Following up to Mxsmanic > :

>Tim C. writes:
>
>> What are your sources, specifically?
>
>I don't keep a log of my sources.

Can you remember them then?
--
Tim C.

Following up to "tim" > :

>
>Because IME they are almost always staffed by english
>speaking staff.

Not ime. When they first open and for a while afterwards you'd be right.
But after that they drift into normality, with the odd one around
sometimes.
--
Tim C.

Following up to "Zox" > :

>
>If the French do it, then "when in France, do as the French"
>and put up your feet.

I suppose you could have just shot the waiter dead, as they murder people
in France too.

>You're only pointing the finger at me because you are
>obnoxious and need to transfer your guilt.
>Thus you are little more than a bully.

Run out of ideas for discussion already have you?
--
Tim C.

(David Horne, _the_ chancellor of
the royal duchy of city south and deansgate) wrote:

>Dave Smith > wrote:
>
>> We were taken out to dinner by a friend in Victoria. Her boyfriend was upset
>> because someone was smoking in the smoking section of the restaurant. Having
>> separate sections wasn't good enough for him. I didn't smell any smoke. My
>> wife didn't smell any smoke. The only thing that put a damper on out meal was
>> him carrying on and on and on about the smoke that no one smelled.
>
>You don't know that he didn't though. Some people are more sensitive to
>it. I frequently notice smoke in restaurants with separate sections- not
>to mention the fact that the divider can be very arbitrary. I prefer to
>go to a smoke-free restaurant when possible.

But what you don't tell us is whether you would carry on and on about
permitted smoke that you smelled and nobody else did.

--
PB
The return address has been MUNGED
My travel writing: http://www.iol.ie/~draoi/

Tim C. writes:

> Can you remember them then?

Not usually.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 21:16:26 -0700, poldy > wrote:

>In article <44db0d24.106562689@localhost>,
> (D. Ross) wrote:
>
>> This is the norm in Italy, and it makes some sense if you think of it as
>> renting a table at which you plan to sit for a while.
>
>There are some cafes in the US which provides free Wifi access. So some
>people take advantage and occupy tables for hours.

I'm at a Little Chef in the UK on the A303 at the minute, I've been
here pushing 90 minutes, despite being pretty busy, they don't seem to
have minded and have been out with the free refills on the coffee
quickly and friendly.

I spend most of time working in pubs and cafes, I've never had anyone
impatient to move me on, even in busy places.

Jim.

poldy > wrote in
news
> I didn't think there were Starbucks in Italy. How would they
> compete with lower-priced espressos and capuccinos?

Shouldn't that be expressi and capuccini? :-)

Never underestimate the ability of a US corporation to complete miss
the obvious.

--

"At a time of universal deceit - telling the truth
is a revolutionary act."

George Orwell

Craig Welch wrote:
> EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) wrote:
> >
> >
> > Craig Welch wrote:
> >
> >> PeterL wrote:
> >>
> >>> Starbuck serves a function. I need Splender for my coffee. It is not
> >>> available anywhere else but Starbucks. And of course the no smoking
> >>> part.
> >>
> >>
> >> No-one 'needs Splender'.
> >
> > The brand name is "Splenda",
>
> I know.
>
> > and if you prefer your coffee sweetened and
> > are diabetic, you do INDEED "need" it or some generic thereof.
>
> The days when diabetics thought a spoonfull of sugar would cause them a
> problem are long gone. The pastry with the coffee would do the real damage.

I'd strongly disagree. The tighter one's BG control is, the better a
diabetic does. Sugars count - any sugar - they do damage, and that
damage is cumulative. The ADA is way out to lunch as far as their
lackadaisical carbohydrate recommendations. An HbA1c of 7 as a goal
is a crime as far as I'm concerned, as are their BG goals. Those
levels have been shown to lead to damage, yet the ADA still insist on
recommending them. I suppose the reasoning is that the stringent
levels that would lead to minimal or no damage would not be met by the
vast majority of people so why recommend them at all. My own HbA1c is
4.9, and my fasting BG is mid 80s. Unless I tell them a doctor can't
tell my bloodwork from a normal non-diabetic. *That's* good BG
control. I've been a Type II for some time now and I've been low
carbing to keep my BGs that low since 1/1/99. My triglycerides dropped
to below 200 and my total cholesterol is as well (185). My HDL (the
"good" cholesterol) rose to 71 from the 34 it was on my low fat
ADA-recommended diet - and I exercised on both eating plans.
<Stepping off soapbox>

Carmen

Dave Smith wrote:

> It was 1993 when we saw the girl fight. Drunks in the boulevards would have been
> 1993, 1999 and 2001. People ****ing in the streets was ..... all three . The
> worst was in Pigaille area. It wasn't just at night. I saw it happening at 8 am.
> We changed hotels and and moved to one near the Alma bridge and tunnel.... and I
> saw there too, in the middle of the afternoon.


Well, there goes that theory. I was in Paris in August of 1992 and a
few times after that. I never saw anything close to what you describe.
The worst I experienced was people being impatient with my broken
French, and even that was rare. Nearly everyone switched to
understandable English as soon as I hesitated.


--Lia

"David Horne, _the_ chancellor of the royal duchy of city south and deansgate" wrote:

>
> > Her boyfriend was upset
> > because someone was smoking in the smoking section of the restaurant. Having
> > separate sections wasn't good enough for him. I didn't smell any smoke. My
> > wife didn't smell any smoke. The only thing that put a damper on out meal was
> > him carrying on and on and on about the smoke that no one smelled.
>
> You don't know that he didn't though. Some people are more sensitive to
> it. I frequently notice smoke in restaurants with separate sections- not
> to mention the fact that the divider can be very arbitrary. I prefer to
> go to a smoke-free restaurant when possible.

If he did smell it, he did so faster than the speed of smoke. He started whining as
soon as he saw the person lighting up and it was a long way away. I doubt very much
that he did smell it. He was an uptight ass and his continued complaints were less
bearable than a little bit of cigarette smoke.

Jim Ley wrote:

>
>
> I'm at a Little Chef in the UK on the A303 at the minute, I've been
> here pushing 90 minutes, despite being pretty busy, they don't seem to
> have minded and have been out with the free refills on the coffee
> quickly and friendly.
>
> I spend most of time working in pubs and cafes, I've never had anyone
> impatient to move me on, even in busy places.

And that is one of my problems with Starbucks. The few that are around here
have very limited seating. I appreciate that warm atmosphere. So, it seems do
a lot of other people who park there for hours nursing a coffee. There is
never a place to sit and enjoy the coffee, so I don't often go there.

Julia Altshuler wrote:

> > It was 1993 when we saw the girl fight. Drunks in the boulevards would have been
> > 1993, 1999 and 2001. People ****ing in the streets was ..... all three . The
> > worst was in Pigaille area. It wasn't just at night. I saw it happening at 8 am.
> > We changed hotels and and moved to one near the Alma bridge and tunnel.... and I
> > saw there too, in the middle of the afternoon.
>
> Well, there goes that theory. I was in Paris in August of 1992 and a
> few times after that. I never saw anything close to what you describe.
> The worst I experienced was people being impatient with my broken
> French, and even that was rare. Nearly everyone switched to
> understandable English as soon as I hesitated.

You ncver saw people ****ing in the streets there...ever ? You're lucky. It is an
outstanding memory for my sister in law, who was not enjoying the trip that much to
begin with. We were in a taxi from the airport to our hotel and stopped at a traffic
light. I saw a look of disgust on her face and turned to see what was upsetting her.
There was a guy standing on a busy sidewalk, ****ing in our direction just a few feet
away. The next day when we were leaving the hotel no one wanted to put their luggage
on the ground because we had seen so many people using the sidewalk for a urinal.

Dave Smith wrote:

> You never saw people ****ing in the streets there...ever ? You're lucky. It is an
> outstanding memory for my sister in law, who was not enjoying the trip that much to
> begin with. We were in a taxi from the airport to our hotel and stopped at a traffic
> light. I saw a look of disgust on her face and turned to see what was upsetting her.
> There was a guy standing on a busy sidewalk, ****ing in our direction just a few feet
> away. The next day when we were leaving the hotel no one wanted to put their luggage
> on the ground because we had seen so many people using the sidewalk for a urinal.


Nope, not ever, not once. And we weren't staying at terribly expensive,
upscale hotels either. I'm sorry you had bad experiences there. I
loved Paris and would go back in a heartbeat. My worst complaints about
Paris have to do with traveling with an American co-worker who didn't
like food. I wrote about him here at the time so I won't go into detail
again.


--Lia

Carmen writes:

> I'd strongly disagree. The tighter one's BG control is, the better a
> diabetic does. Sugars count - any sugar - they do damage, and that
> damage is cumulative.

Not true. What counts is hyperglycemia. Chronic hyperglycemia causes
the damage that in turn produces all the long-term, serious
complications of diabetes. Avoid chronic hyperglycemia, and these
complications will never occur. If blood glucose is maintained well
below 200, complications are unlikely.

Brief hyperglycemic episodes are not a serious problem. And eating
sugar is harmless, as long as it does not lead to hyperglycemia (and a
teaspoon of sugar isn't likely to do this in most adults).

> Unless I tell them a doctor can't
> tell my bloodwork from a normal non-diabetic. *That's* good BG
> control.

Yes, but it isn't essential to avoid complications.

> <Stepping off soapbox>

Be careful: it sounds like the box is pretty high.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic wrote:

> Tim C. writes:
>
>
>>What are your sources, specifically?
>
>
> I don't keep a log of my sources.
>

You have no sources

In alt.coffee Zox > wrote:
> Hello coffee addicts,

> I've gone to three Starbucks while being a tourist in France
> and I have to say, 2 out of 3 have sucked.

> 2. I go in another one, I order just one item and sit down to
> read. I take off my shoes and put my foot up on a chair,
> which, in the USA is 100% OK at the fifty or so Starbucks
> I've been to throughout the US -- so long as you take off
> your shoes of course! At this French Starbucks however
> some jerkoff worker approaches wearing a yellow shirt,
> which is against Starbucks regulations, not only tells me
> to put my foot down but clearly is already ****ed off and gives me
> a hand sign as if to say "better not do it again". Little ****er!
> I should have smacked him upside the head.


I am aghast that he talked to an American like that! What nerve!

He should have gotten down on his hands an knees and thanked you
personally for saving his ass in WWII!

Any American should have the right to do whatever he pleases anywhere in
Europe! If he wants to put his feet up and relax, those surrender monkeys
should bring him a pillow and give him a massage!

What nerve!

Mxsmanic wrote:
> Carmen writes:
>
> > I'd strongly disagree. The tighter one's BG control is, the better a
> > diabetic does. Sugars count - any sugar - they do damage, and that
> > damage is cumulative.
>
> Not true. What counts is hyperglycemia. Chronic hyperglycemia causes
> the damage that in turn produces all the long-term, serious
> complications of diabetes. Avoid chronic hyperglycemia, and these
> complications will never occur. If blood glucose is maintained well
> below 200, complications are unlikely.
>
> Brief hyperglycemic episodes are not a serious problem. And eating
> sugar is harmless, as long as it does not lead to hyperglycemia (and a
> teaspoon of sugar isn't likely to do this in most adults).

I'd suggest you search the journals for research concerning the effects
of short-term spikes vis-a-vis oxidative stress and apoptosis leading
to neuropathy. Or not. Your eyesight and your feet, right?

Carmen

> > Unless I tell them a doctor can't
> > tell my bloodwork from a normal non-diabetic. *That's* good BG
> > control.
>
> Yes, but it isn't essential to avoid complications.
>
> > <Stepping off soapbox>
>
> Be careful: it sounds like the box is pretty high.
>
> --
> Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Julia Altshuler wrote:

> Nope, not ever, not once. And we weren't staying at terribly expensive,
> upscale hotels either.

It was definitely worse in Pigaille than in other places, but it was not limited to there.
Granted, they were a little more subtle about it in nicer areas.


> I'm sorry you had bad experiences there. I
> loved Paris and would go back in a heartbeat.

I didn't have a bad experience. I can live with urine on the side walks. I just didn't want
to put my suitcase on the ground there. :-) It was my sister in law who had the worst time.
She had been a PITA for most of the trip and my the time we got to Paris I had pretty much
lost my patience with her.

> My worst complaints about
> Paris have to do with traveling with an American co-worker who didn't
> like food. I wrote about him here at the time so I won't go into detail
> again.

Pity. I did have some disappointments in the food department. One of them was a very
expensive meal that wasn't very good and there wasn't much food. The only thing substantial
was the bill,which seemed a lot for a small, simple meal that left me hungry. My brothers
and I had gone for a walk off the beaten path and found some interesting looking place that
we thought we would nice to go to for dinner. Thanks to the PITA SiL, we didn't go. My wife
and I went there when we went back two years later and had a great meal.

Sorry to say, but almost every time we had lamb it was very disappointing. Actually, every
time in Paris. I had a meal of lamb shanks in Reims that was terrific.

I suppose that there are now probably enough McDonalds around Paris for those who don't like
food.

Michel Boucher wrote:

> poldy > wrote in
> news >
> > I didn't think there were Starbucks in Italy. How would they
> > compete with lower-priced espressos and capuccinos?
>
> Shouldn't that be expressi and capuccini? :-)
>
> Never underestimate the ability of a US corporation to complete miss
> the obvious.


Like Walmart did in Germany and South Korea :-)


--
Best
Greg

"Gregory Morrow" > wrote in
ink.net:

> Michel Boucher wrote:
>
>> poldy > wrote in
>> news >>
>> > I didn't think there were Starbucks in Italy. How would they
>> > compete with lower-priced espressos and capuccinos?
>>
>> Shouldn't that be expressi and capuccini? :-)
>>
>> Never underestimate the ability of a US corporation to complete miss
>> the obvious.
>
> Like Walmart did in Germany and South Korea :-)

Pretty close but more like Pizza Hut opening restaurants in Italy.
From the Wikipedia article:

"Pizza hut ha aperto propri ristoranti in 86 paesi del mondo, senza
però mai osare metter piede in Italia."

Smart people.

--

"At a time of universal deceit - telling the truth
is a revolutionary act."

George Orwell

Carmen writes:

> I'd suggest you search the journals for research concerning the effects
> of short-term spikes vis-a-vis oxidative stress and apoptosis leading
> to neuropathy. Or not. Your eyesight and your feet, right?

I've already read on this before. Complications are associated with
chronic hyperglycemia. An occasional spike does nothing (provided it
is not extreme, of course).

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Michael "Dog3" Lonergan wrote:

> Has anyone tried Altern? It's the same as Splenda and here in St. Louis
> it's about $2.00 less on the 200 count box than Splenda.

You negelected to mention one other important "feature" about Altern:
one must be prepared to do business with the Wal-Mart borg in order to
purchase the stuff.

No, thanks.
--
dgs

wrote:

> He should have gotten down on his hands an knees and thanked you
> personally for saving his ass in WWII!

The person in quesion was a young punk, and actually I have found that
older French men have a sober respect.

Alan wrote:
> "Zox" wrote> Hello coffee addicts,
> <<ill-tempered, self-centered, whiny rant snipped>>
> > So there you are.
>
> Folks have already paid far too much attention to your little rant, but I
> just can't resist --- <childish blather....>

He who knows he cannot win a debate will
resort to personal attacks.

{{{{{Welcome}}}}} wrote:

> Why would you want to even enter a Starbucks, let alone drink the crap
> they serve?

It's smoke-free, which is why the place was
flooded with nonsmoking French people.

Dave Smith wrote:

> I think the saying "If you don't like the way I drive stay off the sidewalk"
> originated in Italy. We arrived there late one day and were out looking for a
> place for dinner. Just like here, the have one way streets. Motorcyclists who
> want to go opposite to the direction of the cars drive down the sidewalk....
> and fast.

In France, bicyclists ride the wrong way on 1-way streets
all the time, but not on sidewalks.

Mxsmanic wrote:
> Zox writes:
>
> > 1. I go in one near Bastille in Paris, and Starbucks needless to say
> > is nonsmoking, which is a big relief in a place like France.
> > But after I sit down some dumbo French dope walks in with a lit
> > cigarette and sits down, without being told by anyone who works there
> > that he can't enter with a cigarette. Idiots! I resolved the
> > situation eventually.
>
> What did you do?
>
> > 2. I go in another one, I order just one item and sit down to
> > read. I take off my shoes and put my foot up on a chair,
> > which, in the USA is 100% OK at the fifty or so Starbucks
> > I've been to throughout the US -- so long as you take off
> > your shoes of course! At this French Starbucks however
> > some jerkoff worker approaches wearing a yellow shirt,
> > which is against Starbucks regulations, not only tells me
> > to put my foot down but clearly is already ****ed off and gives me
> > a hand sign as if to say "better not do it again". Little ****er!
> > I should have smacked him upside the head. Later I called up
> > to talk to the manager and he says he wanted me to
> > come all the way to the cafe to complain in person.
> > Yeah right! I did my part entirely and he wants more!
> > This was the store at the pompidou center in paris.
> > I also tried complaining to headquarters via email but
> > unsurprisingly it appears that feature is broken on
> > the Starbucks.fr website.
>
> Do not complain to the French headquarters; complain to worldwide
> headquarters. Starbucks in France is run by a franchise that I think
> is based in Spain or Italy (I forget), and it can naturally be
> expected to act on your complaint in the usual European way--whereas
> American headquarters will act on it in a more American way. It helps
> if you can imply that the latter will incur some sort of liability
> through the actions of the franchise; the possibility of litigation
> always motivates American companies.
>
> > 3. I go to another place, the Starbucks at Odeon metro station
> > in Paris and both the French workers and the one British worker
> > are cool about everything and very polite and accommodating
> > in every way. This is especially good news because this is
> > in an area where the regular French cafes price-gouge everybody,
> > as in $3 for an espresso. I recommend this Starbucks.
>
> All of the Starbucks in Paris charge a lot. They increased their
> prices 40% in just the first year of their presence, as I recall.
>
> I haven't gone to them much because they have a habit of locking their
> emergency exits.
>
> --
> Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

You paid $3 for an espresso at Starbucks in Paris. How odd! The medium
of exchange here in France is the Euro. In Paris you can get an
espresso at a cafe for about € 1,20.

Runge wrote:
> He'd better not take iff his shoes in front of me
> dumbo american

So I suppose the French who were doing the same
were dumb too? Or perhaps you're just very intolerant.

hudson wrote:

> Gosh you do sound like an unpleasant little ****.

He who cannot win a debate will resort
to shameful personal insults.

EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) wrote:

> After strangling YOU for being such a prat, of course!

Smoking causes premature aging of the skin,
and a look of leathery skankiness.

David Horne, _the_ chancellor of the royal duchy of city south and
deansgate wrote:

> Wow. Cigarette smoking gets up my nose, physically. My eyes sting, my
> throat hurts. 2nd hand cigarette smoke is one the biggest drawbacks on
> the otherwise pleasurable pursuit of travel. My worst reaction to
> someone putting their feet up on a chair would be mild indignance, but
> I'd still be OK. They'd have to have _very_ smelly feet for it to have a
> physical effect. I'm genuinely surprised you can equate the two- and for
> the record, I don't think it's "OK" to put your feet up on seats- or at
> least, I don't do it.

In the USA, it's common for people to put up their
feet -- without shoes -- at Starbucks, Barnes and Noble,
Borders, and any number of others places. Nobody
but the most tyrranical employees ever complains.
In France, I have seen French put up their feet.

The exception is on trains, where the train workers
are very polite about telling people not to.
The little tyrant I encountered at Starbucks was
not only improperly dressed for his job,
but he was threatening. He needed to be fired,
simply put.

Goomba38 wrote:

> Looking at a strangers nasty feet on a chair in public makes me want to
> strangle too...
> WHY would you do such a thing??

WHY not? Everyone does it in the USA, and French
do it in France. If you take off your shoes there is no harm
in it.

EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) wrote:
> Bailey Legull wrote:
>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>Bailey Legull wrote:
> >>
> >>>Ugly American tourists want to know.
> >>
> >>Applying logic, are Irish people who go to Irish pubs across the globe
> >>automatically Ugly Irish? How about French people going to
> >>French restaurants overseas?
> >
> >
> > That's odd logic. Are these pubs and restaurants ugly, overpriced
> > chains that couldn't hold the jockstraps of their (native)
> > counterparts? Starbucks is crap compared to what AMERICA has to offer.
> > Now transplant it to a country with arguably the best coffee in the
> > world.
>
> In any case, it was the OP's confessed BEHAVIOUR that brands
> him an "Ugly American", not his unaccountable taste in coffee.

Well, I'll use his taste in coffee also. It's offensive to the French
for Americans to automatically assume their exports are superior to the
native French establishments. If someone goes there and just eats
McDonalds they're Ugly Americans no matter *how* they act.

But frankly, I look down on anyone who goes to a chain restaurant.
They were invented fifty years ago, when there weren't many restaurants
and the ones that existed were bad. Chains were for travellers who
wanted to be assured of a certain standard of quality. Just a few
months ago, though, I drove across the U. S., and let me tell you -- I
don't think you can drive twenty miles in the U. S. without passing a
GREAT local restaurant. There's no reason for McDonalds to exist any
more. Now if we could just get people to stop going. . . .

Mxsmanic wrote:
> Carmen writes:
>
> > I'd suggest you search the journals for research concerning the effects
> > of short-term spikes vis-a-vis oxidative stress and apoptosis leading
> > to neuropathy. Or not. Your eyesight and your feet, right?
>
> I've already read on this before. Complications are associated with
> chronic hyperglycemia. An occasional spike does nothing (provided it
> is not extreme, of course).

If you're listening to the ADA their definition of "extreme" will have
lulled you into a false sense of safety. The American Association of
Clinical Endocrinologists put the pre-prandial max at 110 mg/dl and
2-hour post-prandial at 140 mg/dl, and a goal of max HbA1c 6.5% for
diabetes management.

Carmen

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

> Some people live like animals.

And the boy who didn't like my putting my
foot up was very much thinking and feeling
like an animal. An ape in particular, beating his chest,
pushing people around, making a minor thing
seem like a big offense.

Cochon Capitaliste OINKS:

> In Paris you can get an
>espresso at a cafe for about ? 1,20.


You mean they let a FILTHY stinking PIG like you into a cafe...???

--
Best
Greg

Carmen wrote:

> I must take issue with your assertion that it's okay to take one's
> shoes off at Starbucks stateside, or to put your feet on the furniture.
> It's not.

Yes it is. It happens every single day in thousands
of Starbucks and numerous other cafes and restaurants.
So please don't try getting morally self-righteous,
it won't work.

Julia Altshuler wrote:
> Dave Smith wrote:
>
> > Northern Europe is supposed to have more intoxication and binge drinking,
> > but Paris was the only place in Europe where I saw drunken women fighting.
> ...We stayed in hotel one night,
> > and one night only, where half the time you looked out the window some
> > drunk was ****ing on the sidewalk.
>
> What year was this? My experience was so different that I'm wondering
> if the difference might have to do with when we were there rather than
> which arrondissment.

I've got to second this. I've been to Paris probably ten times, the
longest time for a month around 1995. I've seen maybe two men ****ing
in public, and zero fights.

More common is running into jazz combos, just playing on the street. I
remember years ago passing a trapeze act performing on the sidewalk on
the Boulevard St. Germain.

The neighborhoods Dave lists aren't good -- Alma is the Parisian
equivalent of Bed-Stuy, and Pigalle is where I'd go to find a hooker --
but I've been to both and still haven't seen what he has.

Bailey Legull wrote:

> EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) wrote:
> > Bailey Legull wrote:
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >>Bailey Legull wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>Ugly American tourists want to know.
> > >>
> > >>Applying logic, are Irish people who go to Irish pubs across the globe
> > >>automatically Ugly Irish? How about French people going to
> > >>French restaurants overseas?
> > >
> > >
> > > That's odd logic. Are these pubs and restaurants ugly, overpriced
> > > chains that couldn't hold the jockstraps of their (native)
> > > counterparts? Starbucks is crap compared to what AMERICA has to
offer.
> > > Now transplant it to a country with arguably the best coffee in the
> > > world.
> >
> > In any case, it was the OP's confessed BEHAVIOUR that brands
> > him an "Ugly American", not his unaccountable taste in coffee.
>
> Well, I'll use his taste in coffee also. It's offensive to the French
> for Americans to automatically assume their exports are superior to the
> native French establishments. If someone goes there and just eats
> McDonalds they're Ugly Americans no matter *how* they act.
>


Plenty of French must be "Ugly Americans" too, as France is McDo's most
profitable European (and possibly ex - US) market...it's not all Yank
tourists eating there.


> But frankly, I look down on anyone who goes to a chain restaurant.
> They were invented fifty years ago, when there weren't many restaurants
> and the ones that existed were bad. Chains were for travellers who
> wanted to be assured of a certain standard of quality. Just a few
> months ago, though, I drove across the U. S., and let me tell you -- I
> don't think you can drive twenty miles in the U. S. without passing a
> GREAT local restaurant. There's no reason for McDonalds to exist any
> more. Now if we could just get people to stop going. .


There are "great" local restos in the US, but you might have to do a little
research to find them in the more rural areas. In plenty of places
McDonalds (and other chains) is still a big step up from what's available
locally...

--
Best
Greg

Mxsmanic wrote:

>
> No. Those who drink in these countries tend to drink to get drunk.


For goodness sake - I've had enough of your generalisations. I'm
English. I drink occasionally. I don't get drunk. Neither does
anyone I know. They go to pubs or other venues for a good night out,
that doesn't include the desire to get drunk.

There is a problem with drink, as there is in many countries, and I
will state that historically, our licensing laws, where drinking was
permitted between specific hours, has promoted a binge culture in some
people, but "some" isn't "most", and it tends to be more prevalent in
younger people. Once older, drinking excessively has big problems,
like drink-driving, which is far less of a problem these days, or in
employment, where drinking is far more frowned upon than it might have
been in the past.


--
Regards, Danny

http://www.gaggia-espresso.com (a purely hobby site)
http://www.malabargold.co.uk (UK/EU ordering for Malabar Gold blend)