On Fri 09 Sep 2005 01:16:17p, Bob Myers wrote in rec.food.cooking:

>
> "Wayne Boatwright" > wrote in message
> ...
>> > It's like "BBQ" in Wisconsin, for the Cheezeheads up there it consists
>> > of Sloppy Joes, most often the sauce used comes straight out of the
>> > Manwich can...
>> >
>>
>> OMG! That's not BBQ?
>
> Sigh...the only cure for such abject ignorance is to haul thyself
> immediately to Hot Springs, Arkansas (yes, the boyhood
> home of our 42nd President), go to McClard's, and partake
> of the Holy Sacraments...:-)
>
> (There are probably somewhat lesser establishments which
> might also fill the bill - no pun intended..:-) - but this appeared
> to be a severe case...)
>
> Bob M.

lol! Luckily I've had barbeque in Arkansas, albeit when I was just a kid,
but I still remember how great it was.

--
Wayne Boatwright *¿*
____________________________________________

Okay, okay, I take it back! UnScrew you!

wrote:

> What foods do you guys know of that aren't as good as they used to be?
> Here's the ones I know.
>
> 1. Salmon. They have farm raised salmon which is inferior to
> wild-caught salmon because the farm salmon lacks omega 3 fatty acids,
> which are important for many human physiological functions, including
> the creation of more serotonin, which helps fight depression.
>
> 2. Coffee. I heard that the average coffee is lower quality than it
> used to be, because at some time, maybe in the 70's, there was a coffee
> shortage, which resulted in lower coffee quality. And ever since then,
> Americans have become accustomed to drinking lower quality coffee.
> (However, I'm sure high quality coffee is still available if you look
> for it)
>
> 3. Meat - Americans used to eat a lot of wild meat 100 or more years
> ago. Once again, it had omega 3 fatty acids, which farm raised meats
> lack. (By the way, I take fish oil pills which have the omega 3 acids).
>
Tuna (canned)--frequently with additives

Mayo (Hellman's)--now watery

Lamb--seems to be less "lamby"--probably dumbed down to appeal
to those who don't like lamb

Pork--tough (I gather in the name of leanness)

Strawberries--big, but dry and tasteless (unless you are lucky)

Tomatoes--tasteless (unless you are lucky)

Everything that has high-fructose corn syrup in it.

Everything that contains partially hydrogenated oil.

--
Jean B.

Nancy Young wrote:

> You know, that really makes me mad. I find a food
> product I really like, I am the picture of brand loyalty.
> All of a sudden, out of the blue, it's different, and you
> see the brand was sold. Buy a good product with the
> goal in mind, as you said, to count on people still
> buying it, except don't bother making it the same
> quality. Obviously they think we won't notice.
>
> nancy
>
I hate that! Don't they understand that if a product is
successful, that it has to do with the quality? Even more
galling is when they tell us it has improved, when the exact
opposite has happened.



--
Jean B.

Nancy Young wrote:
>
> As I recall, they moved the Hellmann's production to the Best factories,
> swearing up and down the recipe wouldn't change. Yes, it did. That
> was a few years ago. It's not even as thick as it used to be.
>
> nancy
>
>
I think it has changed a couple of times. The first time,
oddly, the stuff in the squeeze bottle seemed to be the same
while the stuff if the jar was different. More recently, it
changed again (according to my reading of the labels too), and
it just seems watery to me. The flavor is okay though, esp.
when compared with other brands.

--
Jean B.

Faux_Pseudo wrote:

> _.-In rec.food.cooking, Wayne Boatwright wrote the following -._
>
>>On Tue 06 Sep 2005 02:02:02p, Lisa Smith wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>>
>>
>>>Hellmann's mayo just does not taste the same to me anymore. Used to be
>>>delightfully eggy, salty and now it tastes a bit too sweet. It's still much
>>>better than the abomination that is Miracle Whip. But it's just not the
>>>same.
>>>
>>>Lisa aka Pagemaster
>>
>>I wonder if that's a regional thing? In the west we have Best Foods mayo,
>>but the same company as Hellmann's. I don't notice any difference.
>
>
> My mother told me that they are the same product. Hallmann's was on
> the east cost they did fine but the PHB's thought that it sounded too
> ethnic (Jewish) for sale on the west coast so they changed the name to
> avoid that.
>
> Personally I prefer either organic mayo or the McCormick's Mayonasa
> (sp?) which is a mexican style mayo with a touch of lime. Goes really
> good on chips (french fries).
>
I wish I could find the Mayonasa (sp). I never even found the
Hellman's with lime. Do they even still make it? And I guess
French's discontinued its chipotle mayo, although it is easy
enough to make chipotle mayo oneself.

--
Jean B.

David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus) wrote:
>
> One thing that you have to remeber is that as we age our toungs loose
> sensitivity. So food tends not to taste as good as time goes by.
>
Don't SAY that! <g>

--
Jean B.

sd wrote:

> In article >,
> (Alex Rast) wrote:
>
>
>>Grapes. No grapes today are worth even looking at. The invention of
>>seedless grapes is the worst violence ever inflicted upon an innocent
>>fruit. And they've shoved out of even local farmers' markets the really
>>good grapes. Everything you find are large, insipid waterbags.
>
>
> I've given up on grapes as merely packaged sugar water.

Well, you can get Concord grapes and various other kinds. I
never did care for the seedless ones that are ubiquitous.
>

> At the co-op the other day, I found some locally-grown grapes
> similar to Concords, called Hoeft grapes (IIRC). Small, seeded, but
> they actually taste like grapes. Let's see if they ever show up
> again.

[snip]

Sounds worth looking for. My daughter especially likes grapes.
--
Jean B.

Bob Myers wrote:

> "Wayne Boatwright" > wrote:
>>Not sure where you live in the West, Bob, but here in the Phoenix area
> some
>>of our supermarkets have fresh made tortilla chips most of the day.
>>They're excellent.
>
>
> Same here (northern Colorado); picking up fresh-made
> corn or flour tortillas from local, family-run shops is
> a big plus, too!
>
> I tried once to get ingredients for a Tex-Mex meal I
> was TRYING to make for some friends I was staying
> with on the East Coast (Boston area). Pitiful....:-)
>
> Bob M.
>
>
When was this? What did you try to get?

--
Jean B.

On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 22:34:34 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:

>sd wrote:
>
>> In article >,
>> (Alex Rast) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Grapes. No grapes today are worth even looking at. The invention of
>>>seedless grapes is the worst violence ever inflicted upon an innocent
>>>fruit. And they've shoved out of even local farmers' markets the really
>>>good grapes. Everything you find are large, insipid waterbags.
>>
>>
and apples and kiwifruit.

There's a fairly recent variety of apple in NZ, called Pacific Rose.
It's rosy, and very crisp and fresh tasting, but it has no flavour.
The producers go for looks, rather than taste. And another thing that
bugs me is new season apples are put into storage for next year, while
we have to make do in shops with last season's cold storage apples.
The best are exported, unless you buy from the growers' door.

Don't get me on the subject of exports. Where the best of our produce
is exported and not available to locals!

As for kiwifruit, which Americans call kiwis, NZ made a fatal mistake
when we did not protect the copyright to the fruit so that now it's
grown in many places. So now the industry has developed a new variety
called Gold, a yellow kiwifruit that is a protected brand. They're
trying to plug it as a better fruit but to my taste it isn't. It's
too sweet. I like the tarter green fruit. However, Americans seem to
like a sweeter taste, from what I've seen, so maybe you will like
Gold.

"Kathy in NZ" > wrote

> So now the industry has developed a new variety
> called Gold, a yellow kiwifruit that is a protected brand. They're
> trying to plug it as a better fruit but to my taste it isn't. It's
> too sweet. I like the tarter green fruit. However, Americans seem to
> like a sweeter taste, from what I've seen, so maybe you will like
> Gold.

Ugh, right up there with the now ubiquitous Golden Pineapple.
So much for pineapples, it was fun while it lasted.

nancy

COUNTRY TIME Lemonade Mix.

When it first came out in the 70's,
it tasted so real, it blew away the competition.

Now, it tastes like Lemon Kool Ade.
( and thats not saying much )


<rj>

<RJ> wrote:
> COUNTRY TIME Lemonade Mix.
>
> When it first came out in the 70's,
> it tasted so real, it blew away the competition.
>
> Now, it tastes like Lemon Kool Ade.
> ( and thats not saying much )

Thirty five years ago your ability to taste was at least 1000% better
than it is today... generally the ability to taste sour is the first to
go, then salt, then sweet, then bitter... which is why as people age
they begin to use more and more salt and sugar, to also overwhelm their
ability to better perceive bitterness. Many elderly stop eating
because everything tastes bitter and at the same time their ability to
smell diminishes greatly. Whenever you see middle aged folks in the
media as professional food, wine, and coffee tasters it's 100% BS, it's
a biological impossiblity for folks over thirty to percieve the minute
nuances of taste and smell... anyone over 40 buying $50 bottles of wine
is a fool, when you see them swirling and sniffing it's an act... if
that wine was clandestinely switched for box wine they'd continue
swirling, sniffing, and proclaiming its virtues precisely the same.
When humans are born they have more taste buds than they will ever
have, newborn's taste buds are present all the way down the throat to
the esophagus. By the time a human is one year old they've lost more
than half their taste buds and will lose half again every year of their
lives... which is why the more foods a young child is introduced to the
less they'll be averse to those particular foods as adults. RJ, that
lemonade mix tastes the same (if anything it's probably improved),
you've simply become an old fart, admit it.

Sheldon

On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 18:36:33 GMT, "Bob Myers"
> wrote:

>I'm originally from Indiana, myself - which is a place I always
>refer to as "that state where 'chili' is a dish which MUST
>contain macaroni..." :-)

I lived in Indiana for a total of 16 years and it is the last place I
can recall having eaten white corn or tomatoes that actually had
flavor and, in the case of the corn, wasn't mealy.

I will never understand why, here in California, a state that prides
itself on its agriculture, the fruits and vegetables are so tasteless
and the texture often unpleasant - avocados excluded, but citrus
definitely *included*.

Terry "Squeaks" Pulliam Burd
AAC(F)BV66.0748.CA

"If the soup had been as hot as the claret, if the claret had been as
old as the bird, and if the bird's breasts had been as full as the
waitress's, it would have been a very good dinner."

-- Duncan Hines

To reply, replace "spaminator" with "cox"

You're quite right !

and so we'll add;

Things that don't taste as good as they used to;
<RJ>'s taste buds ! ( sigh )


On 10 Sep 2005 06:38:34 -0700, "Sheldon" > wrote:

>
><RJ> wrote:
>> COUNTRY TIME Lemonade Mix.
>>
>> When it first came out in the 70's,
>> it tasted so real, it blew away the competition.
>>
>> Now, it tastes like Lemon Kool Ade.
>> ( and thats not saying much )
>
>Thirty five years ago your ability to taste was at least 1000% better
>than it is today... generally the ability to taste sour is the first to
>go, then salt, then sweet, then bitter... which is why as people age
>they begin to use more and more salt and sugar, to also overwhelm their
>ability to better perceive bitterness. Many elderly stop eating
>because everything tastes bitter and at the same time their ability to
>smell diminishes greatly. Whenever you see middle aged folks in the
>media as professional food, wine, and coffee tasters it's 100% BS, it's
>a biological impossiblity for folks over thirty to percieve the minute
>nuances of taste and smell... anyone over 40 buying $50 bottles of wine
>is a fool, when you see them swirling and sniffing it's an act... if
>that wine was clandestinely switched for box wine they'd continue
>swirling, sniffing, and proclaiming its virtues precisely the same.
>When humans are born they have more taste buds than they will ever
>have, newborn's taste buds are present all the way down the throat to
>the esophagus. By the time a human is one year old they've lost more
>than half their taste buds and will lose half again every year of their
>lives... which is why the more foods a young child is introduced to the
>less they'll be averse to those particular foods as adults. RJ, that
>lemonade mix tastes the same (if anything it's probably improved),
>you've simply become an old fart, admit it.
>
>Sheldon

<rj>

Debbie wrote:
> "Wayne Boatwright" > wrote in message
> ...
> | On Mon 05 Sep 2005 07:59:37a, Debbie wrote in rec.food.cooking:
> |
> |
> | > And of course we now have all the convenience foods that have been
> | > canned to make prep faster. Not to mention food combinations that just
> | > need 1 thing added to complete the meal.
> |
> | Yep, we need to add "food" to make those work! :-)
> |
> And not even good "food"! :-) There are some though that have the fixings
> in the box. I came across them last winter. The box contains a can of
> stew.. chicken, beef and a turkey variety too I think. In addition to this
> can is a package of biscuit mix. The cost was about twice it would be to
> buy a can of stew and the biscuit mix separately (not to mention the biscuit
> mix would do for more than 1 can of stew). People were buying them up
> making comments about what a good idea they were.
>
> Debbie

Reminds of that Banquet "Desert in a box" I purchased which was for
apple crisp, and when I opened it to make it I found it consisted of a
can of apple pie filling and a brown sugar topping packet. It was
terrible.

On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 20:16:17 GMT, I needed a babel fish to understand
"Bob Myers" > :

>
>"Wayne Boatwright" > wrote in message
.. .
>> > It's like "BBQ" in Wisconsin, for the Cheezeheads up there it consists
>of
>> > Sloppy Joes, most often the sauce used comes straight out of the Manwich
>> > can...
>> >
>>
>> OMG! That's not BBQ?
>
>Sigh...the only cure for such abject ignorance is to haul thyself
>immediately to Hot Springs, Arkansas (yes, the boyhood
>home of our 42nd President), go to McClard's, and partake
>of the Holy Sacraments...:-)
>
>(There are probably somewhat lesser establishments which
>might also fill the bill - no pun intended..:-) - but this appeared
>to be a severe case...)
>
>Bob M.
>
Though the trip might be fun... Nothing like Stoking up the fire,
putting on a log or two of Hickory or Oak... and smoking a Brisket for
10 - 12 hours while consuming ample amounts of alcohol.

Now that's BBQ.
----------------------------------------
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is
indistinguishable from magic."
- Arthur C. Clarke

On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 22:23:24 -0400, I needed a babel fish to
understand "Jean B." > :

>Nancy Young wrote:
>
>> You know, that really makes me mad. I find a food
>> product I really like, I am the picture of brand loyalty.
>> All of a sudden, out of the blue, it's different, and you
>> see the brand was sold. Buy a good product with the
>> goal in mind, as you said, to count on people still
>> buying it, except don't bother making it the same
>> quality. Obviously they think we won't notice.
>>
>> nancy
>>
>I hate that! Don't they understand that if a product is
>successful, that it has to do with the quality? Even more
>galling is when they tell us it has improved, when the exact
>opposite has happened.

Its not a specific product.. But I have found Oranges are not what
they used to be. I don't ever recall when I was a child where I ate
an orange and it wasn't sweet and juicy...
I cant even find one now that's sweet and juicy.... almost feels
like its gunna suck the saliva out of my mouth.
----------------------------------------
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is
indistinguishable from magic."
- Arthur C. Clarke

jmcquown wrote:
> sd wrote:
>
>>In article >,
>> (Alex Rast) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Grapes. No grapes today are worth even looking at. The invention of
>>>seedless grapes is the worst violence ever inflicted upon an innocent
>>>fruit. And they've shoved out of even local farmers' markets the
>>>really good grapes. Everything you find are large, insipid waterbags.
>>
>>I've given up on grapes as merely packaged sugar water.
>>
>>
>>>And
>>>Washington is a big grape state - there's no excuse for that here,
>>>as there might be for, say, Minnesota. The move to Zante grapes for
>>>currants and to Thompson grapes for raisins has had disastrous
>>>effects on the qualities of these baking staples.
>>
>>At the co-op the other day, I found some locally-grown grapes
>>similar to Concords, called Hoeft grapes (IIRC). Small, seeded, but
>>they actually taste like grapes. Let's see if they ever show up
>>again.
>>
>>
>>>Speaking of Minnesota - wild rice. There *are* sources, but you
>>>generally have to mail order. Real *wild* rice is unobtainable not
>>>only in supermarkets, but even in specialty stores. Paddy "wild"
>>>rice is a completely different thing, so much worse than the real
>>>deal that the still-high price you pay for it is a total ripoff. The
>>>paddy stuff is invariably tough and tasteless.
>>
>>Fortunately for us Meeneesohtans, real wild rice (harvested by
>>Indians) is available at the better grocery stores. You're right,
>>though -- there is no comparison between the slender brown wild rice
>>harvested by hand and the cheap fat black grains most usually sold
>>as "wild rice."
>>
>>I hope Barb chimes in on this; IIRC she has a source for wild rice
>>here in the Twin Cities metro area (?) that's supposed to be the
>>real deal and not terribly expensive, and they ship by mail. I know
>>she's posted about it before, but I can't find the note in my files.
>>
>>sd
>
>
> She sent me some once - delicious! Gosh I wish I could remember the name of
> it, Steve. I can picture the label in my mind but can't make out the words
>
>
> Jill
>
>
You all don't have to be a Native American to harvest wild rice in
Minnesota. And if you are a purist insist on "hand parched" instead of
"machine parched".

del

--
Del Cecchi
"This post is my own and doesn’t necessarily represent IBM’s positions,
strategies or opinions.”

a =E9crit :

> What foods do you guys know of that aren't as good as they used to be?
> Here's the ones I know.
>
> 1. Salmon.
>
> 2. Coffee.
>
> 3. Meat

The issue here is bio-uniformity for the sake of profits over what
nature originally offered us and which we blithely refer to as
bio-diversity (which is the natural state of things without man
screwing it up). On top of that, bio-uniformity stresses longevity (a
condition of profits), not taste or quality. Longevity is a function
of two things: transport and shelf-life. Foods have been travelling
farther in the last 50 years than they did in all the millenia before.
Just because it says "farm-fresh" on the nice crinkly plastic package
doesn't mean it isn't two weeks off the vine. Large chain food stores
are responsible for the shelf-life issue. One can hope the current
gasoline crisis will intensify rather than abate, which should
encourage the establishment of local provenders (many in each
neighbourhood) and the use of local food stuffs over imported ones.

But back to shelf-life: a product, say a green pepper, will be chosen
because it lasts longer on the shelf, and better tasting but less
durable ones will be destroyed to make room for the elected varietal.

The slow food movement which began in Italy stresses a return to
bio-diversity. In some cases, it is impossible to do, as
non-conforming varieties no longer exist, but every effort should be
made to develop not GM varieties, but naturally occuring ones.

One stated need for GM varieties is the need to eliminate chemical
pesticides by creating resistant strains. As as response to one
chemical nightmare, they resort to another, inserting animal DNA into
vegetable matter. Has no one ever heard of the Sepoy rebellion?

However, these strains would not be susceptible had all varieties been
available. The recent potato blight which ravaged Prince Edward Island
crops would not have had that impact had we not reduced the available
varieties of potatoes to four or five instead of the original 15 or 20.

http://www.slowfood.com/

alsandor wrote:
> a écrit :
>
>
>>What foods do you guys know of that aren't as good as they used to be?
>>Here's the ones I know.
>>
>>1. Salmon.
>>
>>2. Coffee.
>>
>>3. Meat
>
>
> The issue here is bio-uniformity for the sake of profits over what
> nature originally offered us and which we blithely refer to as
> bio-diversity (which is the natural state of things without man
> screwing it up). On top of that, bio-uniformity stresses longevity (a
> condition of profits), not taste or quality. Longevity is a function
> of two things: transport and shelf-life. Foods have been travelling
> farther in the last 50 years than they did in all the millenia before.
> Just because it says "farm-fresh" on the nice crinkly plastic package
> doesn't mean it isn't two weeks off the vine. Large chain food stores
> are responsible for the shelf-life issue. One can hope the current
> gasoline crisis will intensify rather than abate, which should
> encourage the establishment of local provenders (many in each
> neighbourhood) and the use of local food stuffs over imported ones.
>
> But back to shelf-life: a product, say a green pepper, will be chosen
> because it lasts longer on the shelf, and better tasting but less
> durable ones will be destroyed to make room for the elected varietal.
>
> The slow food movement which began in Italy stresses a return to
> bio-diversity. In some cases, it is impossible to do, as
> non-conforming varieties no longer exist, but every effort should be
> made to develop not GM varieties, but naturally occuring ones.
>
> One stated need for GM varieties is the need to eliminate chemical
> pesticides by creating resistant strains. As as response to one
> chemical nightmare, they resort to another, inserting animal DNA into
> vegetable matter. Has no one ever heard of the Sepoy rebellion?
>
> However, these strains would not be susceptible had all varieties been
> available. The recent potato blight which ravaged Prince Edward Island
> crops would not have had that impact had we not reduced the available
> varieties of potatoes to four or five instead of the original 15 or 20.
>
> http://www.slowfood.com/
>
And the blight that ravished Ireland, long before GM or whatever? Or
the pest that wrecked the grapevines in france?

Or Dutch Elm Disease, or the disease that killed all the wild American
Chestnuts?

Loon.



--
Del Cecchi
"This post is my own and doesn’t necessarily represent IBM’s positions,
strategies or opinions.”

Del Cecchi > wrote in
:

> And the blight that ravished Ireland, long before GM or whatever?
> Or the pest that wrecked the grapevines in france?
>
> Or Dutch Elm Disease, or the disease that killed all the wild
> American Chestnuts?

One would have to look, but each was probably had some connection to
loss of diversity. How is it that species survived in great varieties
before these occurences? There must have been blights then too. The
quality of genetic diversity is that some benefit while others suffer.
If you only have one variety left, the entire species can disappear.

--

"Compassion is the chief law of human existence."

Dostoevski, The Idiot

lid writes:
>
>"alsandor" > wrote in message
roups.com...
a ecrit :
>
>> The issue here is bio-uniformity for the sake of profits over what
>> nature originally offered us and which we blithely refer to as
>> bio-diversity (which is the natural state of things without man
>> screwing it up).
>
>And you know what? There's really not a damned thing wrong
>with that - "profits" are not inherently a bad thing, especially when
>you realize that there would be NO profit in doing this sort of
>thing IF PEOPLE DIDN'T BUY THE PRODUCT. The market
>in this case is ruthlessly democratic; as long as the majority of
>people vote with their dollars in favor of low cost over high quality,
>the market continues to deliver it as exactly what they want. The
>"good stuff" is still out there - it's just harder to find and more costly
>as a result of what the free market has determined is the optimum
>product offering.
>
>Sorry about that.

Someday, perhaps a million years from now, 90% of people with any
education at all will know that there are economic principles beyond
supply & demand.

Bob Myers wrote:

> "alsandor" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> a écrit :
>
> > The issue here is bio-uniformity for the sake of profits over what
> > nature originally offered us and which we blithely refer to as
> > bio-diversity (which is the natural state of things without man
> > screwing it up).
>
> And you know what? There's really not a damned thing wrong
> with that - "profits" are not inherently a bad thing, especially when
> you realize that there would be NO profit in doing this sort of
> thing IF PEOPLE DIDN'T BUY THE PRODUCT. The market
> in this case is ruthlessly democratic; as long as the majority of
> people vote with their dollars in favor of low cost over high quality,
> the market continues to deliver it as exactly what they want. The
> "good stuff" is still out there - it's just harder to find and more costly
> as a result of what the free market has determined is the optimum
> product offering.
>
> Sorry about that.


You do realise that Michel tends to look at things from a Marxist
perspective, don't you?

:-)

--
Best
Greg

"alsandor" > wrote in message
oups.com...
a écrit :

> The issue here is bio-uniformity for the sake of profits over what
> nature originally offered us and which we blithely refer to as
> bio-diversity (which is the natural state of things without man
> screwing it up).

And you know what? There's really not a damned thing wrong
with that - "profits" are not inherently a bad thing, especially when
you realize that there would be NO profit in doing this sort of
thing IF PEOPLE DIDN'T BUY THE PRODUCT. The market
in this case is ruthlessly democratic; as long as the majority of
people vote with their dollars in favor of low cost over high quality,
the market continues to deliver it as exactly what they want. The
"good stuff" is still out there - it's just harder to find and more costly
as a result of what the free market has determined is the optimum
product offering.

Sorry about that.

Bob M.

"Bob Myers" > wrote in
:

> "alsandor" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> a écrit :
>
>> The issue here is bio-uniformity for the sake of profits over
>> what nature originally offered us and which we blithely refer to
>> as bio-diversity (which is the natural state of things without
>> man screwing it up).
>
> And you know what? There's really not a damned thing wrong
> with that - "profits" are not inherently a bad thing, especially
> when you realize that there would be NO profit in doing this sort
> of thing IF PEOPLE DIDN'T BUY THE PRODUCT.

So you have effectively argued that only profit controls the
production of food? That's plain silly. On high-end produced goods,
like cookies and canned goods and alcohol, there is no problem with
profits, but what I was arguing was that species or vegetables and
fruit have been eliminated without a thought to future requirements
or the survivability of the species as a whole MERELY for profits.

> The market
> in this case is ruthlessly democratic; as long as the majority of
> people vote with their dollars in favor of low cost over high
> quality, the market continues to deliver it as exactly what they
> want.

Actually, no, it doesn't. The market is nothing but manipulative
humans making decisions, it isn't a separate and distinct entity nor
is it managed by an invisible hand. Some human decide to ship
potatoes without consulting the consumers, but only the ones that can
stay longest on the shelf. They don't ask consumers: "Would you
rather have potatoes that taste better?" They even lie. They say
their potatoes taste best, to influence the purchasing choices.
Consumers (those who are so inclined) vote between McCain's and Ore-
Ida but not between varieties of potatoes because they aren't
informed of that. In fact, the more they know the more it worries
the capitalist because truly informed consumers are dangerous to his
profit margin.

In reality, most people don't vote with their money knowing all the
facts, they vote for a limited slate, knowing only what the leading
producers want them to know. If you haven't figured this out yet, I
suggest you catch up on your reading.

> The "good stuff" is still out there - it's just harder to
> find and more costly as a result of what the free market has
> determined is the optimum product offering.

Sometimes it doesn't even exist anymore and no one was asked to vote
on whether varieties should be called upon to disappear. So this
"democratic market" crap is just a load of really smelly hooey.

--

"Compassion is the chief law of human existence."

Dostoevski, The Idiot

"Gregory Morrow"
<gregorymorrowEMERGENCYCANCELLATIONARCHIMEDES@eart hlink.net> wrote
in link.net:

> You do realise that Michel tends to look at things from a Marxist
> perspective, don't you?

In this group, that's called balance, just like the "anti-USAian" (tm
applied for) stuff I say from time to time :-)

--

"Compassion is the chief law of human existence."

Dostoevski, The Idiot

Michel Boucher wrote:

> "Gregory Morrow"
> <gregorymorrowEMERGENCYCANCELLATIONARCHIMEDES@eart hlink.net> wrote
> in link.net:
>
> > You do realise that Michel tends to look at things from a Marxist
> > perspective, don't you?
>
> In this group, that's called balance, just like the "anti-USAian" (tm
> applied for) stuff I say from time to time :-)


See, we agree *completely* on at least one point :-)

--
Best
Greg

"Gregory Morrow"
<gregorymorrowEMERGENCYCANCELLATIONARCHIMEDES@eart hlink.net> wrote
in link.net:

> Michel Boucher wrote:
>
>> "Gregory Morrow"
>> <gregorymorrowEMERGENCYCANCELLATIONARCHIMEDES@eart hlink.net>
>> wrote in
>> link.net:
>>
>> > You do realise that Michel tends to look at things from a
>> > Marxist perspective, don't you?
>>
>> In this group, that's called balance, just like the "anti-USAian"
>> (tm applied for) stuff I say from time to time :-)
>
> See, we agree *completely* on at least one point :-)

I have no doubt there are many things we would agree on if we brought
them up. Just don't dis the UN, not even in jest.

--

"Compassion is the chief law of human existence."

Dostoevski, The Idiot

Mi e' parso che Sheldon abbia scritto:

> time their ability to smell diminishes greatly. Whenever
> you see middle aged folks in the media as professional
> food, wine, and coffee tasters it's 100% BS, it's a
> biological impossiblity for folks over thirty to percieve
> the minute nuances of taste and smell... anyone over 40
> buying $50 bottles of wine is a fool, when you see them
> swirling and sniffing it's an act... if that wine was
> clandestinely switched for box wine they'd continue
> swirling, sniffing, and proclaiming its virtues precisely
> the same.

That includes lots of professional sommeliers, as Mr. Parker, for
example. So you think RP wouldn't distinguish a vintage Chateau
Margaux from box wine? ROTFL
As usual, you took a good principle and then pushed it too far,
to the extent of total BS.
--
Vilco
Think Pink , Drink Rose'

Michel Boucher wrote:
> Del Cecchi > wrote in
> :
>
>
>>And the blight that ravished Ireland, long before GM or whatever?
>>Or the pest that wrecked the grapevines in france?
>>
>>Or Dutch Elm Disease, or the disease that killed all the wild
>>American Chestnuts?
>
>
> One would have to look, but each was probably had some connection to
> loss of diversity. How is it that species survived in great varieties
> before these occurences? There must have been blights then too. The
> quality of genetic diversity is that some benefit while others suffer.
> If you only have one variety left, the entire species can disappear.
>

Nope. American chestnuts grew wild, as did many elms that were just
seed grown. Then a pathogen was introduced that they had no resistance
to and they all died. Even the elms in a mixed forest died.

See the current problem with beetles and lodgepole pine in colorado.

Over thousands of years either the species will happen to have some
resistance which will repopulate, or it will be wiped out. See what
happened to native diverse lake trout in lake superior when the sea
lamprey got in.

If you have the right kind of diversity, you won't miss one species.
The world goes on.

--
Del Cecchi
"This post is my own and doesn’t necessarily represent IBM’s positions,
strategies or opinions.”

"Michel Boucher" > wrote in message
...
> So you have effectively argued that only profit controls the
> production of food? That's plain silly.

Sure would be, IF that were actually what I'd said. I guess
it's just too bad that it's not, huh?


> Actually, no, it doesn't. The market is nothing but manipulative
> humans making decisions, it isn't a separate and distinct entity nor
> is it managed by an invisible hand. Some human decide to ship
> potatoes without consulting the consumers, but only the ones that can
> stay longest on the shelf.

And if those sell, they continue to restock that shelf with the same
thing; if they don't, it doesn't matter HOW long they'll last - no one
will re-order that product, because they don't sell. Supermarket
shelf space is far too precious a commodity, profit margins in that
business being what they are, to waste on good which do not sell.
No one said it was "managed by an invisible hand," so I fail to see the
point of that remark. You claim that the market is run by "manipulative
humans making decision"; I claim that, over the long term, the market
is primarily shaped by a combination of factors, including a very large
contribution called "what WILL sell" (with another factor being "what
can be produced/distributed/stocked at a cost which permits meeting
the market expectation of price"). But let me ask a follow-up question
- who do you think SHOULD decide what is offered in a given
market, and how?

> They don't ask consumers: "Would you
> rather have potatoes that taste better?" They even lie. They say
> their potatoes taste best, to influence the purchasing choices.
> Consumers (those who are so inclined) vote between McCain's and Ore-
> Ida but not between varieties of potatoes because they aren't
> informed of that. In fact, the more they know the more it worries
> the capitalist because truly informed consumers are dangerous to his
> profit margin.

So your argument is basically that the majority of people who make
up the population of "consumers" in a given market are essentially
sheep, incapable of making a correct decision on their own because
they've been fed misinformation (and are too ignorant/lazy/stupid to
know the difference)?


> In reality, most people don't vote with their money knowing all the
> facts, they vote for a limited slate, knowing only what the leading
> producers want them to know. If you haven't figured this out yet, I
> suggest you catch up on your reading.

See above. It must be very frustrating for you, being one of the
apparently insignificantly tiny minority who possess The
Truth.

Bob M.

Michel Boucher wrote:

> "Gregory Morrow"
> <gregorymorrowEMERGENCYCANCELLATIONARCHIMEDES@eart hlink.net> wrote
> in link.net:
>
> > Michel Boucher wrote:
> >
> >> "Gregory Morrow"
> >> <gregorymorrowEMERGENCYCANCELLATIONARCHIMEDES@eart hlink.net>
> >> wrote in
> >> link.net:
> >>
> >> > You do realise that Michel tends to look at things from a
> >> > Marxist perspective, don't you?
> >>
> >> In this group, that's called balance, just like the "anti-USAian"
> >> (tm applied for) stuff I say from time to time :-)
> >
> > See, we agree *completely* on at least one point :-)
>
> I have no doubt there are many things we would agree on if we brought
> them up. Just don't dis the UN, not even in jest.


Oh, you can bet I'll "dis" the UN, Michel. Anyone who still "believes"
in such a corrupt and louche organisation deserves at least a bit of
joshing...support of the UN is not too dissimilar from a belief in
such a hoary and outdated old idea as Marxism :-)

--
Best
Greg "won't be collecting for UNICEF on Halloween this year..."

orange,plums,peaches,watermellon do not compare with what I had as a
kid. Maybe
it's all in my mind, but I don't think so.

Beef was also better.Steaks were tasty and juicy. It might be for the
good--I eat much less of it now.

Del Cecchi > wrote in
:

> alsandor wrote:
>> a écrit :
>>
>>
>>>What foods do you guys know of that aren't as good as they
>>>used to be? Here's the ones I know.
>>>
>>>1. Salmon.
>>>
>>>2. Coffee.
>>>
>>>3. Meat
>>
>>
>> The issue here is bio-uniformity for the sake of profits
>> over what nature originally offered us and which we
>> blithely refer to as bio-diversity (which is the natural
>> state of things without man screwing it up). On top of
>> that, bio-uniformity stresses longevity (a condition of
>> profits), not taste or quality. Longevity is a function
>> of two things: transport and shelf-life. Foods have been
>> travelling farther in the last 50 years than they did in
>> all the millenia before. Just because it says "farm-fresh"
>> on the nice crinkly plastic package doesn't mean it isn't
>> two weeks off the vine. Large chain food stores are
>> responsible for the shelf-life issue. One can hope the
>> current gasoline crisis will intensify rather than abate,
>> which should encourage the establishment of local
>> provenders (many in each neighbourhood) and the use of
>> local food stuffs over imported ones.
>>
>> But back to shelf-life: a product, say a green pepper,
>> will be chosen because it lasts longer on the shelf, and
>> better tasting but less durable ones will be destroyed to
>> make room for the elected varietal.
>>
>> The slow food movement which began in Italy stresses a
>> return to bio-diversity. In some cases, it is impossible
>> to do, as non-conforming varieties no longer exist, but
>> every effort should be made to develop not GM varieties,
>> but naturally occuring ones.
>>
>> One stated need for GM varieties is the need to eliminate
>> chemical pesticides by creating resistant strains. As as
>> response to one chemical nightmare, they resort to
>> another, inserting animal DNA into vegetable matter. Has
>> no one ever heard of the Sepoy rebellion?
>>
>> However, these strains would not be susceptible had all
>> varieties been available. The recent potato blight which
>> ravaged Prince Edward Island crops would not have had that
>> impact had we not reduced the available varieties of
>> potatoes to four or five instead of the original 15 or 20.
>>
>> http://www.slowfood.com/
>>
> And the blight that ravished Ireland, long before GM or
> whatever? Or the pest that wrecked the grapevines in
> france?

the potato famine was because the English landlords only
allowed one variety of potato to be grown, unlike the several
different varieties that the Irish had been growing. had there
been more than one variety, there likely would *not* have been
as severe a famine.
don't know anything about the French grapes issue.

> Or Dutch Elm Disease, or the disease that killed all the
> wild American Chestnuts?

Dutch Elm disease was brought in from another country, where
the trees had some resistance through exposure. American elms
did not.
not all American chestnuts (wild or otherwise... did anyone
cultivate chestnuts?) succumbed to blight. i have one in my
side yard that is loaded with nuts this year & 2 seedlings
that came up from some i missed last year.

> Loon.

yes & no. without the diversity of open-pollinated fruits &
vegetables, there is a good chance of ending up with something
like the Great Potato Famine again. the genetic diversity is
what is needed to produce newer varieties anyway. you get crap
when you try crossing modern hybrids.
lee
--
war is peace
freedom is slavery
ignorance is strength
1984-George Orwell

Meat and chicken. Seems like meat (beef and pork) keep being bred so as
to be so lean that there is just no flavor to them anymore. And, most
chicken is just about tasteless. Carol

Kathy in NZ wrote:

> and apples and kiwifruit.
>
> There's a fairly recent variety of apple in NZ, called Pacific Rose.
> It's rosy, and very crisp and fresh tasting, but it has no flavour.
> The producers go for looks, rather than taste. And another thing that
> bugs me is new season apples are put into storage for next year, while
> we have to make do in shops with last season's cold storage apples.
> The best are exported, unless you buy from the growers' door.
>
> Don't get me on the subject of exports. Where the best of our produce
> is exported and not available to locals!
>
> As for kiwifruit, which Americans call kiwis, NZ made a fatal mistake
> when we did not protect the copyright to the fruit so that now it's
> grown in many places. So now the industry has developed a new variety
> called Gold, a yellow kiwifruit that is a protected brand. They're
> trying to plug it as a better fruit but to my taste it isn't. It's
> too sweet. I like the tarter green fruit. However, Americans seem to
> like a sweeter taste, from what I've seen, so maybe you will like
> Gold.
>
Not me. I like tart things. So, some of the imported produce
I see here would be welcome in their countries of origin?
That's kind-of perverse.

--
Jean B.

LewZephyr wrote:
>
> Its not a specific product.. But I have found Oranges are not what
> they used to be. I don't ever recall when I was a child where I ate
> an orange and it wasn't sweet and juicy...
> I cant even find one now that's sweet and juicy.... almost feels
> like its gunna suck the saliva out of my mouth.

Hmmm, yes. Now they tend to be dry much of the time. Not
worth eating.

--
Jean B.