company won't divulge.
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 5:36 PM on September 14, 2006 [1 favorite]
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 5:36 PM on September 14, 2006 [1 favorite]
The last time I was in Mexico, we bought about 20 kilos of coffee directly from the collective that grew it. They roasted it for us over an open wood fire. And we let them name their price. Man that stuff was a kick in the pants, too.
posted by Devils Rancher at 5:37 PM on September 14, 2006
posted by Devils Rancher at 5:37 PM on September 14, 2006
Real men don't drink latte, they drink black coffee. However, if they were to hypothetically drink such stuff, skim makes better froth anyway.
posted by caddis at 5:46 PM on September 14, 2006
posted by caddis at 5:46 PM on September 14, 2006
"Possible teratogen" is one of the biggest euphemisms i know. I'm getting off the stuff completely.
thickaspigshit? yum!
posted by mrgrimm at 5:55 PM on September 14, 2006
thickaspigshit? yum!
posted by mrgrimm at 5:55 PM on September 14, 2006
Without too much of a diversion, I'd just like to throw in a word on the fair trade movement. It's a nice idea, but it's sort of like buying your slaves from owners who only use nice whips.
Real "fair" wages combined with environmental safeguards can only come through governmental intervention in the forms of better trade agreemeents, land reforms, and market regulations. While a consumer movement is nice, it's no substitute for the necessary work that must be done.
Studying trade law or agricultural policy might not be for everyone, especially considering how depressing the present may be for anyone who believes in the principles that underlie the fair trade movement. At the same time, buying fair trade has become a brand on the left, a way for consumers to buy off their guilty conscience instead of getting involved with real agitation for WTO reform, etc. It's possible to buy Fair Trade and still believe in structural change and like rikschell, I recommend you do so, but just realize that it's really not much. As in my hypo, there was no way that individuals could end slavery through consumer action; that problem needed government intervention. Let's do it right.
posted by allen.spaulding at 5:59 PM on September 14, 2006 [1 favorite]
Real "fair" wages combined with environmental safeguards can only come through governmental intervention in the forms of better trade agreemeents, land reforms, and market regulations. While a consumer movement is nice, it's no substitute for the necessary work that must be done.
Studying trade law or agricultural policy might not be for everyone, especially considering how depressing the present may be for anyone who believes in the principles that underlie the fair trade movement. At the same time, buying fair trade has become a brand on the left, a way for consumers to buy off their guilty conscience instead of getting involved with real agitation for WTO reform, etc. It's possible to buy Fair Trade and still believe in structural change and like rikschell, I recommend you do so, but just realize that it's really not much. As in my hypo, there was no way that individuals could end slavery through consumer action; that problem needed government intervention. Let's do it right.
posted by allen.spaulding at 5:59 PM on September 14, 2006 [1 favorite]
Private entities will continue to control the flow of coffee at the expense of farmers and the poor, only to provide monetary gain of the rich. All in all, this indicates that free-market economics are powerful enough to benefit a few, and crush the rest.
Lolocaust.
posted by grobstein at 6:07 PM on September 14, 2006
Lolocaust.
posted by grobstein at 6:07 PM on September 14, 2006
GLH-9000
posted by idontlikewords at 6:07 PM on September 14, 2006
posted by idontlikewords at 6:07 PM on September 14, 2006
Why do so many (American) corporations need to fuck with coffee so much? I mean, what is this sugar syrup shit that starbucks makes, who considers that coffee? And espesso??? Are you all that devoid of meaning in your life that you have got to 'innovate' on something that the italians got right about a century ago? What is wrong with people?
posted by wilful at 6:47 PM on September 14, 2006
posted by wilful at 6:47 PM on September 14, 2006
Why do so many (American) corporations need to fuck with coffee so much?
If you read the article, you might notice that "espesso" was introduced in Spain 4 years ago, and the chef is Spanish.
posted by advil at 6:54 PM on September 14, 2006
If you read the article, you might notice that "espesso" was introduced in Spain 4 years ago, and the chef is Spanish.
posted by advil at 6:54 PM on September 14, 2006
"You eat little pieces sh!+ for breakfast?"
posted by longsleeves at 6:55 PM on September 14, 2006
posted by longsleeves at 6:55 PM on September 14, 2006
nd espesso??? Are you all that devoid of meaning in your life that you have got to 'innovate' on something that the italians got right about a century ago?
If you'd RTFA, you'd realize that espesso was created by an Italian corporation.
posted by hoboynow at 6:56 PM on September 14, 2006
If you'd RTFA, you'd realize that espesso was created by an Italian corporation.
posted by hoboynow at 6:56 PM on September 14, 2006
Espesso consists of espresso and an ingredient the company won't divulge, combined in a pressurized canister and left to set for 12 hours. The result is a mousselike, cold solid sprayed right out of the canister.
yum, coffee and guar gum - I think I will pass on this - just a cup of Joe will be fine thank you
posted by caddis at 7:03 PM on September 14, 2006
yum, coffee and guar gum - I think I will pass on this - just a cup of Joe will be fine thank you
posted by caddis at 7:03 PM on September 14, 2006
Are the corporations fattening us so they can eat us?
posted by Citizen Premier at 7:04 PM on September 14, 2006
posted by Citizen Premier at 7:04 PM on September 14, 2006
Real men don't drink latte, they drink black coffee. However, if they were to hypothetically drink such stuff, skim makes better froth anyway.
as someone as susceptible to social self-loating as the next guy, allow me to say "yes and no." yes, that is what real men drink. (if you think you're a real man and you don't drink that, it's because you're a sissy girly man laboring under the misconception that you're a real man) BUT, skim simply does not make a better froth. if you'd ever worked in a coffee shop you'd know this. chances are you're a girly hipster asshole who's far too conscious of his "slim hipster asshole coolness" to pay attention to how good your froth is. stop pretending the coolness of your of your food is dependent on its contribution to your fat index!
posted by shmegegge at 7:15 PM on September 14, 2006 [1 favorite]
No, I hate the froth, love the bitter, hence I like black coffee and espresso. I make the froth for friends and have always had better success with lower fat milks. What do you think makes the best froth?
posted by caddis at 7:20 PM on September 14, 2006
posted by caddis at 7:20 PM on September 14, 2006
This morning I had, for the very first time, a cup of Dunkin' Donuts coffee. It was outrageously hot, and devoid of any noteworthy flavor. The drinking apparatus, a high-tech plastic cup and lid setup, more closely resembled a bottle and nipple than the mug I prefer. It was like a hot morning sports drink.
caddis: skim makes better froth anyway.
This is true on a home espresso machine with its anemic steam delivery, but with a big honking espresso machine with a large high-pressure steam tank I’d prefer to froth whole milk. It’s easy to make big soapy bubbles with skim milk, but for the small velvety bubbles that your palate deserves you’re going to want to use whole milk.
Also, in response to the links, well, globalization screws over a lot of people, but doesn’t it help some people? There are a ton of calories in a frappuchino and even more in the whipped cream. Real men drink black coffee, or a nice doppio con panna. So there.
Nice post, sure to ruffle some feathers.
posted by peeedro at 7:21 PM on September 14, 2006
caddis: skim makes better froth anyway.
This is true on a home espresso machine with its anemic steam delivery, but with a big honking espresso machine with a large high-pressure steam tank I’d prefer to froth whole milk. It’s easy to make big soapy bubbles with skim milk, but for the small velvety bubbles that your palate deserves you’re going to want to use whole milk.
Also, in response to the links, well, globalization screws over a lot of people, but doesn’t it help some people? There are a ton of calories in a frappuchino and even more in the whipped cream. Real men drink black coffee, or a nice doppio con panna. So there.
Nice post, sure to ruffle some feathers.
posted by peeedro at 7:21 PM on September 14, 2006
At the same time, buying fair trade has become a brand on the left, a way for consumers to buy off their guilty conscience instead of getting involved with real agitation for WTO reform, etc.
Voting with ones dollars is far more effective than 'agitation of citizens'.
posted by rough ashlar at 7:22 PM on September 14, 2006
Voting with ones dollars is far more effective than 'agitation of citizens'.
posted by rough ashlar at 7:22 PM on September 14, 2006
Who drinks this frappuccino and latte crap anyway? They deserve all the calories they get. Gimme my cuppa black mud any day. Keeps the cancer away, I hear.
And though I don't condone froth generally, whole milk does indeed make the best. You get that brownish crema and tiny bubbles.
posted by drinkcoffee at 7:36 PM on September 14, 2006
And though I don't condone froth generally, whole milk does indeed make the best. You get that brownish crema and tiny bubbles.
posted by drinkcoffee at 7:36 PM on September 14, 2006
What do you think makes the best froth?
A nice machine, good technique, and practice. It took me almost a year working 40 hours a week at a coffee shop before I could get close to making something that looks like this.
For a shortcut, find a capable barista and ask for an hour of their time making drinks on your home machine to find out what it is capable of doing.
posted by peeedro at 7:37 PM on September 14, 2006
A nice machine, good technique, and practice. It took me almost a year working 40 hours a week at a coffee shop before I could get close to making something that looks like this.
For a shortcut, find a capable barista and ask for an hour of their time making drinks on your home machine to find out what it is capable of doing.
posted by peeedro at 7:37 PM on September 14, 2006
Oh yeah, and what the hell is "Espesso"??
posted by drinkcoffee at 7:39 PM on September 14, 2006
posted by drinkcoffee at 7:39 PM on September 14, 2006
I have a tough time making froth with whole milk, for some reason, but I'm fairly new to the frothification process (yeah, I know. That's not a word.) I've had the best luck with skim and 1%.
Ugh. Those stats on the calories of Starbucks drinks make me cringe.
posted by katillathehun at 7:41 PM on September 14, 2006
Ugh. Those stats on the calories of Starbucks drinks make me cringe.
posted by katillathehun at 7:41 PM on September 14, 2006
Never mind -- I read the article. That's disgusting.
posted by drinkcoffee at 7:41 PM on September 14, 2006
posted by drinkcoffee at 7:41 PM on September 14, 2006
This morning I had, for the very first time, a cup of Dunkin' Donuts coffee. It was outrageously hot, and devoid of any noteworthy flavor. The drinking apparatus, a high-tech plastic cup and lid setup, more closely resembled a bottle and nipple than the mug I prefer. It was like a hot morning sports drink.
Ha! (make up your own comment on your introduction to a Dunkin' Donuts-based existence, day one).
posted by longsleeves at 8:17 PM on September 14, 2006
Ha! (make up your own comment on your introduction to a Dunkin' Donuts-based existence, day one).
posted by longsleeves at 8:17 PM on September 14, 2006
re: Allen Spaulding...
Let me tell you the truth on Fair Trade and Commodities :any "gourmet" coffee/ tea / chocolate you buy that isn't cheap freeze dried, is doing a bunch of farmer's somewhere out there lots of good. (Starbucks has probably helped tens of millions of farmer's worldwide by raising the price of coffee just through increasing US and thus the world demand of decent coffee beans). Buying Fairtrade does a smaller percentage of the world's farmers who are lucky enough to be part of fair trade groups more good.
As for "WTO reform" the most it would help developing countries with these products is by allowing them to sell/ trade processed coffee, tea, and chocolate products. Right now there arn't any tariffs on these raw commodities that would hurt farmers in and of themselves. There are tariffs that keep them from processing and adding value to their tradables, and thus being able to make more money. Trade reform however, = lowering tariffs, you're for that right?
You want to appease your guilty conscience? Buy more coffee and tea and chocolate.
As for the article I always order "Short" when i go to starbucks
posted by stratastar at 8:23 PM on September 14, 2006
Let me tell you the truth on Fair Trade and Commodities :any "gourmet" coffee/ tea / chocolate you buy that isn't cheap freeze dried, is doing a bunch of farmer's somewhere out there lots of good. (Starbucks has probably helped tens of millions of farmer's worldwide by raising the price of coffee just through increasing US and thus the world demand of decent coffee beans). Buying Fairtrade does a smaller percentage of the world's farmers who are lucky enough to be part of fair trade groups more good.
As for "WTO reform" the most it would help developing countries with these products is by allowing them to sell/ trade processed coffee, tea, and chocolate products. Right now there arn't any tariffs on these raw commodities that would hurt farmers in and of themselves. There are tariffs that keep them from processing and adding value to their tradables, and thus being able to make more money. Trade reform however, = lowering tariffs, you're for that right?
You want to appease your guilty conscience? Buy more coffee and tea and chocolate.
As for the article I always order "Short" when i go to starbucks
posted by stratastar at 8:23 PM on September 14, 2006
Personally I don't much care for froth, I'd rather just dribble some dairy product (preferably whole milk but I'll resort to 2%) to my mugful of espresso (or better yet turkish) and stir it in, with a spoon or two of sugar. I do the same with my "regular" coffee. I used to drink it straight black, then black with sugar, then whitened but unsweetened, but then I grew up and began going more by my own taste than by the social semiotics. Real Men put drink their coffee however they damn please.
But I think too much fat and sugar in coffee is a bad thing; for those food groups I prefer chocolate-covered pork chops.
posted by davy at 8:49 PM on September 14, 2006
But I think too much fat and sugar in coffee is a bad thing; for those food groups I prefer chocolate-covered pork chops.
posted by davy at 8:49 PM on September 14, 2006
I have a tough time making froth with whole milk, for some reason, but I'm fairly new to the frothification process.
You don't want to be making froth. What you want is luxurious, silky microfoam.
Aaron DeLazzer's guide at Coffeegeek had me doing it in just a couple of days -- though latte art takes a fair bit longer.
Regarding the whole Fair Trade issue, there are those in the coffee industry who believe that this is a mistake. Those growers who focus their efforts on producing a high quality product can charge a premium for their coffee that is way above the money that the Fair Trade people can add. See, for example, the price per bags being fetched by coffees that are doing well in the various Cup of Excellence competitions.
If Fair Trade coffee simply means that we're paying higher prices for terrible, undrinkable Vietnamese Robusta, then count me out. I regularly spend as much as $40 a kilo on roasted coffee beans, but I don't think I've ever bought Fair Trade certified coffee.
Much as I loathe Reason, here's a pretty good article on the complexities involved in the issue, and another from CoffeeGeek on the coffee crisis.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 9:27 PM on September 14, 2006
You don't want to be making froth. What you want is luxurious, silky microfoam.
Aaron DeLazzer's guide at Coffeegeek had me doing it in just a couple of days -- though latte art takes a fair bit longer.
Regarding the whole Fair Trade issue, there are those in the coffee industry who believe that this is a mistake. Those growers who focus their efforts on producing a high quality product can charge a premium for their coffee that is way above the money that the Fair Trade people can add. See, for example, the price per bags being fetched by coffees that are doing well in the various Cup of Excellence competitions.
If Fair Trade coffee simply means that we're paying higher prices for terrible, undrinkable Vietnamese Robusta, then count me out. I regularly spend as much as $40 a kilo on roasted coffee beans, but I don't think I've ever bought Fair Trade certified coffee.
Much as I loathe Reason, here's a pretty good article on the complexities involved in the issue, and another from CoffeeGeek on the coffee crisis.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 9:27 PM on September 14, 2006
You drink coffee and call yourself men, you gaggle of mincing queens? I just bite the ear off the first stranger I encounter in the morning and throw their weak screaming carcass in the gutter and go on my dickheavy way, invigorated and ready to start the day.
Seriously, how can anyone have one of those Starbucks drinks and not know its got a jillion calories in it? A fucking pint of whipped cream, caramel and milk? No country has ever called for enforced basic science quizzes before being allowed to leave the home like the USA.
I take good coffee black and NYC dishwater coffee with a little milk to smoothe over the thin greasy taste. No sugar, I'm sweet enough.
posted by Divine_Wino at 9:52 PM on September 14, 2006
Seriously, how can anyone have one of those Starbucks drinks and not know its got a jillion calories in it? A fucking pint of whipped cream, caramel and milk? No country has ever called for enforced basic science quizzes before being allowed to leave the home like the USA.
I take good coffee black and NYC dishwater coffee with a little milk to smoothe over the thin greasy taste. No sugar, I'm sweet enough.
posted by Divine_Wino at 9:52 PM on September 14, 2006
PeterMcDermott is right about F.T. not being the only (and possibly not even a good) way to improve prices for coffee growers.
This past Saturday I had a chance to sip COE Hacienda la Esmeralda, which retails for over $50 per pound. I don't think it's FT, but those farmers got any unbelievable price.
posted by turbodog at 10:08 PM on September 14, 2006
This past Saturday I had a chance to sip COE Hacienda la Esmeralda, which retails for over $50 per pound. I don't think it's FT, but those farmers got any unbelievable price.
posted by turbodog at 10:08 PM on September 14, 2006
Also, the ham-fisted editorializing in the tags is lame.
posted by turbodog at 10:09 PM on September 14, 2006
posted by turbodog at 10:09 PM on September 14, 2006
spray-on coffee?
can you use it to cover bald spots?
posted by arialblack at 10:12 PM on September 14, 2006
can you use it to cover bald spots?
posted by arialblack at 10:12 PM on September 14, 2006
The article:
posted by pracowity at 3:35 AM on September 15, 2006
Espesso consists of espresso and an ingredient the company won't divulge, combined in a pressurized canister and left to set for 12 hours. The result is a mousselike, cold solid sprayed right out of the canister.Bleh. Not coffee. Not espresso. Not hot. Not even nameable ingredients. But it could be worse:
Considering Adria's other concoctions at El Bulli, his exclusive restaurant outside Barcelona -- liquid ravioli and frozen parmesan air, among them -- spoonable coffee doesn't seem all that strange.Who the fuck is buying "frozen parmesan air" and what are they getting?
posted by pracowity at 3:35 AM on September 15, 2006
pracowity, sounds better than cold cheesy foot fart, doesn't it?
I disagree with allen-spaulding's we can't do anything, so let's do nothing approach. The 18th century campaign against slave sugar made slavery unacceptable. Only in the 19th century did the political will evolve to legislate against it.
(s., drinking unnamed filter from a plastic cup in some Huron motel, missing his home-roasted Sumatra.)
posted by scruss at 4:25 AM on September 15, 2006
I disagree with allen-spaulding's we can't do anything, so let's do nothing approach. The 18th century campaign against slave sugar made slavery unacceptable. Only in the 19th century did the political will evolve to legislate against it.
(s., drinking unnamed filter from a plastic cup in some Huron motel, missing his home-roasted Sumatra.)
posted by scruss at 4:25 AM on September 15, 2006
> Real men don't drink latte, they drink black coffee.
Ask any hipster. Amaretto Chocolate Caramel Brown Sugar Frappuccino Froth is the new black.
posted by jfuller at 5:32 AM on September 15, 2006
Ask any hipster. Amaretto Chocolate Caramel Brown Sugar Frappuccino Froth is the new black.
posted by jfuller at 5:32 AM on September 15, 2006
Are the corporations fattening us so they can eat us?
Soylent Green is People!!!!
posted by hotmud at 5:53 AM on September 15, 2006
Soylent Green is People!!!!
posted by hotmud at 5:53 AM on September 15, 2006
I just wanted to say that it's really entertaining to sit here and observe grown men debating the merits of skim froth vs. whole milk froth!
posted by echo0720 at 6:21 AM on September 15, 2006
posted by echo0720 at 6:21 AM on September 15, 2006
Ugh, this is why I didn't want to head in this direction.
scruss - you lose on reading comprehension. I'm arguing the opposite, that we can do a lot more than Fair Trade, which is barely a start. The role of consumer movements in reconstituting social conscienciousness is an interesting one, but if you think all the abolitionists did was feel good about themselves for not buying slave sugar, you're wrong. If you're interested in this stuff, you might want to check out Kathy Newman's often overlooked Radio Active, a study of consumer activism in the 50s.
Stratastar - You're creating a strawman about WTO reform. A real development round would give producing countries more policy space to structure both their environmental and labor standards as well as infant-industry protection potential. In fact, tariffs may play an important role in this process, as they have in the development of most signficant industries. Having said that, primary goods are uniquely challenging in this respect and Stiglitz's latest (the aptly named Fair Trade for All) goes through this is a good amount of detail. The role of land reform is probably understated. You are correct, first-world consumers should be paying more for coffee (and if you read my first post, you'd see that I'm advocating this). The difference is that the coffee producing countries should have more of a say in that process.
Come on, attacking Fair Trade from the left is pretty played out and it's not any fun to defend just because I feel like I'm defending Clinton against calls for impeachment. Now compulsory licensing, that's an argument to sink your teeth into.
posted by allen.spaulding at 6:43 AM on September 15, 2006
scruss - you lose on reading comprehension. I'm arguing the opposite, that we can do a lot more than Fair Trade, which is barely a start. The role of consumer movements in reconstituting social conscienciousness is an interesting one, but if you think all the abolitionists did was feel good about themselves for not buying slave sugar, you're wrong. If you're interested in this stuff, you might want to check out Kathy Newman's often overlooked Radio Active, a study of consumer activism in the 50s.
Stratastar - You're creating a strawman about WTO reform. A real development round would give producing countries more policy space to structure both their environmental and labor standards as well as infant-industry protection potential. In fact, tariffs may play an important role in this process, as they have in the development of most signficant industries. Having said that, primary goods are uniquely challenging in this respect and Stiglitz's latest (the aptly named Fair Trade for All) goes through this is a good amount of detail. The role of land reform is probably understated. You are correct, first-world consumers should be paying more for coffee (and if you read my first post, you'd see that I'm advocating this). The difference is that the coffee producing countries should have more of a say in that process.
Come on, attacking Fair Trade from the left is pretty played out and it's not any fun to defend just because I feel like I'm defending Clinton against calls for impeachment. Now compulsory licensing, that's an argument to sink your teeth into.
posted by allen.spaulding at 6:43 AM on September 15, 2006
I've grown tired of the growing paternalism surrounding food that seems to be burgeoning mostly from the left -- in my memory it began with Adbusters begining to talk about "big food" and how it would be the next point of neo-struggle (the last being big tobacco).
In my mind, it's one thing to call a company to task for selling a product like cigarettes where the only "healthy choice" is not to use the product. It's a far different one to criticise a food company for offering unhealthy food -- even if that's all they offer. In the case of the food industry they are very much selling what people want to eat, not what they want people to eat. It is people--not companies--that set the dietary agenda.
The reason is that individuals must take responsibility for what they put in their mouths. I'm overweight myself, and I take total responsibility for the fact that it's due largely to my decision over many years to pick a cheesesteak over a balanced meal, french fries over a baked potato, french onion soup over a mixed green salad, a kaiser roll over toasted whole wheat, etc.
With Starbucks, anyone who walks in and orders a large (excuse me, VENTI, cough cough) Banana Caramel Frappuccino with whipped cream and is surprised that it's high in calories and fat is either an idiot or doesn't care.
Food--like feminism--is all about choices. If an individual continually eschews a balanced diet that is largely limited to be only the food they need to live, there are health consequences in the long term, period. This has always been true, it's just more true now that food is readily available (to the people that can buy Staerbucks coffee anyway).
It's not that I'm against telling the big food companies that they should have more healthy choices -- I think that's awesome. Spurlock's documentary definitely was a good nudge to the fast food industry, and I think they responded very well (notice that most of the Nationals have a decent salad choice now).
I've been really busy in the last month and I've decided to ameliorate my tight schedule with fast food almost every night. But I get a salad and baked potato from Wendy's instead of a cheese burger and fries.
And I've lost over 10 pounds eating almost entirely "fast food."
I should probably think about keeping it up and making a documentary -- I bet Wendy's would pay for it =P
posted by illovich at 6:58 AM on September 15, 2006
In my mind, it's one thing to call a company to task for selling a product like cigarettes where the only "healthy choice" is not to use the product. It's a far different one to criticise a food company for offering unhealthy food -- even if that's all they offer. In the case of the food industry they are very much selling what people want to eat, not what they want people to eat. It is people--not companies--that set the dietary agenda.
The reason is that individuals must take responsibility for what they put in their mouths. I'm overweight myself, and I take total responsibility for the fact that it's due largely to my decision over many years to pick a cheesesteak over a balanced meal, french fries over a baked potato, french onion soup over a mixed green salad, a kaiser roll over toasted whole wheat, etc.
With Starbucks, anyone who walks in and orders a large (excuse me, VENTI, cough cough) Banana Caramel Frappuccino with whipped cream and is surprised that it's high in calories and fat is either an idiot or doesn't care.
Food--like feminism--is all about choices. If an individual continually eschews a balanced diet that is largely limited to be only the food they need to live, there are health consequences in the long term, period. This has always been true, it's just more true now that food is readily available (to the people that can buy Staerbucks coffee anyway).
It's not that I'm against telling the big food companies that they should have more healthy choices -- I think that's awesome. Spurlock's documentary definitely was a good nudge to the fast food industry, and I think they responded very well (notice that most of the Nationals have a decent salad choice now).
I've been really busy in the last month and I've decided to ameliorate my tight schedule with fast food almost every night. But I get a salad and baked potato from Wendy's instead of a cheese burger and fries.
And I've lost over 10 pounds eating almost entirely "fast food."
I should probably think about keeping it up and making a documentary -- I bet Wendy's would pay for it =P
posted by illovich at 6:58 AM on September 15, 2006
Ask any hipster. Amaretto Chocolate Caramel Brown Sugar Frappuccino Froth is the new black.
Meaningless hipster-bashing. Just because you think that something popular is ridiculous doesn't mean that "hipsters" do it.
Besides, everyone knows that hipsters drink their coffee as black and Bukowski-esqe as possible, for that gritty "authentic" image.
posted by hermitosis at 7:12 AM on September 15, 2006
Meaningless hipster-bashing. Just because you think that something popular is ridiculous doesn't mean that "hipsters" do it.
Besides, everyone knows that hipsters drink their coffee as black and Bukowski-esqe as possible, for that gritty "authentic" image.
posted by hermitosis at 7:12 AM on September 15, 2006
Ask any hipster. Amaretto Chocolate Caramel Brown Sugar Frappuccino Froth is the new black.
Meaningless hipster-bashing. Just because you think that something popular is ridiculous doesn't mean that "hipsters" do it.
Besides, everyone knows that hipsters drink their coffee as black and Bukowski-esqe as possible, for that gritty "authentic" image.
posted by hermitosis at 7:12 AM on September 15, 2006
Meaningless hipster-bashing. Just because you think that something popular is ridiculous doesn't mean that "hipsters" do it.
Besides, everyone knows that hipsters drink their coffee as black and Bukowski-esqe as possible, for that gritty "authentic" image.
posted by hermitosis at 7:12 AM on September 15, 2006
Link to Adbusters anti-McDonalds campaign
Looking over their site a bit more, I'm tempted to ask -- no I'm asking it -- what the fuck happened to Adbusters anyway? When I was younger they were fun and provided a great counter-current to consumerism and had a really healthy idealism.
In more recent years I've found them to be increasingly depressing and annoying. I can't get through an issue of their magazine without feeling despair and hopelessness.
And do they even talk about advertising anymore? It seems like they've switched from hating the shallowness of the ads to bashing the consumer -- which seems like a losing strategy to me.
posted by illovich at 7:19 AM on September 15, 2006
Looking over their site a bit more, I'm tempted to ask -- no I'm asking it -- what the fuck happened to Adbusters anyway? When I was younger they were fun and provided a great counter-current to consumerism and had a really healthy idealism.
In more recent years I've found them to be increasingly depressing and annoying. I can't get through an issue of their magazine without feeling despair and hopelessness.
And do they even talk about advertising anymore? It seems like they've switched from hating the shallowness of the ads to bashing the consumer -- which seems like a losing strategy to me.
posted by illovich at 7:19 AM on September 15, 2006
> It seems like they've switched from hating the shallowness of the ads to bashing
> the consumer -- which seems like a losing strategy to me.
It strikes me that a great many outfits, especially on the countercultural, stand-against-the-tide end of things, have moved in the last few years from hating the game to hating the playas.
posted by jfuller at 7:34 AM on September 15, 2006 [1 favorite]
> the consumer -- which seems like a losing strategy to me.
It strikes me that a great many outfits, especially on the countercultural, stand-against-the-tide end of things, have moved in the last few years from hating the game to hating the playas.
posted by jfuller at 7:34 AM on September 15, 2006 [1 favorite]
If you want to be Bukowski-esqe you are drinking beer with for breakfast, not coffee.
posted by caddis at 7:34 AM on September 15, 2006
posted by caddis at 7:34 AM on September 15, 2006
Ferran Adriá is scarily innovative. If you get a chance, watch Anthony Bourdain's Decoding Ferran Adriá. It's the best Food Porn ever.
Watching the curmudgeon just sort of fold when he realizes that, yes, someone's that far ahead of the curve is great fun. There's a geniune love of food present that I just don't see very much, even in a country with The Food Network.
posted by beaucoupkevin at 8:06 AM on September 15, 2006
Watching the curmudgeon just sort of fold when he realizes that, yes, someone's that far ahead of the curve is great fun. There's a geniune love of food present that I just don't see very much, even in a country with The Food Network.
posted by beaucoupkevin at 8:06 AM on September 15, 2006
allen. spaulding: Stratastar - You're creating a strawman about WTO reform.
Sorry, you brought up WTO reform... I wanted to mention that it doesnt really apply to the case. Anyways...
A real development round would give producing countries more policy space to structure both their environmental and labor standards as well as infant-industry protection potential.
Developing countries (governments) don't care about environmental and labor standards. Interests in developed countries (unions, the wage workers, (those that still exist) in competition with developing countries) care about developing country "environmental and labor standards," because its a way of raising costs of doing business in those countries. Now, the reality is that factories in developing countries ("sweat shops" for those who want to bring in negative connotations) exist, and the lives of workers in these factories are going to be drastically different than those in developed countries, and it will continue to be so for a long time. However there are lots of positives from having those jobs. If its not clear, I'd rather have more jobs created in developing countries, than less.
In fact, tariffs may play an important role in this process, as they have in the development of most signficant industries.
This may have been the case with some industries in the past in some countries, (and I am being generous in allowing this...) but unless you can create companies that can compete in the world, and are just as efficient as world class companies elsewhere, they are doomed to fail. Protective tariffs reduce the world-created incentives for efficient companies and industries to succeed.
ANY Policy space created to increase tariffs and protectionism will inevitably HURT THE POOR. Vested interests are best able to take advantage of such "space." Protectionism protects a few people here and there, and hurts more people on average. Liberalization does create losses, but it can also be done right. check out this book
All those countries that are growing well right now, and are reducing poverty? China, India, Brazil? They are not doing it through import-subsitution strategies, you remember that Import-Substitution failed miserably in the 80s right? (snark: Or was it the powers that be that didnt let it succeed? /end snark)
That said i just came across this Oxfam brief of a conference "Alternatives to Neo-liberalism" and its just sad, devoid of ideas, grasping at the wisps of what's left of their ideological viewpoint without the courage to look at what's actually going on in the world.
(now that may have been a bit mean!)
posted by stratastar at 8:24 AM on September 15, 2006
Sorry, you brought up WTO reform... I wanted to mention that it doesnt really apply to the case. Anyways...
A real development round would give producing countries more policy space to structure both their environmental and labor standards as well as infant-industry protection potential.
Developing countries (governments) don't care about environmental and labor standards. Interests in developed countries (unions, the wage workers, (those that still exist) in competition with developing countries) care about developing country "environmental and labor standards," because its a way of raising costs of doing business in those countries. Now, the reality is that factories in developing countries ("sweat shops" for those who want to bring in negative connotations) exist, and the lives of workers in these factories are going to be drastically different than those in developed countries, and it will continue to be so for a long time. However there are lots of positives from having those jobs. If its not clear, I'd rather have more jobs created in developing countries, than less.
In fact, tariffs may play an important role in this process, as they have in the development of most signficant industries.
This may have been the case with some industries in the past in some countries, (and I am being generous in allowing this...) but unless you can create companies that can compete in the world, and are just as efficient as world class companies elsewhere, they are doomed to fail. Protective tariffs reduce the world-created incentives for efficient companies and industries to succeed.
ANY Policy space created to increase tariffs and protectionism will inevitably HURT THE POOR. Vested interests are best able to take advantage of such "space." Protectionism protects a few people here and there, and hurts more people on average. Liberalization does create losses, but it can also be done right. check out this book
All those countries that are growing well right now, and are reducing poverty? China, India, Brazil? They are not doing it through import-subsitution strategies, you remember that Import-Substitution failed miserably in the 80s right? (snark: Or was it the powers that be that didnt let it succeed? /end snark)
That said i just came across this Oxfam brief of a conference "Alternatives to Neo-liberalism" and its just sad, devoid of ideas, grasping at the wisps of what's left of their ideological viewpoint without the courage to look at what's actually going on in the world.
(now that may have been a bit mean!)
posted by stratastar at 8:24 AM on September 15, 2006
All those countries that are growing well right now, and are reducing poverty? China, India, Brazil? They are not doing it through import-subsitution strategies
I said IIP, not ISI. And those three countries are the three furthest from the neoliberal model that you're espousing. Massive subsidization of industry in all of these countries. Check out Embedded Autonomy if you're actually interested in learning about how Brazil and India got there, instead of spouting this watered down Thomas Friedman.
posted by allen.spaulding at 9:43 AM on September 15, 2006
I said IIP, not ISI. And those three countries are the three furthest from the neoliberal model that you're espousing. Massive subsidization of industry in all of these countries. Check out Embedded Autonomy if you're actually interested in learning about how Brazil and India got there, instead of spouting this watered down Thomas Friedman.
posted by allen.spaulding at 9:43 AM on September 15, 2006
Who drinks this frappuccino and latte crap anyway? They deserve all the calories they get.I'll grant you frappuccinos, but a latte is just milk and coffee. Would who say "Who the hell drinks a glass of milk - they deserve all the calories they get."?
I know folks who drink skim milk lattes (no sugar - milk's sweet enough) because they know they won't drink the milk straight, but they want the protein and calcium. Whats with all the latte hatin' in this thread?
posted by Karmakaze at 9:45 AM on September 15, 2006
Are the corporations fattening us so they can eat us?
Soylent Green !!
posted by a3matrix at 11:33 AM on September 15, 2006
Soylent Green !!
posted by a3matrix at 11:33 AM on September 15, 2006
Great post. Coffee is assumed by the masses to be as ordinary as air or water. That it is a drug plant grown in tropical climes and sold for mega-profits to thoroughly addicted users is worth mentioning now and again.
posted by telstar at 12:13 PM on September 15, 2006
posted by telstar at 12:13 PM on September 15, 2006
I love my drug. Coffee makes me happy. It tastes good, it makes my morning better, it helps me work, etc, etc, etc. You all are making it way more confused than it needs to be.
When I make my own latte, I put a little sugar in, and it's tasty. And when I get crazy overengineered Starbucks supersweet coffee drinks, I make sure there's enough caffeine in there that I only have to have one a day. :)
posted by blacklite at 1:02 PM on September 15, 2006
When I make my own latte, I put a little sugar in, and it's tasty. And when I get crazy overengineered Starbucks supersweet coffee drinks, I make sure there's enough caffeine in there that I only have to have one a day. :)
posted by blacklite at 1:02 PM on September 15, 2006
I have a hard time trusting any coffee article that misspells Colombia.
posted by TBoneMcCool at 2:35 PM on September 15, 2006
posted by TBoneMcCool at 2:35 PM on September 15, 2006
I want to make a documentary about that coffee snob site (what is the name of it? Oh yeah, the totally obnoxious Coffeegeek--and I say this as one who dearly loves coffee, as well as lattes, given that the site's owner think you can only have a cafe au lait in France, never mind New Orleans, assholes), and its target audience. And we'll cover the upmarket beer scene and associated websites, and highlight some of the worst gourmet pizza offenders. The title: "Pierre Bourdieu's Impossibly Irksome Class Co-optating Clusterfuck Nightmare."
posted by raysmj at 6:41 PM on September 15, 2006
posted by raysmj at 6:41 PM on September 15, 2006
allen.spaulding, how nice you know what I comprehend better than I do. The slave sugar abolitionists didn't just feel good about themselves. They made slavery unacceptable through their actions. Once that had been achieved, better trade agreements, land reforms, and market regulations followed.
posted by scruss at 12:46 PM on September 16, 2006
posted by scruss at 12:46 PM on September 16, 2006
« Older What we saw | GILG! Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by rikschell at 5:07 PM on September 14, 2006