http://www.recfoodcooking.com/

I am going to blame Christine Dabney for this one...
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

Garlic: the element without which life as we know it would be impossible

"ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
.. .
> http://www.recfoodcooking.com/
>
> I am going to blame Christine Dabney for this one...
> --
> Cheers
> Chatty Cathy
>
> Garlic: the element without which life as we know it would be impossible

Another chapeau! Under the circumstances, I'll take the toque.

Felice

ChattyCathy wrote:
> http://www.recfoodcooking.com/
>
> I am going to blame Christine Dabney for this one...

Why ask if it's eating for one, two, or a dozen?!?!?

Cooking for more than one saves energy/time... but each person eats
their own food... if it's two, what, you each eat half portions?

No wonder so many think they eat well on $40/week... they eat half
portions... they feed their entire family by adding more water to the
stew.

On Dec 21, 10:33�am, "Felice" > wrote:
> "ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
>
> .. .
>
> >http://www.recfoodcooking.com/
>
> > I am going to blame Christine Dabney for this one...
> > --
> > Cheers
> > Chatty Cathy
>
> > Garlic: the element without which life as we know it would be impossible
>
> Another chapeau! Under the circumstances, I'll take the toque.
>
> Felice

And I was thinking I was first... we both voted the same.

SHELDON

Felice wrote:
> "ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
> .. .
>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com/
>>
>> I am going to blame Christine Dabney for this one...
>> --
>> Cheers
>> Chatty Cathy
>>
>> Garlic: the element without which life as we know it would be impossible
>
> Another chapeau! Under the circumstances, I'll take the toque.




--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

Garlic: the element without which life as we know it would be impossible

On Dec 21, 10:43 am, "Michael \"Dog3\"" > wrote:
> ChattyCathy > dropped this news:GYQaj.19330
> : in rec.food.cooking
>
> >http://www.recfoodcooking.com/
>
> > I am going to blame Christine Dabney for this one...
>
> Well hell, I'm the only yes so far.


Sorry to be so late but I wanted somebody to check the waters.

John Kane, Kingston ON Canada

Sheldon wrote:
> ChattyCathy wrote:
>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com/
>>
>> I am going to blame Christine Dabney for this one...
>
> Why ask if it's eating for one, two, or a dozen?!?!?

OK, I'll explain....

If you live alone (as Chris does) one can buy purely what * you* like to
eat - which can be quite a saving in itself... We have 4 people in our
immediate family and, for example, 3 of us like celery and one of us
doesn't, so I buy celery for certain dishes. I hate tofu, but one of the
family members likes it, so I have also been known to buy that... If I
lived alone, tofu would not be on my shopping list - ever... You getting
the picture now??
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

Garlic: the element without which life as we know it would be impossible

ChattyCathy wrote:

> If you live alone (as Chris does) one can buy purely what * you* like to
> eat - which can be quite a saving in itself... We have 4 people in our
> immediate family and, for example, 3 of us like celery and one of us
> doesn't, so I buy celery for certain dishes. I hate tofu, but one of the
> family members likes it, so I have also been known to buy that... If I
> lived alone, tofu would not be on my shopping list - ever... You getting
> the picture now??


If I were on my own I would eat a lot less beef, meat in general, eggs,
bacon, cream and cheese. Since those are among the more expensive things on
our shopping list it would cut the bill a lot.

On Dec 21, 11:37�am, ChattyCathy > wrote:
> Sheldon wrote:
> > ChattyCathy wrote:
> >>http://www.recfoodcooking.com/
>
> >> I am going to blame Christine Dabney for this one...
>
> > Why ask if it's eating for one, two, or a dozen?!?!?
>
> OK, I'll explain....
>
> If you live alone (as Chris does) one can buy purely what * you* like to
> eat - which can be quite a saving in itself...

I don't see how living alone makes any difference, you're still going
to eat the same *quantity*... but you're still locked into the
budget... if you want to eat up your entire budget in one day then you
starve for the rest of the week is all.

> We have 4 people in our
> immediate family and, for example, 3 of us like celery and one of us
> doesn't, so I buy celery for certain dishes. I hate tofu, but one of the
> family members likes it, so I have also been known to buy that... If I
> lived alone, tofu would not be on my shopping list - ever... You getting
> the picture now??

No, not at all. Because if you're tweaking for each then you still
need to apportion within the $40/wk budget... what you're describing
is just more laborious but at the end of the week costs no more or
less monetarily... you still need to stay within your weekly budget
regardless someone doesn't eat celery/tofo, that just means perhaps
more ketchup for those who like ketchup but not celery and more beans
for those who abhor tofu.... the budget is for the week, not the
meal... You getting the picture now??

I think you are ignoring the concept of "budget"... you probably don't
eat on a strict budget.... I really don't think any who we've heard
from do, I think you eat what you want within fairly loose limits...
you don't eat shrimp or steak every day but on those occasions you do
I seriously doubt you eat shrimp/steak on close rations like you
actually count out three bites each.... I'm pretty certain you buy a
quantity so that everyone in your family gets their fill. I'm
positive that if you lived in the US with US money and US prices you
would find it very difficult to eat on a $40/wk budget, especially
since you've already noted how your family members have some food
fusses, you certainly wouldn't be eating well, in fact you'd feel like
your family was quite deprived. Even those on food stamps are alloted
far more than $40/wk per dependant. I think those who are claiming
they eat well on $40/week are full of shit... even were it ten years
ago you could subsist a wee bit better but you'd still not eat very
well.

Sheldon

On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 08:02:09 -0800 (PST), Sheldon >
wrote:

>No wonder so many think they eat well on $40/week... they eat half
>portions... they feed their entire family by adding more water to the
>stew.

Not everyone eats a lot of meat or huge portions of everything.

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smiley face first

Dave Smith wrote:
>
>
> If I were on my own I would eat a lot less beef, meat in general, eggs,
> bacon, cream and cheese. Since those are among the more expensive things on
> our shopping list it would cut the bill a lot.

Exactly.
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

Garlic: the element without which life as we know it would be impossible

On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 09:32:01 -0800 (PST), Sheldon >
wrote:

> I'm
>positive that if you lived in the US with US money and US prices you
>would find it very difficult to eat on a $40/wk budget

$40 is doable. $50 each is a good average of we spend now.

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smiley face first

On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 11:51:50 -0500, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>ChattyCathy wrote:
>
>> If you live alone (as Chris does) one can buy purely what * you* like to
>> eat - which can be quite a saving in itself... We have 4 people in our
>> immediate family and, for example, 3 of us like celery and one of us
>> doesn't, so I buy celery for certain dishes. I hate tofu, but one of the
>> family members likes it, so I have also been known to buy that... If I
>> lived alone, tofu would not be on my shopping list - ever... You getting
>> the picture now??
>
>
>If I were on my own I would eat a lot less beef, meat in general, eggs,
>bacon, cream and cheese. Since those are among the more expensive things on
>our shopping list it would cut the bill a lot.

Meat and fish/shellfish are the worst grocery bill inflators.

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smiley face first

On Dec 21, 1:20�pm, sf wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 09:32:01 -0800 (PST), Sheldon >
> wrote:
>
> > I'm
> >positive that if you lived in the US with US money and US prices you
> >would find it very difficult to eat on a $40/wk budget
>
> $40 is doable. �$50 each is a good average of we spend now.

"Doable" (make do) is NOT eating well... doable is subsistance (barely
eking by).

SHELDON

On Dec 21, 1:21�pm, sf wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 11:51:50 -0500, Dave Smith
>
> > wrote:
> >ChattyCathy wrote:
>
> >> If you live alone (as Chris does) one can buy purely what * you* like to
> >> eat - which can be quite a saving in itself... We have 4 people in our
> >> immediate family and, for example, 3 of us like celery and one of us
> >> doesn't, so I buy celery for certain dishes. I hate tofu, but one of the
> >> family members likes it, so I have also been known to buy that... If I
> >> lived alone, tofu would not be on my shopping list - ever... You getting
> >> the picture now??
>
> >If I were on my own I would eat a lot less beef, meat in general, �eggs,
> >bacon, cream and cheese. Since those are among the more expensive things on
> >our shopping list it would cut the bill a lot.
>
> Meat and fish/shellfish are the worst grocery bill inflators.

Don't you mean the *best* inflators... you have a language problem.

On Dec 21, 11:51�am, Dave Smith > wrote:
> ChattyCathy wrote:
> > If you live alone (as Chris does) one can buy purely what * you* like to
> > eat - which can be quite a saving in itself... We have 4 people in our
> > immediate family and, for example, 3 of us like celery and one of us
> > doesn't, so I buy celery for certain dishes. I hate tofu, but one of the
> > family members likes it, so I have also been known to buy that... If I
> > lived alone, tofu would not be on my shopping list - ever... You getting
> > the picture now??
>
> If I were on my own I would eat a lot less beef, meat in general, �eggs,
> bacon, cream and cheese. Since those are among the more expensive things on
> our shopping list it would cut the bill a lot.

So then you admit you're willing to eat more poorly just to satisfy
eating on a pauper's budget.

Dave Smith wrote:
> ChattyCathy wrote:
> > If you live alone (as Chris does) one can buy purely what * you* like to
> > eat - which can be quite a saving in itself... We have 4 people in our
> > immediate family and, for example, 3 of us like celery and one of us
> > doesn't, so I buy celery for certain dishes. I hate tofu, but one of the
> > family members likes it, so I have also been known to buy that... If I
> > lived alone, tofu would not be on my shopping list - ever... You getting
> > the picture now??
>
> If I were on my own I would eat a lot less beef, meat in general, eggs,
> bacon, cream and cheese. Since those are among the more expensive things on
> our shopping list it would cut the bill a lot.

So then you admit you're willing to eat more poorly just to satisfy
eating on a pauper's budget.


SHELDON

On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 10:36:46 -0800 (PST), Sheldon >
wrote:

>On Dec 21, 1:21?pm, sf wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 11:51:50 -0500, Dave Smith
>>
>> > wrote:
>> >ChattyCathy wrote:
>>
>> >> If you live alone (as Chris does) one can buy purely what * you* like to
>> >> eat - which can be quite a saving in itself... We have 4 people in our
>> >> immediate family and, for example, 3 of us like celery and one of us
>> >> doesn't, so I buy celery for certain dishes. I hate tofu, but one of the
>> >> family members likes it, so I have also been known to buy that... If I
>> >> lived alone, tofu would not be on my shopping list - ever... You getting
>> >> the picture now??
>>
>> >If I were on my own I would eat a lot less beef, meat in general, ?eggs,
>> >bacon, cream and cheese. Since those are among the more expensive things on
>> >our shopping list it would cut the bill a lot.
>>
>> Meat and fish/shellfish are the worst grocery bill inflators.
>
>Don't you mean the *best* inflators... you have a language problem.

It all depends on your POV.

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smiley face first

On Dec 21, 1:05�pm, ChattyCathy > wrote:
> Dave Smith wrote:
>
> > If I were on my own I would eat a lot less beef, meat in general, �eggs,
> > bacon, cream and cheese. Since those are among the more expensive things on
> > our shopping list it would cut the bill a lot.
>
> Exactly.

You would eat on a pauper's budget too... how lucky for you and your
kids you have a supportive hubby.

SHELDON

Sheldon wrote:
> Dave Smith wrote:
>> ChattyCathy wrote:
>>> If you live alone (as Chris does) one can buy purely what * you* like to
>>> eat - which can be quite a saving in itself... We have 4 people in our
>>> immediate family and, for example, 3 of us like celery and one of us
>>> doesn't, so I buy celery for certain dishes. I hate tofu, but one of the
>>> family members likes it, so I have also been known to buy that... If I
>>> lived alone, tofu would not be on my shopping list - ever... You getting
>>> the picture now??
>> If I were on my own I would eat a lot less beef, meat in general, eggs,
>> bacon, cream and cheese. Since those are among the more expensive things on
>> our shopping list it would cut the bill a lot.
>
> So then you admit you're willing to eat more poorly just to satisfy
> eating on a pauper's budget.

Good grief Sheldon, did you take your 'stoopid pills' today?? It's a
case of eating what *you* like, not what costs the most.
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

Garlic: the element without which life as we know it would be impossible

On Dec 21, 1:41�pm, sf wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 10:36:46 -0800 (PST), Sheldon >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Dec 21, 1:21?pm, sf wrote:
> >> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 11:51:50 -0500, Dave Smith
>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >ChattyCathy wrote:
>
> >> >> If you live alone (as Chris does) one can buy purely what * you* like to
> >> >> eat - which can be quite a saving in itself... We have 4 people in our
> >> >> immediate family and, for example, 3 of us like celery and one of us
> >> >> doesn't, so I buy celery for certain dishes. I hate tofu, but one of the
> >> >> family members likes it, so I have also been known to buy that... If I
> >> >> lived alone, tofu would not be on my shopping list - ever... You getting
> >> >> the picture now??
>
> >> >If I were on my own I would eat a lot less beef, meat in general, ?eggs,
> >> >bacon, cream and cheese. Since those are among the more expensive things on
> >> >our shopping list it would cut the bill a lot.
>
> >> Meat and fish/shellfish are the worst grocery bill inflators.
>
> >Don't you mean the *best* inflators... you have a language problem.
>
> It all depends on your POV.

Were those items the "worst" inflators then they'd have the *least*
bearing on ones food budget.

Nope, you definitely have very poor communicative skills, like no
skills at all.

SHELDON

On Dec 21, 9:27�am, ChattyCathy > wrote:
> http://www.recfoodcooking.com/
>
> I am going to blame Christine Dabney for this one...
> --
> Cheers
> Chatty Cathy
>
> Garlic: the element without which life as we know it would be impossible

Well, I said NO, so far I am the only one to admit this, but I know
there are a lot more out there.
Rosie

On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 10:33:51 -0800 (PST), Sheldon >
wrote:

>On Dec 21, 1:20?pm, sf wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 09:32:01 -0800 (PST), Sheldon >
>> wrote:
>>
>> > I'm
>> >positive that if you lived in the US with US money and US prices you
>> >would find it very difficult to eat on a $40/wk budget
>>
>> $40 is doable. $50 each is a good average of what we spend now.
>
>"Doable" (make do) is NOT eating well... doable is subsistance (barely
>eking by).
>

It can be done... doable.
http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=doable

Nobody claimed they would eat lavishly on $40 a week. The question
is... could you "eat well"? I could. Obviously, you can't.

I eat meat every day. If I cut my budget, I would buy less meat and
stretch what I buy. The challenge is doable. Would I want to? No.

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smiley face first

On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 10:49:11 -0800 (PST), Sheldon >
wrote:

>On Dec 21, 1:41?pm, sf wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 10:36:46 -0800 (PST), Sheldon >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Dec 21, 1:21?pm, sf wrote:
>> >> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 11:51:50 -0500, Dave Smith
>>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >ChattyCathy wrote:
>>
>> >> >> If you live alone (as Chris does) one can buy purely what * you* like to
>> >> >> eat - which can be quite a saving in itself... We have 4 people in our
>> >> >> immediate family and, for example, 3 of us like celery and one of us
>> >> >> doesn't, so I buy celery for certain dishes. I hate tofu, but one of the
>> >> >> family members likes it, so I have also been known to buy that... If I
>> >> >> lived alone, tofu would not be on my shopping list - ever... You getting
>> >> >> the picture now??
>>
>> >> >If I were on my own I would eat a lot less beef, meat in general, ?eggs,
>> >> >bacon, cream and cheese. Since those are among the more expensive things on
>> >> >our shopping list it would cut the bill a lot.
>>
>> >> Meat and fish/shellfish are the worst grocery bill inflators.
>>
>> >Don't you mean the *best* inflators... you have a language problem.
>>
>> It all depends on your POV.
>
>Were those items the "worst" inflators then they'd have the *least*
>bearing on ones food budget.
>
>Nope, you definitely have very poor communicative skills, like no
>skills at all.
>

You're babbling


--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smiley face first

Sheldon wrote:
> On Dec 21, 1:05�pm, ChattyCathy > wrote:
>> Dave Smith wrote:
>>
>>> If I were on my own I would eat a lot less beef, meat in general, �eggs,
>>> bacon, cream and cheese. Since those are among the more expensive things on
>>> our shopping list it would cut the bill a lot.
>> Exactly.
>
> You would eat on a pauper's budget too... how lucky for you and your
> kids you have a supportive hubby.

I... will... resist...

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

Garlic: the element without which life as we know it would be impossible

"rosie" > wrote in message
...
On Dec 21, 9:27?am, ChattyCathy > wrote:
> http://www.recfoodcooking.com/
>
> I am going to blame Christine Dabney for this one...
> --
> Cheers
> Chatty Cathy
>
> Garlic: the element without which life as we know it would be impossible

Well, I said NO, so far I am the only one to admit this, but I know
there are a lot more out there.
Rosie



I just voted, No." The key word to me is "eat well."
Not when I can only find fruit at near $1 for an orange, here in 'these
parts."
Actually I try to accomplish most of the time getting 5-7 veg/fruits a day,
so I would have to say, no.

Dee Dee

On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 09:56:12 -0800, sf wrote:

>On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 08:02:09 -0800 (PST), Sheldon >
>wrote:
>
>>No wonder so many think they eat well on $40/week... they eat half
>>portions... they feed their entire family by adding more water to the
>>stew.
>
>Not everyone eats a lot of meat or huge portions of everything.

And a lot of folks know how to cook things that stretch the amount of
food we buy, instead of roasts all the time, or starting from scratch
every day.

I made a big pot of turkey gumbo last night, made with the remains of
the Thanksgiving turkey, and the turkey broth made with the carcass. I
am taking part of it to work with me for the next few nights. I had
all the ingredients right there, so didn't go out to buy additional
ingredients for it.

I also was craving more of the ribs and kraut that I had made a few
weeks ago. I did buy some sauerkraut, but I already had the country
style ribs that I got on sale for $0.97/pound a few months ago. That
made a big pot as well.. I have pizza dough in the fridge, ready to
go, if I want a pizza. I have salad makings, of which I will take
some to work with me tonight for a side salad with my gumbo. I am not
sure if I am going to fix rice yet....

I don't call this subsistence eating...

Christine

Christine Dabney wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 09:56:12 -0800, sf wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 08:02:09 -0800 (PST), Sheldon >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> No wonder so many think they eat well on $40/week... they eat half
>>> portions... they feed their entire family by adding more water to
>>> the stew.
>>
>> Not everyone eats a lot of meat or huge portions of everything.
>
> And a lot of folks know how to cook things that stretch the amount of
> food we buy, instead of roasts all the time, or starting from scratch
> every day.
>
> I made a big pot of turkey gumbo last night, made with the remains of
> the Thanksgiving turkey, and the turkey broth made with the carcass. I
> am taking part of it to work with me for the next few nights. I had
> all the ingredients right there, so didn't go out to buy additional
> ingredients for it.
>
> I also was craving more of the ribs and kraut that I had made a few
> weeks ago. I did buy some sauerkraut, but I already had the country
> style ribs that I got on sale for $0.97/pound a few months ago. That
> made a big pot as well.. I have pizza dough in the fridge, ready to
> go, if I want a pizza. I have salad makings, of which I will take
> some to work with me tonight for a side salad with my gumbo. I am not
> sure if I am going to fix rice yet....
>
> I don't call this subsistence eating...

LOL nor do I) I have never heard before of someone watering down the
stew. I can't imagine the kind of mean person who would dream that up!!

On Dec 21, 11:02 am, Sheldon > wrote:
> ChattyCathy wrote:
> >http://www.recfoodcooking.com/
>
> > I am going to blame Christine Dabney for this one...
>
> Why ask if it's eating for one, two, or a dozen?!?!?
>
> Cooking for more than one saves energy/time... but each person eats
> their own food... if it's two, what, you each eat half portions?
>
> No wonder so many think they eat well on $40/week... they eat half
> portions... they feed their entire family by adding more water to the
> stew.

If I buy a single portion of food, it costs more than if I purchase
larger sizes or in quantity. The difference between one and two isn't
that great, but when you add a family, it does make a difference in
purchasing.

And think of how cheap it is if you're buying for a platoon!

maxine in ri

Christine Dabney wrote:
> sf wrote:
> >Sheldon wrote:
>
> >>No wonder so many think they eat well on $40/week... they eat half
> >>portions... they feed their entire family by adding more water to the
> >>stew.
>
> >Not everyone eats a lot of meat or huge portions of everything.
>
> And a lot of folks know how to cook things that stretch the amount of
> food we buy, instead of roasts all the time, or starting from scratch
> every day.
>
> I made a big pot of turkey gumbo last night, made with the remains of
> the Thanksgiving turkey, and the turkey broth made with the carcass. I
> am taking part of it to work with me for the next few nights. �I had
> all the ingredients right there, so didn't go out to buy additional
> ingredients for it.
>
> I don't call this subsistence eating...

Very funny.... You don't say how much left over turkey went into
the dish... could have been 1/4 the turkey which would be
substantial. If all you had was the picked over carcass then that
would be subsistence eating... could always stretch the broth with
more water and salt, could even add a handful of cheapo rice. But
just because you had the additional ingredients on hand doesn't mean
they are free. HaHa, Vewy Funny... unless you stole them. Sheesh but
yoose kishka gelters sure think you're schlick. It's what I
previously said, if you deplete your pantry you can go awhile without
spending but eventually you will have to spend a bunch of money all at
once. So how many times are you going to dunk that carcass? hehe

Gumbo is essentially a depression mentality dish anyway... even with
little meat make it thick enough with plenty of browned flour and
served over plenty cheapo rice it will fill a lot of bellies for very
little money... gumbo is essentially highly seasoned starch and fat,
filling and tasty but not at all a nutritious dish, definitely
subsistance food about as nutritious as subsisting on potato chips
only cheaper.

SHELDON

On Dec 21, 1:33 pm, Sheldon > wrote:
> On Dec 21, 1:20�pm, sf wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 09:32:01 -0800 (PST), Sheldon >
> > wrote:
>
> > > I'm
> > >positive that if you lived in the US with US money and US prices you
> > >would find it very difficult to eat on a $40/wk budget
>
> > $40 is doable. �$50 each is a good average of we spend now.
>
> "Doable" (make do) is NOT eating well... doable is subsistance (barely
> eking by).
>
> SHELDON

What do you mean by "eating well"? We may be talking about two
separate concepts. To me, eating well is eating nutritious, healthy
meals that taste good and satisfy . Perhaps you consider "eating
well" to include the finer things that tend to cost more? In that
case, you're right. It wouldn't cover enough food to suffice for a
week.

On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 13:56:22 -0800 (PST), Sheldon >
wrote:

>Very funny.... You don't say how much left over turkey went into
>the dish... could have been 1/4 the turkey which would be
>substantial.
I think I had about 6-8 cups of turkey meat..both light and dark. This
was from a 20 pound turkey. I used the trinity (green peppers,
onions, celery) in the gumbo. I had a pound of Andouille, which I had
bought for about $5 earlier in the month.


>Gumbo is essentially a depression mentality dish anyway... even with
>little meat make it thick enough with plenty of browned flour and
>served over plenty cheapo rice it will fill a lot of bellies for very
>little money... gumbo is essentially highly seasoned starch and fat,
>filling and tasty but not at all a nutritious dish, definitely
>subsistance food about as nutritious as subsisting on potato chips
>only cheaper.

I guess you haven't had a great gumbo then..

This is the recipe I used. The instructions for the turkey meat are
at the end. I used more turkey, than I would have used chicken.

http://recipes.egullet.org/recipes/r772.html

Christine

maxine in ri wrote:
> Sheldon wrote:
> > ChattyCathy wrote:
> > >http://www.recfoodcooking.com/
>
> > > I am going to blame Christine Dabney for this one...
>
> > Why ask if it's eating for one, two, or a dozen?!?!?
>
> > Cooking for more than one saves energy/time... but each person eats
> > their own food... if it's two, what, you each eat half portions?
>
> > No wonder so many think they eat well on $40/week... they eat half
> > portions... they feed their entire family by adding more water to the
> > stew.
>
> If I buy a single portion of food, it costs more than if I purchase
> larger sizes or in quantity. �The difference between one and two isn't
> that great, but when you add a family, it does make a difference in
> purchasing.

That's not true, you're assuming single people don't know how to shop/
cook... that's very big-oted of you. I probably buy in greater
quantity than most families and my staples pantry happens to be large
enough to feed a platoon, and I only cook in quantity, whenever I cook
it's enough in case a military troop transport arrives in my yard. I
shop in quantity all the time, just this week I stopped into Sam's
Club, dropped close to $300 on all sorts of party foods, large
cheeses, whole salamis, hams, all kinds of chips, and of course a few
36 can packs of Fancy Feast, cases of evap, plus more items. So what
you're saying is you feed your family for less than it costs me to
open three can's of Fancy Feast. You're silly.

I'm positive that I cook in larger amounts all the time than 99pct of
all rfc'ers... that's what freezers are for, cooked foods.

SHELDON

Sheldon wrote:
>
> > If you live alone (as Chris does) one can buy purely what * you* like to
> > eat - which can be quite a saving in itself...
>
> I don't see how living alone makes any difference, you're still going
> to eat the same *quantity*... but you're still locked into the
> budget... if you want to eat up your entire budget in one day then you
> starve for the rest of the week is all.


In my case, my wife has expensive taste in food. She used a lot of cream,
butter and cheese. Eggs aren't expensive, but while I eat maybe one per
week and the odd one in cooking, she eats at least 1 dozen and a half per
week. She eats a lot more meat than I do and she likes beef and pork. If
I were on my own, I would be using maybe 1/3 as much meat, and it would be
more likely to be chicken than beef.


> No, not at all. Because if you're tweaking for each then you still
> need to apportion within the $40/wk budget... what you're describing
> is just more laborious but at the end of the week costs no more or

I am spending about $100-120 per week for two of us without scrimping. I
could probably do it on $40 if I had to. My breakfasts are keep. I eat a
bowl of oatmeal with a little bit of milk and a little demererra sugar. A
kilo bag of oatmeal costs less than a box of cereal and lasts at least
three weeks.

On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 14:22:05 -0800 (PST), Sheldon >
wrote:

>That's not true, you're assuming single people don't know how to shop/
>cook... that's very big-oted of you. I probably buy in greater
>quantity than most families and my staples pantry happens to be large
>enough to feed a platoon, and I only cook in quantity, whenever I cook
>it's enough in case a military troop transport arrives in my yard.

Man, they got you on some good drugs!!!

Lou

Christine Dabney wrote:
> Sheldon wrote:
>
> >Very funny.... �You don't say how much left over turkey went into
> >the dish... could have been 1/4 the turkey which would be
> >substantial.
>
> I think I had about 6-8 cups of turkey meat..both light and dark. This
> was from a 20 pound turkey. �I used the trinity (green peppers,
> onions, celery) in the gumbo. �I had a pound of Andouille, which I had
> bought for about $5 earlier in the month.
>
> >Gumbo is essentially a depression mentality dish anyway... even with
> >little meat make it thick enough with plenty of browned flour and
> >served over plenty cheapo rice it will fill a lot of bellies for very
> >little money... gumbo is essentially highly seasoned starch and fat,
> >filling and tasty but not at all a nutritious dish, definitely
> >subsistance food about as nutritious as subsisting on potato chips
> >only cheaper.
>
> I guess you haven't had a great gumbo then..
>
> This is the recipe I used. �The instructions for the turkey meat are
> at the end. �I used more turkey, than I would have used chicken. �
>
> http://recipes.egullet.org/recipes/r772.html

There is nothing healthful/nutritious about that dish, it's mostly
starch and fat calories... what little veggies it contains are cooked
to death from square one, really only for flavoring... and of course
that dish is salty as heck, part of what makes it tasty. Gumbo is
eating gooood, not eating well. No matter what recipe, gumbo is a
poverty dish... that cup of flour stretches a little meat a looooong
way.

If you serve that kind of food as a steady diet your family would all
be morbidly obesse.

SHELDON

On Dec 21, 5:31�pm, Lou Decruss > wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 14:22:05 -0800 (PST), Sheldon >
> wrote:
>
> >That's not true, you're assuming single people don't know how to shop/
> >cook... that's very big-oted of you. �I probably buy in greater
> >quantity than most families and my staples pantry happens to be large
> >enough to feed a platoon, and I only cook in quantity, whenever I cook
> >it's enough in case a military troop transport arrives in my yard.
>
> Man, they got you on some good drugs!!! �
>
> Lou

That's your post... they got you on a frontal lobotomy... you've no IQ
whatsoever.

On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 14:41:18 -0800 (PST), Sheldon >
wrote:

>On Dec 21, 5:31?pm, Lou Decruss > wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 14:22:05 -0800 (PST), Sheldon >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >That's not true, you're assuming single people don't know how to shop/
>> >cook... that's very big-oted of you. ?I probably buy in greater
>> >quantity than most families and my staples pantry happens to be large
>> >enough to feed a platoon, and I only cook in quantity, whenever I cook
>> >it's enough in case a military troop transport arrives in my yard.
>>
>> Man, they got you on some good drugs!!! ?
>>
>> Lou
>
>That's your post... they got you on a frontal lobotomy... you've no IQ
>whatsoever.

Yup. I was right.

Lou

On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 14:37:13 -0800 (PST), Sheldon >
wrote:

>There is nothing healthful/nutritious about that dish, it's mostly
>starch and fat calories... what little veggies it contains are cooked
>to death from square one, really only for flavoring... and of course
>that dish is salty as heck, part of what makes it tasty. Gumbo is
>eating gooood, not eating well. No matter what recipe, gumbo is a
>poverty dish... that cup of flour stretches a little meat a looooong
>way.
>
>If you serve that kind of food as a steady diet your family would all
>be morbidly obesse.
>
>SHELDON

I make this about once a year. And I don't eat huge portions of it at
any given time as some people seem to do, as it is very rich. Maybe a
cup at a time. And that is not all of my meal, it is just part. I
usually have a green salad on the side, and a piece of fruit. I don't
always have rice with it, as it is pretty filling on it's own, and I
don't need the extra carbohydrates.

Christine

On Dec 21, 4:56Â*pm, maxine in ri > wrote:
> On Dec 21, 1:33 pm, Sheldon > wrote:
>
> > On Dec 21, 1:20�pm, sf wrote:
>
> > > On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 09:32:01 -0800 (PST), Sheldon >
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > I'm
> > > >positive that if you lived in the US with US money and US prices you
> > > >would find it very difficult to eat on a $40/wk budget
>
> > > $40 is doable. �$50 each is a good average of we spend now.
>
> > "Doable" (make do) is NOT eating well... doable is subsistance (barely
> > eking by).
>
> > SHELDON
>
> What do you mean by "eating well"? Â*We may be talking about two
> separate concepts. Â*To me, eating well is eating nutritious, healthy
> meals that taste good and satisfy . Â*

There's the difference right there... you eat "healhty" foods, I eat
*healthful* foods. Nutritious and healthy is an oxymoron.

Anyway I don't eat fancy schmancy foods, I eat ordinary but I choose
high quality... I don't eat from the used food bin, nor do I look to
stretch my food dollar with high caloric low nutrition dishes, like
gumbo. Gumbo is a perfect example of your "healthy" food (healthy as
in zoftig, tastes good but not good for you), but is extremely low on
the *healthful*/nutritious scale.