If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Times)   The latest ObamaCare scandal: regulating pizzas. THIS. IS. AN. OUTRAGE   (washingtontimes.com) divider line 197
    More: Stupid, obamacare, Cathy McMorris, Roy Blunt, Food Marketing Institute, medical sign, Loretta Sanchez, State of the Union  
•       •       •

9534 clicks; posted to Main » on 31 Jan 2014 at 4:31 PM (33 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



197 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-01-31 04:00:19 PM
requires restaurants with 20 or more locations to list calorie-content information for each menu item on a board at every establishment.  The costs of this intrusive regulation would be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices


The costs
of  a board

THE COSTS of A BOARD
 
2014-01-31 04:09:27 PM

creating a nutritional menu for the hundreds of possible food combinations


or, you could do this:



www.anutinanutshell.com
 
2014-01-31 04:14:52 PM

Bareefer Obonghit: requires restaurants with 20 or more locations to list calorie-content information for each menu item on a board at every establishment.  The costs of this intrusive regulation would be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices


The costs of  a board

THE COSTS of A BOARD


I see it as a BS argument, but to be fair, you would be surprised how much something like this could cost
 
2014-01-31 04:16:15 PM

cman: I see it as a BS argument, but to be fair, you would be surprised how much something like this could cost


Try me. Whatever it is I'm sure will bankrupt utterly a business with at least twenty operating restaurants.
 
2014-01-31 04:17:50 PM

Cagey B: cman: I see it as a BS argument, but to be fair, you would be surprised how much something like this could cost

Try me. Whatever it is I'm sure will bankrupt utterly a business with at least twenty operating restaurants.


Try you? I already said it was a BS argument
 
2014-01-31 04:20:08 PM
According to the Food Marketing Institute, which represents retail grocery chains, the current proposed menu-labeling regulation would cost the industry $1 billion in the first year of implementation


lol, sounds legit
 
2014-01-31 04:22:34 PM

cman: Cagey B: cman: I see it as a BS argument, but to be fair, you would be surprised how much something like this could cost

Try me. Whatever it is I'm sure will bankrupt utterly a business with at least twenty operating restaurants.

Try you? I already said it was a BS argument


The statement that we'd be "surprised how much something like this could cost" implies that doing this is a) relatively expensive and b) some sort of noticeable burden to the parties that would have to comply. If that's genuinely not what you were driving at, then whatever.
 
2014-01-31 04:23:17 PM

Cagey B: cman: Cagey B: cman: I see it as a BS argument, but to be fair, you would be surprised how much something like this could cost

Try me. Whatever it is I'm sure will bankrupt utterly a business with at least twenty operating restaurants.

Try you? I already said it was a BS argument

The statement that we'd be "surprised how much something like this could cost" implies that doing this is a) relatively expensive and b) some sort of noticeable burden to the parties that would have to comply. If that's genuinely not what you were driving at, then whatever.


Thats why I added "to be fair"
 
2014-01-31 04:28:41 PM
Meh, this actually does seem kind of stupid, intrusive, and pointless to me.

Not often he and I see eye to eye, but I'm with the True Father Rev. Dr. Sun Myung Moon on this one. May he continue to perform mass weddings atop his blessed space dragon beyond the sun.
 
2014-01-31 04:31:30 PM

Headso: According to the Food Marketing Institute, which represents retail grocery chains, the current proposed menu-labeling regulation would cost the industry $1 billion in the first year of implementation


lol, sounds legit


Yeah, those are rapidly approaching the annual costs of people watching NCAA basketball games right there.
 
2014-01-31 04:33:19 PM

Langston: Headso: According to the Food Marketing Institute, which represents retail grocery chains, the current proposed menu-labeling regulation would cost the industry $1 billion in the first year of implementation


lol, sounds legit

Yeah, those are rapidly approaching the annual costs of people watching NCAA basketball games right there.


Obama could take like 5 vacations for that much!
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-01-31 04:34:30 PM
That's nonsense.  Stores already spend plenty on  promotional signage.  They could simply combine the two and it would cost nothing extra.
 
2014-01-31 04:35:03 PM
What an asinine argument. The cost of a board showing nutrition info is not burdensome in any manner
 
2014-01-31 04:38:09 PM
The whole point of this country is if you want to eat garbage, balloon up to 600 pounds, and die of a heart attack at 43, you can. You are free to do so. To me, that's beautiful.
 
2014-01-31 04:38:40 PM
What a stupid argu.... Oh, it's the Moonie Times.  Carry on.
 
2014-01-31 04:38:51 PM

Ritley: What an asinine argument. The cost of a board showing nutrition info is not burdensome in any manner


You do realize it costs $$$ to do the nutrition tests
 
2014-01-31 04:40:19 PM
Obama will not be happy until he is analyzing my stool.
 
2014-01-31 04:40:29 PM
Its only for places with 20 or more locations, because you know, big business is the root of all evil.
 
2014-01-31 04:41:50 PM
This again?  Why do they trot the same complaints out year after   year after year as though  these are new "surprising" parts of the law?
 
2014-01-31 04:42:08 PM

Ritley: What an asinine argument. The cost of a board showing nutrition info is not burdensome in any manner


How bout the cost of producing that data?    Having somebody determine the calorie counts for an entire menu.  Think that's free?
 
2014-01-31 04:42:08 PM

ShadowKamui: Ritley: What an asinine argument. The cost of a board showing nutrition info is not burdensome in any manner

You do realize it costs $$$ to do the nutrition tests


Isn't the info on the Sysco containers?
 
2014-01-31 04:43:07 PM

m1ke: The whole point of this country is if you want to eat garbage, balloon up to 600 pounds, and die of a heart attack at 43, you can. You are free to do so. To me, that's beautiful.


nobody is going to force you to eat healthy, fatty.
 
2014-01-31 04:43:54 PM
According to the Food Marketing Institute, which represents retail grocery chains, the current proposed menu-labeling regulation would cost the industry $1 billion in the first year of implementation 

That's like, $3 a person over the course of a year. Many people eat out more than once a week... So, what is that, like 6 cents per person per meal? Maybe 20 cents per person per meal, since not everybody eats out the same amount?
 
2014-01-31 04:43:54 PM
That's just wrong. A man who spent as long as he did serving the state of Illinois has no business regulating pizza.
 
2014-01-31 04:44:23 PM

ShadowKamui: Ritley: What an asinine argument. The cost of a board showing nutrition info is not burdensome in any manner

You do realize it costs $$$ to do the nutrition tests


If you have 20 or more locations, you have a set of standards for each dish.  The on-site cooks don't get to buy their own random supplies from wherever and wing their own dishes.  You know what the caloric content of your ingredients are and you know what your recipes are.
 
2014-01-31 04:45:26 PM
I watched a few episodes of Restaurant Impossible and one of the big things was costing out a menu item. If you can break down a menu item to it's cost then you can break down it's calorie content. Well, except fried food. Some of that will be an estimate of the oil picked up, but it won't be as much as people accuse them of.

This may, however, prompt some operators to stop at 19 restaurants. Then maybe open more that look very similar to the others, but it's a different corporation.
 
2014-01-31 04:45:52 PM
My wife is a chef, and I have some serious food allergies, so I have a vague clue about how difficult something like this would be to create.  The answer is not very.   Accurate information would cost more--but the odds of quality analysis done by a regulating body (FDA?) seems pretty low.    Accurate information would also be difficult to calculate and maintain.   Ex: When you cook in oil, how much of the oil is actually retained by the item?   Are all slices of pepperoni the same thickness and therefore calorie count?   If suppliers change, are the replacement products equivalent or will there be variations?    How often does the board get updated?

Until we have tricorders or some other tech to scan a plate and give us stats, truly accurate info will never be available.
 
2014-01-31 04:46:23 PM
Wait. Did the real math.

The Restaurant industry is $683 billion/year. If this will cost the restaurant industry $1 billion as a whole, expect a 0.14 cents/dollar increase on your meal.

This truly is going to ruin the industry.
 
2014-01-31 04:46:26 PM
Aren't restaurants already required by law to have nutritional information available to customers, whether in the form of a separate board (usually found in an out-of-the-way location in the store that customers are less likely to be in) or some brochure or pamphlet that customers have to specifically request? Wouldn't this just require them to make that stuff more readily available?
 
2014-01-31 04:46:32 PM

sufferpuppet: Ritley: What an asinine argument. The cost of a board showing nutrition info is not burdensome in any manner

How bout the cost of producing that data?    Having somebody determine the calorie counts for an entire menu.  Think that's free?


They know how many ounces of X are in each dish, and the calorie info on that is readily available. It's like you know you put 1lb of ground beef, 2 eggs, etc into your burger patties, and made 4 patties, you can do some quick maths, and find out. Chain restaurants measure everything.  Also, calorie testing is really cheap.
 
2014-01-31 04:47:12 PM
Incidentally all this bill does is change the rule from "having a board" to "post online".  This isn't even news.  No company is going to be saved because they no longer have to have a menu board.
 
2014-01-31 04:47:39 PM

m1ke: The whole point of this country is if you want to eat garbage, balloon up to 600 pounds, and die of a heart attack at 43, you can. You are free to do so. To me, that's beautiful.


This. I'm ordering a pizza. Any time you do that, you're not eating a healthy meal. I don't need it pointed out to me six times a week.
 
2014-01-31 04:47:58 PM
you can have my pizza when you pry it from my cold dead greasy teeth.

/DRTFA
 
2014-01-31 04:48:20 PM
New York City has had this regulation on the books for over five years now, as have  Seattle and other cities for nearly as long.  As far as I know, nobody went out of business due to compliance costs.

A well informed buyer is critical to a healthy capitalist system.
 
2014-01-31 04:49:01 PM
To be honest - if you think anything at these restaurants is good for you you probably deserve to be fat with diabetes.

If you are a smart restaurant (that is healthy) you do this without being asked.

Side note: Chipotle (I love you)
 
2014-01-31 04:49:06 PM

wildcardjack: This may, however, prompt some operators to stop at 19 restaurants. Then maybe open more that look very similar to the others, but it's a different corporation.


This is probably all that happens.

It's kinda like the kid that goes and builds a fort in the back yard to avoid cleaning his room. They're willing to do more work and pay just as much or more, they just don't want to do what they're told.
 
2014-01-31 04:49:30 PM

ValisIV: sufferpuppet: Ritley: What an asinine argument. The cost of a board showing nutrition info is not burdensome in any manner

How bout the cost of producing that data?    Having somebody determine the calorie counts for an entire menu.  Think that's free?

They know how many ounces of X are in each dish, and the calorie info on that is readily available. It's like you know you put 1lb of ground beef, 2 eggs, etc into your burger patties, and made 4 patties, you can do some quick maths, and find out. Chain restaurants measure everything.  Also, calorie testing is really cheap.


If you serve that raw to your customers, the costs of nutritional tests are going to be the least of your concerns
 
2014-01-31 04:49:42 PM
Why don't they just release a chart we can all understand.

On a standard Large Pizza (16")

1-2 Slices: Normal
3-4 Slices: That uncomfortable feeling is telling you something.
4+ Slices: Good job fatty
 
2014-01-31 04:50:50 PM

Random Anonymous Blackmail: 4+ Slices: Good job fatty


Thanks, I work hard at it.
 
2014-01-31 04:51:17 PM
Why do people continue to buy into BS like this?  Of course the people who will have to pay for this (corporations) want customers to believe it will raise prices - but the world just doesn't work that way.

If Papa John's could get more money for there crappy pizza then they are already charging, wouldn't they already be doing that??

Price is not Cost plus Desired Profit.  Price is what the market will bear, and Profit is Price minus Cost.

Don't be dumb.
 
2014-01-31 04:51:21 PM
You can get 20 3x6 vinyl signs for $35 bucks each.  I can't imagine a nice wooden sign, with your logo, in 2 or 3 colors could cost much more than $150 each.  That's a one-time only expense.  That's 20 minimum wage part-time hours spread out over the life of the sign.  Leaving the restaurant lights on a half hour longer each day would cost tons more in only a few weeks.
 
2014-01-31 04:51:36 PM
Use your designer to put the layout together. email the pdf to each franchise, print that sh*t off on 8.5x11 from the office printer. Post it.

The designer is the most expensive part. Some prima donna designer/ad agency will charge $150 an hour. This will take 22 hours.

hahahahaha.
 
2014-01-31 04:51:51 PM

ShadowKamui: Ritley: What an asinine argument. The cost of a board showing nutrition info is not burdensome in any manner

You do realize it costs $$$ to do the nutrition tests


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calorimeter

For the biggest companies, they could add a few machines and a few scientists at minimal overall cost.

For the growing companies, it might be a bit of a hit, but they seem to have no problem spending large sums of money to advertise that double meat, double-stuffed-bun  jalapeno bacon burger greasebomb. I have no problem with them having to explain just how much it's going to cost YOU, and I don't mean $$$.

They're really worried about people thinking twice about ordering the Angus Angioplasty Burger and Infarction fries.

Fark em.
 
2014-01-31 04:51:58 PM
"The costs of this intrusive regulation would be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices."

Complete and utter bullshiat! It's a one time expense, you don't raise prices over a one time expense.
 
2014-01-31 04:52:31 PM

Headso: Langston: Headso: According to the Food Marketing Institute, which represents retail grocery chains, the current proposed menu-labeling regulation would cost the industry $1 billion in the first year of implementation


lol, sounds legit

Yeah, those are rapidly approaching the annual costs of people watching NCAA basketball games right there.

Obama could take like 5 vacations for that much!


Still doesn't approach the amount that pirating a single movie costs the industry, however.
 
2014-01-31 04:52:54 PM
If these bastards had their way, they'd still be blocking the 1970s laws that mandated nutritional information on packaged supermarket food.
 
Ant
2014-01-31 04:53:37 PM

Bareefer Obonghit: requires restaurants with 20 or more locations to list calorie-content information for each menu item on a board at every establishment.  The costs of this intrusive regulation would be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices


The costs of  a board

THE COSTS of A BOARD


To be fair, I think they have to have someone calculate the nutritional value of each menu item.
 
2014-01-31 04:53:50 PM
You dont just have the cost of signs. You have to know how many calories are in the food I doubt they will let you guess(I.E cost of a lab).  When you change it you have to have the lab tell you how many calories are in your new menu item\s, the man hours involved in operating collecting and maintaining the info and blah blah blah. You dont just slap up a sign and say 600 calories all done!

Does it cost as much as they say? I doubt it. Does it cost more than "DEPR ITS A SIGN". It probably does.
 
2014-01-31 04:53:57 PM

Random Anonymous Blackmail: Why don't they just release a chart we can all understand.


A 3-D model is better.  Here's one for you--make a fist.   That's the natural size of your stomach.   Eat that volume of food--no more the rest is wasted.   Your appetite is the result of cultural mis-training to eat more than you need, and you will get used to it in a few weeks.     Carry on.
 
2014-01-31 04:56:19 PM

Rhypskallion: Random Anonymous Blackmail: Why don't they just release a chart we can all understand.

A 3-D model is better.  Here's one for you--make a fist.   That's the natural size of your stomach.   Eat that volume of food--no more the rest is wasted.   Your appetite is the result of cultural mis-training to eat more than you need, and you will get used to it in a few weeks.     Carry on.


I eat that many cookies with every meal.

/cookies
 
2014-01-31 04:56:20 PM
You know it's amazing we've survived as long as we have with out this regulations.
 
2014-01-31 04:56:24 PM

boyvoyeur: m1ke: The whole point of this country is if you want to eat garbage, balloon up to 600 pounds, and die of a heart attack at 43, you can. You are free to do so. To me, that's beautiful.

This. I'm ordering a pizza. Any time you do that, you're not eating a healthy meal. I don't need it pointed out to me six times a week.


Why do you hate Free Markets filled with informed consumers?
 
2014-01-31 04:57:20 PM

poot_rootbeer: New York City has had this regulation on the books for over five years now, as have  Seattle and other cities for nearly as long.  As far as I know, nobody went out of business due to compliance costs.

A well informed buyer is critical to a healthy capitalist system.


McDonald's has been doing it voluntarily for years now as well.
 
2014-01-31 04:58:18 PM

MemeSlave: Its only for places with 20 or more locations, because you know, big business is the root of all evil.


No, that would be organized religion.  Corrupt governments come in second.  Big businesses who care more about shareholders than goodwill comes in at third on today's countdown <Casey Kasem voice>
 
2014-01-31 05:00:12 PM

Huggermugger: If these bastards had their way, they'd still be blocking the 1970s laws that mandated nutritional information on packaged supermarket food.


1990s I think, maybe late 80s.  Breakfast cereals listed nutritional information voluntarily as a marketing gimmick (to show off all that vitamin enrichment).
 
2014-01-31 05:00:53 PM

I alone am best: You dont just have the cost of signs. You have to know how many calories are in the food I doubt they will let you guess(I.E cost of a lab).  When you change it you have to have the lab tell you how many calories are in your new menu item\s, the man hours involved in operating collecting and maintaining the info and blah blah blah. You dont just slap up a sign and say 600 calories all done!

Does it cost as much as they say? I doubt it. Does it cost more than "DEPR ITS A SIGN". It probably does.


Guess no, but a reasonable basis is all that is required.

'(iv) REASONABLE BASIS- For the purposes of this clause, a restaurant or similar retail food establishment shall have a reasonable basis for its nutrient content disclosures, including nutrient databases, cookbooks, laboratory analyses, and other reasonable means, as described in section 101.10 of title 21, Code of Federal Regulations (or any successor regulation) or in a related guidance of the Food and Drug Administration.
 
2014-01-31 05:02:03 PM

cman: but to be fair, you would be surprised how much something like this could cost


Okay, surprise me.
Shock me with the size of that crushing cost, but be fair about it.
 
2014-01-31 05:02:04 PM

boyvoyeur: m1ke: The whole point of this country is if you want to eat garbage, balloon up to 600 pounds, and die of a heart attack at 43, you can. You are free to do so. To me, that's beautiful.

This. I'm ordering a pizza. Any time you do that, you're not eating a healthy meal. I don't need it pointed out to me six times a week.


They took the "lard" out of movie popcorn, and I said nothing.

Then I tasted some cookies one day while home with one of the monsters and thought, "My, it sure does taste different now, compared to when I was younger." So I called the 800 number and asked why. Turns out they had eliminated the cholesterol from the cookies.

"I know it's not a health food!" I protested. "Put the cholesterol back in!"

My kids will never taste McDonald's shakes and fries the way I did.

/Old and fat.
 
2014-01-31 05:06:06 PM

SumJackass07: ShadowKamui: Ritley: What an asinine argument. The cost of a board showing nutrition info is not burdensome in any manner

You do realize it costs $$$ to do the nutrition tests

Isn't the info on the Sysco containers?


Yes it is. But reading is so hard. These places just microwave frozen crap anyway. The factories can provide that info.
 
2014-01-31 05:06:48 PM
So out of curiosity just how many calories is a large meat lovers? 4000-5000?
 
2014-01-31 05:06:57 PM

Goetz: cman: but to be fair, you would be surprised how much something like this could cost

Okay, surprise me.
Shock me with the size of that crushing cost, but be fair about it.


...seriously?

You think replacing their menu boards would be cheap? You see how complex they are.
 
2014-01-31 05:07:25 PM
Those calorie estimates restaurants use, even in good faith, are hardly accurate. If you need to be told that three slices of double pepperoni and sausage pizza are high in fat, calories and sodium and probably aren't good for you, then you probably aren't the sharpest tool in the shed. Of course, if you RTFA, it seems that the industry asked that the regulation be changed and members of both parties in the House and Senate seem willing to help solve the problems and still provide consumer information, but dear lord, someone said something negative about a provision of the ACA, so let's all crap our pants...
 
2014-01-31 05:07:31 PM

CujoQuarrel: You know it's amazing we've survived as long as we have with out this regulations.


you need to get out more and see how fat people are nowadays.
 
2014-01-31 05:08:07 PM

Rhypskallion: Random Anonymous Blackmail: Why don't they just release a chart we can all understand.

A 3-D model is better.  Here's one for you--make a fist.   That's the natural size of your stomach.   Eat that volume of food--no more the rest is wasted.   Your appetite is the result of cultural mis-training to eat more than you need, and you will get used to it in a few weeks.     Carry on.


Yeah, in the one size fits all world I have to special order gloves to fit hands that can span more than an octave. I have gone for seconds at Jimmy John's, because bread is all foam.
 
2014-01-31 05:08:19 PM

ShadowKamui: If you serve that raw to your customers, the costs of nutritional tests are going to be the least of your concerns


Cooking food can only reduce its calorie count (with the frying-oil-absorption exception already mentioned), and I don't think anyone's going to be penalized for slightly over-reporting their numbers.
 
2014-01-31 05:09:28 PM
<dripping sarcasm>

What happens if after reading the nutritional facts we still make the wrong choice? I think it would be best for everyone if we had all our choices made for us by someone in Washington. This way, there is no confusion and wrong choices being made. Thankfully our leaders are not cursed with poor decision making skills like we are.

</dripping sarcasm>
 
2014-01-31 05:10:10 PM
John Stewart laughs at Obamacare.  Evidently, even though she's now seen it, Nancy Pelosi still doesn't understand it.


http://www.mrctv.org/videos/jon-stewart-laughs-nancy-pelosi-when-she -p leads-ignorance-failure-health-care-website
 
2014-01-31 05:10:19 PM

Bareefer Obonghit: requires restaurants with 20 or more locations to list calorie-content information for each menu item on a board at every establishment.  The costs of this intrusive regulation would be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices


The costs of  a board

THE COSTS of A BOARD


Lawyer has pizza tested. Employee had put one more pepperoni on the slice. Lawyer sues. Not just the cost of a board.
 
2014-01-31 05:10:41 PM

ValisIV: sufferpuppet: Ritley: What an asinine argument. The cost of a board showing nutrition info is not burdensome in any manner

How bout the cost of producing that data?    Having somebody determine the calorie counts for an entire menu.  Think that's free?

They know how many ounces of X are in each dish, and the calorie info on that is readily available. It's like you know you put 1lb of ground beef, 2 eggs, etc into your burger patties, and made 4 patties, you can do some quick maths, and find out. Chain restaurants measure everything.  Also, calorie testing is really cheap.


Who the fark puts egg, etc. in a burger? 'Cuz I will not be eating there! Burger = ground beef salt and pepper cooked for a few mins, on a bun, that's it!
 
2014-01-31 05:10:54 PM
Do people actually trust the nutritional information if it's provided?

/Like trusting Dr.s that work for the NFL.
 
2014-01-31 05:10:58 PM

sdd2000: I alone am best: You dont just have the cost of signs. You have to know how many calories are in the food I doubt they will let you guess(I.E cost of a lab).  When you change it you have to have the lab tell you how many calories are in your new menu item\s, the man hours involved in operating collecting and maintaining the info and blah blah blah. You dont just slap up a sign and say 600 calories all done!

Does it cost as much as they say? I doubt it. Does it cost more than "DEPR ITS A SIGN". It probably does.

Guess no, but a reasonable basis is all that is required.

'(iv) REASONABLE BASIS- For the purposes of this clause, a restaurant or similar retail food establishment shall have a reasonable basis for its nutrient content disclosures, including nutrient databases, cookbooks, laboratory analyses, and other reasonable means, as described in section 101.10 of title 21, Code of Federal Regulations (or any successor regulation) or in a related guidance of the Food and Drug Administration.


I think you read that wrong, that is saying they need a reasonable basis for what they display on the sign including nutrient databases, cookbooks, laboratory analyses, and other reasonable means.
 
2014-01-31 05:12:01 PM
So what restaurant that says in business does not keep track of their ingredient costs?
 
2014-01-31 05:12:17 PM

Headso: CujoQuarrel: You know it's amazing we've survived as long as we have with out this regulations.

you need to get out more and see how fat people are nowadays.


Are you suggesting that all these regulations are making people fat?
 
2014-01-31 05:12:29 PM

Huggermugger: If these bastards had their way, they'd still be blocking the 1970s laws that mandated nutritional information on packaged supermarket food.


The 1990 Nutrition Labeling and Education Act
I'm assuming you were born sometime after disco
 
2014-01-31 05:13:54 PM

MyRandomName: Bareefer Obonghit: requires restaurants with 20 or more locations to list calorie-content information for each menu item on a board at every establishment.  The costs of this intrusive regulation would be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices


The costs of  a board

THE COSTS of A BOARD

Lawyer has pizza tested. Employee had put one more pepperoni on the slice. Lawyer sues. Not just the cost of a board.


Your a moron.
 
2014-01-31 05:14:13 PM

Nabb1: but dear lord, someone said something negative about a provision of the ACA, so let's all crap our pants...


Be fair.  How was anyone to differentiate this particular "ACA will kill businesses" claim from the millions of other "ACA will kill businesses" claims?  The justification that this one time there might be some reasonable tweak to its provisions that seems to provide nearly the same public benefit while at the same time easing compliance seems to be thin.  It's almost special pleading to say "OK guys, ignore all those other baseless, BS attacks we've made on the ACA--as well as the many more we're sure to make in the future--THIS ONE TIME you have to give us some benefit of the doubt, otherwise you're being unreasonable."
 
2014-01-31 05:14:40 PM

MyRandomName: Bareefer Obonghit: requires restaurants with 20 or more locations to list calorie-content information for each menu item on a board at every establishment.  The costs of this intrusive regulation would be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices


The costs of  a board

THE COSTS of A BOARD

Lawyer has pizza tested. Employee had put one more pepperoni on the slice. Lawyer sues. Not just the cost of a board.


Sues for what damages and what cause of action?
 
2014-01-31 05:15:08 PM

mrlewish: So what restaurant that says in business does not keep track of their ingredient costs?


Good ol' mom & pop places that "Owe"bama is trying to run into the ground.

You know, those small town business owners who have 20 restaurants.  Real salt of the Earth.
 
2014-01-31 05:16:51 PM

Skleenar: Nabb1: but dear lord, someone said something negative about a provision of the ACA, so let's all crap our pants...

Be fair.  How was anyone to differentiate this particular "ACA will kill businesses" claim from the millions of other "ACA will kill businesses" claims?  The justification that this one time there might be some reasonable tweak to its provisions that seems to provide nearly the same public benefit while at the same time easing compliance seems to be thin.  It's almost special pleading to say "OK guys, ignore all those other baseless, BS attacks we've made on the ACA--as well as the many more we're sure to make in the future--THIS ONE TIME you have to give us some benefit of the doubt, otherwise you're being unreasonable."


Okay, that's fair in general, but I refuse to be fair to complaints that could have been assuaged by simply reading the article.
 
2014-01-31 05:16:51 PM
I decided what I am making for dinner tonight
 
2014-01-31 05:16:51 PM

Rhypskallion: A 3-D model is better. Here's one for you--make a fist. That's the natural size of your stomach. Eat that volume of food--no more the rest is wasted. Your appetite is the result of cultural mis-training to eat more than you need, and you will get used to it in a few weeks. Carry on.


ionenewsone.files.wordpress.com
 
2014-01-31 05:18:10 PM
print out a piece of paper with the item and calories-per-serving, and let the customers do the math.

/my money-saving methods don't come cheap
 
2014-01-31 05:19:21 PM

Rhypskallion: Random Anonymous Blackmail: Why don't they just release a chart we can all understand.

A 3-D model is better.  Here's one for you--make a fist.   That's the natural size of your stomach.   Eat that volume of food--no more the rest is wasted.   Your appetite is the result of cultural mis-training to eat more than you need, and you will get used to it in a few weeks.     Carry on.


Every hour?
 
2014-01-31 05:20:33 PM
I alone am best: When you change it you have to have the lab tell you how many calories are in your new menu item

I was responding to this in your post and the answer is no you can use any of these--including nutrient databases, cookbooks, laboratory analyses, and other reasonable means
 
2014-01-31 05:22:32 PM

cman: Bareefer Obonghit: requires restaurants with 20 or more locations to list calorie-content information for each menu item on a board at every establishment.  The costs of this intrusive regulation would be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices


The costs of  a board

THE COSTS of A BOARD

I see it as a BS argument, but to be fair, you would be surprised how much something like this could cost


Or you could just pot a sticker on there with the calories.
 
2014-01-31 05:23:08 PM

MyRandomName: Bareefer Obonghit: requires restaurants with 20 or more locations to list calorie-content information for each menu item on a board at every establishment.  The costs of this intrusive regulation would be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices


The costs of  a board

THE COSTS of A BOARD

Lawyer has pizza tested. Employee had put one more pepperoni on the slice. Lawyer sues. Not just the cost of a board.


That's not how it works.

Someone has to outraged by a continuous misrepresentation of ingredient count enough to contact a lawyer.  The lawyer would have to first determine whether there is some sort of intentional misrepresentation of the resturanteer or a institutional practice which may result in the miscount of ingredient.  After determining the validity of the complaint, the lawyer would notify the institution of the complaint thus giving them time to correct the error.

There would have to be continual and intentional disreguard of the complaint before any type of suit could b pursued and actual damages determined.
 
2014-01-31 05:24:57 PM
I put one egg per pound of beef in my hamburgers.


tay steeee
 
2014-01-31 05:28:57 PM
To the people biatching about the costs of coming up with the calorie counts... I'm just one guy, and if I want to know how many calories are in a homemade meal, here's what I do: I weigh the amount of ingredient I'll be using to make the meal, I check the ingredient label to see how many calories are in a serving, I do a little math, I write down the total, and I repeat that for every ingredient. Maybe that takes five minutes. What exactly is so hard about this? They don't have to send each menu item to a frickin' lab. We already know the calorie content of stuff. What, they can do all the calculations required to determine how much they should mark up their food, but they can't be bothered to do the calculations to determine how fat their food will make us?
 
2014-01-31 05:29:09 PM

busy chillin': I put one egg per pound of beef in my hamburgers.


tay steeee


Roll in some bread crumbs and diced onions while you're at it.
 
2014-01-31 05:29:46 PM

sdd2000: I alone am best: When you change it you have to have the lab tell you how many calories are in your new menu item

I was responding to this in your post and the answer is no you can use any of these--including nutrient databases, cookbooks, laboratory analyses, and other reasonable means


But you guys, it's really expensive to google up nutrition facts for ingredients and know how much I use for each product I make! It could take a second-grader nearly hours to add up the numbers!
 
2014-01-31 05:30:44 PM

Bareefer Obonghit: requires restaurants with 20 or more locations to list calorie-content information for each menu item on a board at every establishment.  The costs of this intrusive regulation would be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices


The costs of  a board

THE COSTS of A BOARD


I was under the impression that the regulation was so poorly written that it required every possible permutation/combination which would involve hundreds of square feet of signage, even if the font was like size 9.
 
2014-01-31 05:30:54 PM

Steigen: Huggermugger: If these bastards had their way, they'd still be blocking the 1970s laws that mandated nutritional information on packaged supermarket food.

The 1990 Nutrition Labeling and Education Act
I'm assuming you were born sometime after disco


That's when it was finally implemented.  It took a couple of decades to hash it all out, but I know they started fighting it in the 1970s.

/born during the Cold War
//worked part-time at a grocery store when I was in college in the late 70s
 
2014-01-31 05:31:10 PM
I'm actually okay with the entire article except for the last sentence: Congress should follow up passage of the Common Sense bill with a vote to repeal Obamacare before it does more any more damage.

My takeaway is that they found a somewhat legitimate painpoint in Obamacare, are in the process of fixing it, and therefore Obamacare is even better than it was before.  BOOM.  Republican Democracy!

To the naysayers--if the bill actually requires a business to put nutritional information on a menu board, that can be an expensive addition if the boards aren't easily changed.  I've seen sandwich shops whose menus are literally carved into hardwood panels on the wall. It doesn't look cheap, anyway.
 
2014-01-31 05:31:13 PM
Reading that headline made me hungry for pizza.  Pizza Hut pan cheese lovers with Alfredo sauce and pepperoni.
Not so sure that calorie counts matter when you crave something like that. You know it tops 5000 so it is a diet bomb.
 
2014-01-31 05:33:36 PM

boyvoyeur: m1ke: The whole point of this country is if you want to eat garbage, balloon up to 600 pounds, and die of a heart attack at 43, you can. You are free to do so. To me, that's beautiful.

This. I'm ordering a pizza. Any time you do that, you're not eating a healthy meal. I don't need it pointed out to me six times a week.


So, a mean isn't good for you. You could be a very healthy person that treats himself on occasion. Knowing how bad something actually is for you is valuable.

Let's say, my friends and I go out for bugers one Saturday. If I know the nutritional information is I can appropriately adjust my meals over the next few days.

For people that go to those places daily, they don't care. But others do.
 
2014-01-31 05:34:06 PM
I always enjoy reading the delusional right wing butt-hurt in the comments below such articles.
 
2014-01-31 05:38:46 PM

Jaymark108: I've seen sandwich shops whose menus are literally carved into hardwood panels on the wall. It doesn't look cheap, anyway.


Well, they wanted to do that when they created their menus; they can do it to amend it. That's assuming they have 20+ locations, and if they do that at 20+ locations, that's just nuts.

/and they'll probably have some type of exemptions
//they'll happily raise prices, just know that it's not going to be costing them much

rev. dave: Not so sure that calorie counts matter when you crave something like that. You know it tops 5000 so it is a diet bomb.


I love the Chicken Bacon Ranch stuffed pizza from Papa Murphy's. I looked up the nutritional information - a slice (1/16 of a pizza) goes for 370 calories.

I only slice pizzas into 8 pieces. Then I used to have four slices.

:/ @ realizing I just consumed nearly 3000 calories in one meal (without factoring drinks in)

/two slices are okay, but still 1480 calories
//1/8 of a pizza isn't even worth the time to bake it
 
2014-01-31 05:38:50 PM

IAmRight: sdd2000: I alone am best: When you change it you have to have the lab tell you how many calories are in your new menu item

I was responding to this in your post and the answer is no you can use any of these--including nutrient databases, cookbooks, laboratory analyses, and other reasonable means

But you guys, it's really expensive to google up nutrition facts for ingredients and know how much I use for each product I make! It could take a second-grader nearly hours to add up the numbers!


Basic math is not reasonable means to a derper!
 
2014-01-31 05:39:19 PM

doctor wu: I always enjoy reading the delusional right wing butt-hurt in the comments below such articles.


Aren't they amazing?
 
2014-01-31 05:39:45 PM

cman: Cagey B: cman: Cagey B: cman: I see it as a BS argument, but to be fair, you would be surprised how much something like this could cost

Try me. Whatever it is I'm sure will bankrupt utterly a business with at least twenty operating restaurants.

Try you? I already said it was a BS argument

The statement that we'd be "surprised how much something like this could cost" implies that doing this is a) relatively expensive and b) some sort of noticeable burden to the parties that would have to comply. If that's genuinely not what you were driving at, then whatever.

Thats why I added "to be fair"


Your mom is a whore.  No disrespect.

I added "no disrespect."
 
2014-01-31 05:40:11 PM
California already does this, and as far as I can tell fast food restaurants are doing just fine.
 
2014-01-31 05:41:13 PM

IAmRight: sdd2000: I alone am best: When you change it you have to have the lab tell you how many calories are in your new menu item

I was responding to this in your post and the answer is no you can use any of these--including nutrient databases, cookbooks, laboratory analyses, and other reasonable means

But you guys, it's really expensive to google up nutrition facts for ingredients and know how much I use for each product I make! It could take a second-grader nearly hours to add up the numbers!


nutrient databases, cookbooks, laboratory analyses, and other reasonable means

Not

google and guesswork
 
2014-01-31 05:41:24 PM
They've had that on the books for years in NY... It's pretty helpful to know that the meal you're ordering is about 1,000 more calories than you'd thought it was.
 
2014-01-31 05:42:09 PM
combat this be ordering your pie by the calorie !

yes, i'd like a plain at 1000and a pepperoni at 1500and a 2 liter  of coke ...
 
2014-01-31 05:43:05 PM

I alone am best: IAmRight: sdd2000: I alone am best: When you change it you have to have the lab tell you how many calories are in your new menu item

I was responding to this in your post and the answer is no you can use any of these--including nutrient databases, cookbooks, laboratory analyses, and other reasonable means

But you guys, it's really expensive to google up nutrition facts for ingredients and know how much I use for each product I make! It could take a second-grader nearly hours to add up the numbers!

nutrient databases, cookbooks, laboratory analyses, and other reasonable means

Not

google and guesswork


Addition is guesswork to the right wing?
 
2014-01-31 05:44:35 PM
Who the fark reads that shiat anyway?
 
2014-01-31 05:44:59 PM

sufferpuppet: Having somebody determine the calorie counts for an entire menu. Think that's free?


Hire some kid for near minimum wage, have him run through the recipes and determine caloric content based on the ingredients.  Shouldn't take more than a day or two at worst.  If your 20+ restaurant chain can't handle that, then you deserve to go out of business.


shootsright: Do people actually trust the nutritional information if it's provided?


I use it as a guide, expecting that it'll probably be off by ±10%, and possibly off by ±25%.  But, it did reenforce my suspicion that a lot of stuff marketed as "healthy" is still very high in calories and fat.  And I was surprised about how bad some things were.
 
2014-01-31 05:45:10 PM

MemeSlave: Its only for places with 20 or more locations, because you know, big business is the root of all evil.


I'm sure you're being sarcastic, but generally larger businesses are more profitable and can absorb the cost of regulatory compliance much more easily than smaller businesses, and with most such regulatory issues, contribute to a larger portion of the problem that the regulation is designed to combat.
 
2014-01-31 05:46:09 PM

WTFDYW: Who the fark reads that shiat anyway?


Read the comment section. You'll very quickly discover who.
 
2014-01-31 05:46:36 PM

I alone am best: IAmRight: sdd2000: I alone am best: When you change it you have to have the lab tell you how many calories are in your new menu item

I was responding to this in your post and the answer is no you can use any of these--including nutrient databases, cookbooks, laboratory analyses, and other reasonable means

But you guys, it's really expensive to google up nutrition facts for ingredients and know how much I use for each product I make! It could take a second-grader nearly hours to add up the numbers!

nutrient databases, cookbooks, laboratory analyses, and other reasonable means

Not

google and guesswork


Describe  one ingredient not listed in the USDA's official reference, available online, free.
 
2014-01-31 05:48:31 PM
FTFA:  Liz Thatcher is an adjunct scholar with the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

FFW:  The Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) is a non-profit American, libertarian think tank founded on March 9, 1984 in Washington, D.C. by Fred L. Smith, Jr that aims to advance economic liberty by fighting what it sees as excessive government regulation.

Wish I knew that sooner, then I could have stopped reading even earlier.  Dumb biatch didn't even mention how it's already been implemented in California (that is, until it was negated by the ACA in a confusing state vs federal law mess than won't get resolved until the ACA goes into full effect).  It consists of adding numbers to the existing menu, numbers which are already known by any chain with more than a handful of stores.  Oh my farking god how much more arduous and expensive can it get?!

And, for the record, it was very useful (and still is in places that haven't reverted since the law was negated).  There's things which I knew were bad for me, I was like yeah...this thing's probably like 1000 calories, so I shouldn't have it too often.  Then came the labeling laws...it was 1920 calories.  I don't eat that thing anymore.  For those that look, you eat just a little less cause you're a bit more conscious of it and decide maybe you don't need an extra 150 calories from a taco on the side.  Or maybe you'll spend a buck extra for something just a tad healthier that still sounds good.  Those small things add up.  For those that don't look, stfu and stop making up bullshiat excuses why it will kill small businesses and make the sky fall and poison our children.

/also great for maximizing food energy per dollar!
 
2014-01-31 05:49:16 PM

doctor wu: I always enjoy reading the delusional right wing butt-hurt in the comments below such articles.


Deluded wingnuts vote.
 
2014-01-31 05:49:48 PM

Bareefer Obonghit: requires restaurants with 20 or more locations to list calorie-content information for each menu item on a board at every establishment.  The costs of this intrusive regulation would be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices


The costs of  a board

THE COSTS of A BOARD


Plus keeping the info on it accurate in the face of changes to recipes, ingredients, suppliers, portion sizes, and offered dishes. Plus handling the shakedown lawsuits when enterprising trial attorneys nitpick it for flaws, or decide it isn't displayed in the legally required manner such as some jackass customer hanging his coat on it.

It's all easy when you're not the one with your ass on the line for it, meanwhile trying to keep your business in the air too.
 
2014-01-31 05:50:30 PM

Enigmamf: I alone am best: IAmRight: sdd2000: I alone am best: When you change it you have to have the lab tell you how many calories are in your new menu item

I was responding to this in your post and the answer is no you can use any of these--including nutrient databases, cookbooks, laboratory analyses, and other reasonable means

But you guys, it's really expensive to google up nutrition facts for ingredients and know how much I use for each product I make! It could take a second-grader nearly hours to add up the numbers!

nutrient databases, cookbooks, laboratory analyses, and other reasonable means

Not

google and guesswork

Describe  one ingredient not listed in the USDA's official reference, available online, free.


Yes but adding things up is hard if you can only count to potato.
 
2014-01-31 05:50:40 PM

Endive Wombat: Bareefer Obonghit: requires restaurants with 20 or more locations to list calorie-content information for each menu item on a board at every establishment.  The costs of this intrusive regulation would be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices


The costs of  a board

THE COSTS of A BOARD

I was under the impression that the regulation was so poorly written that it required every possible permutation/combination which would involve hundreds of square feet of signage, even if the font was like size 9.


Then you got that impression from a strawman being propped up by fox news, possibly with Bill O'Reilly's hand up its ass.
 
2014-01-31 05:50:59 PM

Enigmamf: Describe one ingredient not listed in the USDA's official reference, available online, free.


Jizz.

/It's for a cop.
 
2014-01-31 05:51:20 PM
The reason for the pushback is that restaurants DO NOT want the customer to know what they are eating, because they actually might not eat it.
 
2014-01-31 05:52:04 PM
It's amazing how many people will pretend to have never seen a menu with a calorie count on it, all while attempting to convey that they understand how business works.
 
2014-01-31 05:52:48 PM

BSABSVR: Enigmamf: Describe one ingredient not listed in the USDA's official reference, available online, free.

Jizz.

/It's for a cop.


Right here?
 
2014-01-31 05:53:11 PM

poot_rootbeer: New York City has had this regulation on the books for over five years now, as have  Seattle and other cities for nearly as long.  As far as I know, nobody went out of business due to compliance costs.

A well informed buyer is critical to a healthy capitalist system.


......and this is why Chicago has better pizza.
 
2014-01-31 05:53:32 PM

clowncar on fire: MyRandomName: Bareefer Obonghit: requires restaurants with 20 or more locations to list calorie-content information for each menu item on a board at every establishment.  The costs of this intrusive regulation would be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices


The costs of  a board

THE COSTS of A BOARD

Lawyer has pizza tested. Employee had put one more pepperoni on the slice. Lawyer sues. Not just the cost of a board.

That's not how it works.

Someone has to outraged by a continuous misrepresentation of ingredient count enough to contact a lawyer.  The lawyer would have to first determine whether there is some sort of intentional misrepresentation of the resturanteer or a institutional practice which may result in the miscount of ingredient.  After determining the validity of the complaint, the lawyer would notify the institution of the complaint thus giving them time to correct the error.

There would have to be continual and intentional disreguard of the complaint before any type of suit could b pursued and actual damages determined.


This.

And then when they try to put a dollar figure on the losses of the plaintiff, they'll get laughed out of court.
 
2014-01-31 05:54:09 PM
Wait, so the nutritional info boards at virtually every one of these establishments are there currently just for show? I thought this was a requirement already for the most part, or at least common-sense CYA stuff from their legal teams..
 
2014-01-31 05:54:14 PM

sdd2000: Enigmamf: I alone am best: IAmRight: sdd2000: I alone am best: When you change it you have to have the lab tell you how many calories are in your new menu item

I was responding to this in your post and the answer is no you can use any of these--including nutrient databases, cookbooks, laboratory analyses, and other reasonable means

But you guys, it's really expensive to google up nutrition facts for ingredients and know how much I use for each product I make! It could take a second-grader nearly hours to add up the numbers!

nutrient databases, cookbooks, laboratory analyses, and other reasonable means

Not

google and guesswork

Describe  one ingredient not listed in the USDA's official reference, available online, free.

Yes but adding things up is hard if you can only count to potato.


So in your expert legal opinion, when the government comes knocking you can just say "Hey, I googled it this is legit"?
 
2014-01-31 05:55:41 PM
Anyone care that this is a 10th amendment issue?
Didn't think so.....
 
2014-01-31 05:56:05 PM

jjorsett: Bareefer Obonghit: requires restaurants with 20 or more locations to list calorie-content information for each menu item on a board at every establishment.  The costs of this intrusive regulation would be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices


The costs of  a board

THE COSTS of A BOARD

Plus keeping the info on it accurate in the face of changes to recipes, ingredients, suppliers, portion sizes, and offered dishes. Plus handling the shakedown lawsuits when enterprising trial attorneys nitpick it for flaws, or decide it isn't displayed in the legally required manner such as some jackass customer hanging his coat on it.

It's all easy when you're not the one with your ass on the line for it, meanwhile trying to keep your business in the air too.


Damages, cause of action?
 
2014-01-31 05:57:17 PM

I alone am best: sdd2000: Enigmamf: I alone am best: IAmRight: sdd2000: I alone am best: When you change it you have to have the lab tell you how many calories are in your new menu item

I was responding to this in your post and the answer is no you can use any of these--including nutrient databases, cookbooks, laboratory analyses, and other reasonable means

But you guys, it's really expensive to google up nutrition facts for ingredients and know how much I use for each product I make! It could take a second-grader nearly hours to add up the numbers!

nutrient databases, cookbooks, laboratory analyses, and other reasonable means

Not

google and guesswork

Describe  one ingredient not listed in the USDA's official reference, available online, free.

Yes but adding things up is hard if you can only count to potato.

So in your expert legal opinion, when the government comes knocking you can just say "Hey, I googled it this is legit"?


It would depend on what the underlying google source was. Assuming it was the USDA database (pointed out above) I would be happy to take the case.
 
2014-01-31 05:57:40 PM

kpaxoid: The reason for the pushback is that restaurants DO NOT want the customer to know what they are eating, because they actually might not eat it.


That's not what they are complaining about. The restaurant industry wanted more options to provide the information than a huge board posted on the premises. For example, restaurants that primarily deal with delivery. Customers would never see it. Some, like Domino's already have calculators on the website where you order pizza online. The proposed revision would also exempt places like grocery stores where less than half their revenue is prepared food. They aren't wholesale objecting to providing the information at all.
 
2014-01-31 05:59:49 PM

Enigmamf: I alone am best: IAmRight: sdd2000: I alone am best: When you change it you have to have the lab tell you how many calories are in your new menu item

I was responding to this in your post and the answer is no you can use any of these--including nutrient databases, cookbooks, laboratory analyses, and other reasonable means

But you guys, it's really expensive to google up nutrition facts for ingredients and know how much I use for each product I make! It could take a second-grader nearly hours to add up the numbers!

nutrient databases, cookbooks, laboratory analyses, and other reasonable means

Not

google and guesswork

Describe  one ingredient not listed in the USDA's official reference, available online, free.



It doesnt matter if you can source it on the USDA's website the law is pretty clear. For fun I did source some widley used regional items in michigan and they were not on there.
 
2014-01-31 06:01:30 PM

Nabb1: For example, restaurants that primarily deal with delivery. Customers would never see it.


Every delivery place I know of also does take out.  Little Caesars promotes their 5 buck hot n ready pizzas for carryout with tons of tv commercials recently.
 
2014-01-31 06:05:48 PM

chitownmike: ValisIV: sufferpuppet: Ritley: What an asinine argument. The cost of a board showing nutrition info is not burdensome in any manner

How bout the cost of producing that data?    Having somebody determine the calorie counts for an entire menu.  Think that's free?

They know how many ounces of X are in each dish, and the calorie info on that is readily available. It's like you know you put 1lb of ground beef, 2 eggs, etc into your burger patties, and made 4 patties, you can do some quick maths, and find out. Chain restaurants measure everything.  Also, calorie testing is really cheap.

Who the fark puts egg, etc. in a burger? 'Cuz I will not be eating there! Burger = ground beef salt and pepper cooked for a few mins, on a bun, that's it!


You forgot the onion, and hot sauce (feel free to pick the kind you prefer) in the burger. The cheese melted on the patty. And mayonnaise, ketchup, yello mustard, dill pickles, onions, tomatoes, and bacon inside the bun.

Bread crubs and egg are prefectly fine, but non-essential ingredients.
 
2014-01-31 06:08:55 PM

I alone am best: It doesnt matter if you can source it on the USDA's website the law is pretty clear.


You're aware that that would be a "nutrient database," right? Hence why it WOULD be acceptable?
 
2014-01-31 06:12:47 PM

12349876: Nabb1: For example, restaurants that primarily deal with delivery. Customers would never see it.

Every delivery place I know of also does take out.  Little Caesars promotes their 5 buck hot n ready pizzas for carryout with tons of tv commercials recently.


Little Greasers doesn't deliver. And delivery customers still wouldn't see the board. I've never set foot in the Papa John's I've been ordering from for 15 years.
 
2014-01-31 06:13:27 PM

IAmRight: I alone am best: It doesnt matter if you can source it on the USDA's website the law is pretty clear.

You're aware that that would be a "nutrient database," right? Hence why it WOULD be acceptable?


I assume because the US government is not trustworthy?

The vast majority of ingredients will be in that database. Any prepared ingredients will have the details readily available. And finding a reasonably reliable database for any others shouldn't be too hard.
 
2014-01-31 06:15:19 PM

dywed88: IAmRight: I alone am best: It doesnt matter if you can source it on the USDA's website the law is pretty clear.

You're aware that that would be a "nutrient database," right? Hence why it WOULD be acceptable?

I assume because the US government is not trustworthy?

The vast majority of ingredients will be in that database. Any prepared ingredients will have the details readily available. And finding a reasonably reliable database for any others shouldn't be too hard.


That's really not the most reliable way to get a calorie count on specific dishes as they are prepared and served.
 
2014-01-31 06:15:32 PM
I've also noticed more restaurants using 60" tvs as menu boards. I figure it's just a matter of time before they start jiggling the prices depending on the time of day.
 
2014-01-31 06:15:44 PM
I'm having a hard time understanding the public objection to this.  I mean if they just don't want to know they probably have trouble reading anyway so it shouldn't be hard to ignore the sign.  If you have a restaurant chain with 20 or more locations you have the means to pay someone to calculate the caloric content of your food.  It's not super expensive to take the ingredients and and add.  I think what most chain restaurants are objecting to is publicly posting numbers that are in many cases way worse than McDonalds simply due to portion size and equally shiatty ingredients.
 
2014-01-31 06:15:48 PM

genner: Anyone care that this is a 10th amendment issue?
Didn't think so.....


Except no it's not.  The 10th amended basically says whatever issues are not covered by federal law the states are free to do with as they see fit, unless they are prohibited from doing so.  If a federal law is passed and applied equally to all states, then it becomes an area that falls under federal jurisdiction and state law is superseded.  The 10th amendment does not confer any power to the states, it just reiterates that the federal government can't get involved in state matters unless an existing law makes it relevant at a federal level.  It was not always interpreted this way, but it is now, and has been off and on for a couple hundred years.  I don't think you'll win that argument.
 
2014-01-31 06:15:54 PM

Nabb1: 12349876: Nabb1: For example, restaurants that primarily deal with delivery. Customers would never see it.

Every delivery place I know of also does take out.  Little Caesars promotes their 5 buck hot n ready pizzas for carryout with tons of tv commercials recently.

Little Greasers doesn't deliver. And delivery customers still wouldn't see the board. I've never set foot in the Papa John's I've been ordering from for 15 years.


The point is if you have customers in your store even if it's just take out then it's only fair that you need a damn board.
 
2014-01-31 06:16:45 PM
It's an unfunded mandate by the gubmint for you morans who can't wipe their ass without Fadder Oobama's help.
 
2014-01-31 06:19:24 PM

Nabb1: dywed88: IAmRight: I alone am best: It doesnt matter if you can source it on the USDA's website the law is pretty clear.

You're aware that that would be a "nutrient database," right? Hence why it WOULD be acceptable?

I assume because the US government is not trustworthy?

The vast majority of ingredients will be in that database. Any prepared ingredients will have the details readily available. And finding a reasonably reliable database for any others shouldn't be too hard.

That's really not the most reliable way to get a calorie count on specific dishes as they are prepared and served.


The law does not require absolute accuracy, only that one of the enumerated means or any reasonable means be used.
 
2014-01-31 06:22:18 PM

Nabb1: dywed88: IAmRight: I alone am best: It doesnt matter if you can source it on the USDA's website the law is pretty clear.

You're aware that that would be a "nutrient database," right? Hence why it WOULD be acceptable?

I assume because the US government is not trustworthy?

The vast majority of ingredients will be in that database. Any prepared ingredients will have the details readily available. And finding a reasonably reliable database for any others shouldn't be too hard.

That's really not the most reliable way to get a calorie count on specific dishes as they are prepared and served.


Sure, it isn't the most reliable. But it should be "reasonably reliable"
 
2014-01-31 06:24:11 PM
Bareefer Obonghit [TotalFark]
2014-01-31 04:00:19 PM


requires restaurants with 20 or more locations to list calorie-content information for each menu item on a board at every establishment. The costs of this intrusive regulation would be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices


The costs of a board

THE COSTS of A BOARD

Are you really that ignorant, or just an uber-apologist?


whynotboth.jpg
 
2014-01-31 06:25:53 PM
I'm still trying to figure out why I should be outraged again?

/Remembers this same crap from last year
 
2014-01-31 06:27:42 PM

clowncar on fire: MyRandomName: Bareefer Obonghit: requires restaurants with 20 or more locations to list calorie-content information for each menu item on a board at every establishment.  The costs of this intrusive regulation would be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices


The costs of  a board

THE COSTS of A BOARD

Lawyer has pizza tested. Employee had put one more pepperoni on the slice. Lawyer sues. Not just the cost of a board.

That's not how it works.

Someone has to outraged by a continuous misrepresentation of ingredient count enough to contact a lawyer.  The lawyer would have to first determine whether there is some sort of intentional misrepresentation of the resturanteer or a institutional practice which may result in the miscount of ingredient.  After determining the validity of the complaint, the lawyer would notify the institution of the complaint thus giving them time to correct the error.

There would have to be continual and intentional disreguard of the complaint before any type of suit could b pursued and actual damages determined.


Notsureifserious..

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/17/nyregion/lawyers-find-obstacles-to -t he-disabled-then-find-plaintiffs.html
 
2014-01-31 06:32:15 PM

Rezurok: genner: Anyone care that this is a 10th amendment issue?
Didn't think so.....

Except no it's not.  The 10th amended basically says whatever issues are not covered by federal law the states are free to do with as they see fit, unless they are prohibited from doing so.  If a federal law is passed and applied equally to all states, then it becomes an area that falls under federal jurisdiction and state law is superseded.  The 10th amendment does not confer any power to the states, it just reiterates that the federal government can't get involved in state matters unless an existing law makes it relevant at a federal level.  It was not always interpreted this way, but it is now, and has been off and on for a couple hundred years.  I don't think you'll win that argument.



The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.[2]

I don't expect to win the argument It just amazes me that courts are capable of the leaps of logic it takes to reinterpret one sentence to mean the opposite of what it clearly says.
 
2014-01-31 06:32:38 PM
passmethemalkplease.files.wordpress.com

We don't need the government telling us what's in our Malk!
 
2014-01-31 06:38:27 PM
img.fark.net
Oblig
 
2014-01-31 06:38:32 PM

dywed88: chitownmike: ValisIV: sufferpuppet: Ritley: What an asinine argument. The cost of a board showing nutrition info is not burdensome in any manner

How bout the cost of producing that data?    Having somebody determine the calorie counts for an entire menu.  Think that's free?

They know how many ounces of X are in each dish, and the calorie info on that is readily available. It's like you know you put 1lb of ground beef, 2 eggs, etc into your burger patties, and made 4 patties, you can do some quick maths, and find out. Chain restaurants measure everything.  Also, calorie testing is really cheap.

Who the fark puts egg, etc. in a burger? 'Cuz I will not be eating there! Burger = ground beef salt and pepper cooked for a few mins, on a bun, that's it!

You forgot the onion, and hot sauce (feel free to pick the kind you prefer) in the burger. The cheese melted on the patty. And mayonnaise, ketchup, yello mustard, dill pickles, onions, tomatoes, and bacon inside the bun.

Bread crubs and egg are prefectly fine, but non-essential ingredients.


That's meatloaf
 
2014-01-31 06:39:47 PM

Cagey B: cman: I see it as a BS argument, but to be fair, you would be surprised how much something like this could cost

Try me. Whatever it is I'm sure will bankrupt utterly a business with at least twenty operating restaurants.


Regardless . It is an unnecessary  regulation  imposing a cost  easily dismissed as a non-issue by those who do not have to pay  for comply with it.  The majority of people who buy pizza really don't care about  the nutritional info and the very very small minority who do are not worth the costs.

This is sort of like supporting raising taxes you don't have to pay or "free stuff" government you don't have to pay for.

The politician who promises to rob Peter to pay Paul can always count on the vote of Paul
 
2014-01-31 06:40:44 PM

hasty ambush: Cagey B: cman: I see it as a BS argument, but to be fair, you would be surprised how much something like this could cost

Try me. Whatever it is I'm sure will bankrupt utterly a business with at least twenty operating restaurants.

Regardless . It is an unnecessary  regulation  imposing a cost  easily dismissed as a non-issue by those who do not have to pay  for comply with it.  The majority of people who buy pizza really don't care about  the nutritional info and the very very small minority who do are not worth the costs.

This is sort of like supporting raising taxes you don't have to pay or "free stuff" government you don't have to pay for.

The politician who promises to rob Peter to pay Paul can always count on the vote of Paul


Who is Peter and who is Paul?
 
2014-01-31 06:44:37 PM
meh is more about not having to reveal how bad  the food to customers in store, and potentially scaring them off when they see how much fat and cholesterol is in some of that stuff.
 
2014-01-31 06:45:04 PM

kpaxoid: The reason for the pushback is that restaurants DO NOT want the customer to know what they are eating, because they actually might not eat it.


Also they want an excuse to raise prices, if they can persuade gullible right wing morons that this will cost eleventh kajillion dollars to get a five year old to add up 3 or 4 numbers and then get them put on a sign or menu, then they can hike their prices and make more profit off the rubes.

As we all know, every time MacDonalds introduces a new menu item the horrendous costs of putting out new menus and new signage totally destroyed the world economy, and forced the IMF to step in and bail out the massive debt they incurred.
 
2014-01-31 06:57:59 PM
Obama is trying to keep people from throwing their weight around.
 
2014-01-31 07:00:15 PM

what_now: creating a nutritional menu for the hundreds of possible food combinations
or, you could do this:

[www.anutinanutshell.com image 400x300]


Seriously, Chipotle even figured this out.  All their food is is various combinations of other food.
 
2014-01-31 07:01:51 PM
Guys, you can quit arguing over how much nutritional analysis and labeling would cost.

I am pretty certain the loss of revenue from people realizing (or being reminded) just how terrible said pizza is for you would dwarf whatever the costs are for signage and analysis.  But they can't say that, so they put this bullshiat argument out instead.

Which is why the people who carry water for the big pizza chains (and every other large company) are writing about it.
 
2014-01-31 07:11:51 PM
That was a pretty sane and refreshing commentary piece for the Washington Times.

Until it veered into Upper Derpistan in the last sentence.

/btw, washingtontimes.com will spam you if you use a Disqus ID to comment at their site.
 
2014-01-31 07:14:52 PM
How much research would they really need to do? It's not as if they're growing the food out in the back; doesn't it already have labels, and don't they know how many servings they get from a gallon of mayonnaise or a 5lb block of cheese?

If they can't do that amount arithmetic on a one-off basis, I should be more careful in counting my change.
 
2014-01-31 07:41:19 PM

chitownmike: dywed88: chitownmike: ValisIV: sufferpuppet: Ritley: What an asinine argument. The cost of a board showing nutrition info is not burdensome in any manner

How bout the cost of producing that data?    Having somebody determine the calorie counts for an entire menu.  Think that's free?

They know how many ounces of X are in each dish, and the calorie info on that is readily available. It's like you know you put 1lb of ground beef, 2 eggs, etc into your burger patties, and made 4 patties, you can do some quick maths, and find out. Chain restaurants measure everything.  Also, calorie testing is really cheap.

Who the fark puts egg, etc. in a burger? 'Cuz I will not be eating there! Burger = ground beef salt and pepper cooked for a few mins, on a bun, that's it!

You forgot the onion, and hot sauce (feel free to pick the kind you prefer) in the burger. The cheese melted on the patty. And mayonnaise, ketchup, yello mustard, dill pickles, onions, tomatoes, and bacon inside the bun.

Bread crubs and egg are prefectly fine, but non-essential ingredients.

That's meatloaf


If you put it in a loaf pan and bakeit, sure. Though I would argue that bread crumbs, garlic and egg are essential for meatloaf.
 
2014-01-31 07:46:55 PM
Doesn't Sysco provide nutrition labels for the stuff they microwave at restaurants in the first place? Just print it out on a poster and be done with it.
 
2014-01-31 07:46:57 PM

Nabb1: That's not what they are complaining about. The restaurant industry wanted more options to provide the information than a huge board posted on the premises.


The restaurants are still free to provide the information on the web site or any other way they can think of.

But some people do drop in to Dominos and order a pizza. Those people should have the information available at the same place that lists what foods are available to purchase, whether it's a big sign, a menu, or whatever.
 
2014-01-31 07:48:23 PM

Ant: Bareefer Obonghit: requires restaurants with 20 or more locations to list calorie-content information for each menu item on a board at every establishment.  The costs of this intrusive regulation would be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices


The costs of  a board

THE COSTS of A BOARD

To be fair, I think they have to have someone calculate the nutritional value of each menu item.


And then someone had to design the board. Then there are the people who have to produce the boards, the people who deliver and install the boards, not to mention the people who have to decide where to locate the boards. Oops, I nearly forgot the people who have to make sure the boards were properly designed, printed, delivered and installed.

Wait a minute, this is a job creation program isn't it?
 
2014-01-31 07:51:16 PM

mcnguyen: California already does this, and as far as I can tell fast food restaurants are doing just fine.


^^^^^^THIS^^^^^
 
2014-01-31 07:55:38 PM
So, the totally outraged and posting from the same IP crew is:
cman
MyRandomName   
jjorsett
hasty ambush
Must be a communal living arrangement....I guess.

Also.
Mean Daddy (not the same IP, probably just retarded, in all fairness)

P.S. No, I won't tell you how I know.
 
2014-01-31 07:58:12 PM
We've had this in NY State for a few years - it's great. Know exactly what's going on.
 
2014-01-31 07:59:48 PM

Goetz: So, the totally outraged and posting from the same IP crew is:
cman
MyRandomName
jjorsett
hasty ambush
Must be a communal living arrangement....I guess.

Also.
Mean Daddy (not the same IP, probably just retarded, in all fairness)

P.S. No, I won't tell you how I know.


Private investigators... in Hawaii.

www.timesnews.net
 
2014-01-31 08:13:21 PM
A few things the article gets wrong:

1) It claims "Their bill will provide relief ... for those establishments that derive less than 50 percent of their total revenue from prepared food sales, such as gas stations." However, the new regulations already state that "Movie theaters, airplanes, bowling alleys, and other establishments whose primary purpose is not to sell food would not be subject to these proposed regulations. "
2) It claims restaurants would need to provide "nutritional menu for the hundreds of possible food combinations". However, the regulations already provide "Calories for variable menu items, such as combination meals, would be displayed in ranges. "
3) They claim it would be burdensome to displays this information in-store for pizza places, because so little of their business comes from in-store purchases. Information must only be displayed "on all menus and menu boards", so quite simply, if it's such a small portion of their business, they can take down the in-store menus. That's practically free.
 
2014-01-31 08:16:47 PM

I alone am best: sdd2000: Enigmamf: I alone am best: IAmRight: sdd2000: I alone am best: When you change it you have to have the lab tell you how many calories are in your new menu item

I was responding to this in your post and the answer is no you can use any of these--including nutrient databases, cookbooks, laboratory analyses, and other reasonable means

But you guys, it's really expensive to google up nutrition facts for ingredients and know how much I use for each product I make! It could take a second-grader nearly hours to add up the numbers!

nutrient databases, cookbooks, laboratory analyses, and other reasonable means

Not

google and guesswork

Describe  one ingredient not listed in the USDA's official reference, available online, free.

Yes but adding things up is hard if you can only count to potato.

So in your expert legal opinion, when the government comes knocking you can just say "Hey, I googled it this is legit"?


How many calories are in your strawman?

Step 1: For each ingredient in recipe, look up info in USDA database.
Step 2: Add them up
Step 3: There is no step 3.
Step 4: Potatoe!
 
2014-01-31 08:20:42 PM
That'll teach Herman Cain not to fark with the Obama man and his skinny wife.
 
2014-01-31 08:23:29 PM

3.bp.blogspot.com Miss me yet?

 
2014-01-31 08:25:31 PM
Why not do what McDo does? Put your nutritional information on the bottom of the place mat where people who really love McDo's food will find it when they eat the greasy place mat?
 
2014-01-31 08:32:18 PM

Goetz: So, the totally outraged and posting from the same IP crew is:
cman
MyRandomName
jjorsett
hasty ambush
Must be a communal living arrangement....I guess.

Also.
Mean Daddy (not the same IP, probably just retarded, in all fairness)

P.S. No, I won't tell you how I know.


Did you even read what I posted?

Because if you did, you would have read that I called their argument bullshiat
 
2014-01-31 08:32:22 PM

Enigmamf: A few things the article gets wrong:

1) It claims "Their bill will provide relief ... for those establishments that derive less than 50 percent of their total revenue from prepared food sales, such as gas stations." However, the new regulations already state that "Movie theaters, airplanes, bowling alleys, and other establishments whose primary purpose is not to sell food would not be subject to these proposed regulations. "
2) It claims restaurants would need to provide "nutritional menu for the hundreds of possible food combinations". However, the regulations already provide "Calories for variable menu items, such as combination meals, would be displayed in ranges. "
3) They claim it would be burdensome to displays this information in-store for pizza places, because so little of their business comes from in-store purchases. Information must only be displayed "on all menus and menu boards", so quite simply, if it's such a small portion of their business, they can take down the in-store menus. That's practically free.


The big difference in the first one would be grocery and convenience stores. Where the majority of their sales are food, but not prepared food.
 
2014-01-31 08:40:00 PM
I thought it was going to be more like this: ordering pizza
 
2014-01-31 09:13:21 PM

brantgoose: Why not do what McDo does? Put your nutritional information on the bottom of the place mat where people who really love McDo's food will find it when they eat the greasy place mat?


The McDonalds around here put the calorie information on a video screen. Don't know if it is LED or Plasma but it's bright and the items roll passed. All a place has to do is put a flat screen someplace and have a PowerPoint presentation or something with each item on a slide. The law doesn't say all items have to be visible at the same time. So what if it takes three days to get around back to the first slide. If a customer wants to wee something specific, he can wait.
 
2014-01-31 09:46:50 PM
Can they just do the same trick as everyone else and put a low calorie count but say that this hamburger is 4 servings?
 
2014-01-31 09:54:38 PM
I'm in favor of this--it will help me keep score. It's a game I play to piss people off, called "How many calories can I eat while my waistline still diminishes?" (aka "Have a job that busts my ass.")
 
2014-01-31 10:01:11 PM

Enigmamf: 3) They claim it would be burdensome to displays this information in-store for pizza places, because so little of their business comes from in-store purchases. Information must only be displayed "on all menus and menu boards", so quite simply, if it's such a small portion of their business, they can take down the in-store menus. That's practically free.


I just remembered the Donatos pizzas near me did this.  There are only pictures on the big boards above the counter and they've got a small paper menu taped to the counter and I think you can grab one for yourself too.  That's the way to go for low traffic places.  Drop the big boards, print some paper menus.
 
2014-01-31 10:06:22 PM

cman: Goetz: So, the totally outraged and posting from the same IP crew is:
cman
MyRandomName
jjorsett
hasty ambush
Must be a communal living arrangement....I guess.

Also.
Mean Daddy (not the same IP, probably just retarded, in all fairness)

P.S. No, I won't tell you how I know.

Did you even read what I posted?

Because if you did, you would have read that I called their argument bullshiat


Go dig yourself a little hole and bury what shred of honour you have left.
 
2014-01-31 10:13:22 PM

Goetz: cman: Goetz: So, the totally outraged and posting from the same IP crew is:
cman
MyRandomName
jjorsett
hasty ambush
Must be a communal living arrangement....I guess.

Also.
Mean Daddy (not the same IP, probably just retarded, in all fairness)

P.S. No, I won't tell you how I know.

Did you even read what I posted?

Because if you did, you would have read that I called their argument bullshiat

Go dig yourself a little hole and bury what shred of honour you have left.


What? Are you shiatting on me because I said that it won't be cheap? If you took that as support to their side, don't. I am not saying that we should toss the law. I called their argument bullshiat while at the same time recognizing that things are not cheap. I am not saying its a catastrophic burden.
 
2014-01-31 10:29:37 PM

cman: Goetz: cman: Goetz: So, the totally outraged and posting from the same IP crew is:
cman
MyRandomName
jjorsett
hasty ambush
Must be a communal living arrangement....I guess.

Also.
Mean Daddy (not the same IP, probably just retarded, in all fairness)

P.S. No, I won't tell you how I know.

Did you even read what I posted?

Because if you did, you would have read that I called their argument bullshiat

Go dig yourself a little hole and bury what shred of honour you have left.

What? Are you shiatting on me because I said that it won't be cheap? If you took that as support to their side, don't. I am not saying that we should toss the law. I called their argument bullshiat while at the same time recognizing that things are not cheap. I am not saying its a catastrophic burden.


You protest too much.
 
2014-01-31 11:42:26 PM
Once the administration realizes that some people order for delivery, restaurants will be forced to use catapults to deliver the signs through closed glass windows and into the armpits of unsuspecting customers
 
2014-02-01 12:14:17 AM

chitownmike: ValisIV: sufferpuppet: Ritley: What an asinine argument. The cost of a board showing nutrition info is not burdensome in any manner

How bout the cost of producing that data?    Having somebody determine the calorie counts for an entire menu.  Think that's free?

They know how many ounces of X are in each dish, and the calorie info on that is readily available. It's like you know you put 1lb of ground beef, 2 eggs, etc into your burger patties, and made 4 patties, you can do some quick maths, and find out. Chain restaurants measure everything.  Also, calorie testing is really cheap.

Who the fark puts egg, etc. in a burger? 'Cuz I will not be eating there! Burger = ground beef salt and pepper cooked for a few mins, on a bun, that's it!


Eggs help the patty stay together. As an aside, have you ever had a fried egg on a burger? Sweet Jesus that is living.
 
2014-02-01 01:54:05 AM

BigBenny: chitownmike: ValisIV: sufferpuppet: Ritley: What an asinine argument. The cost of a board showing nutrition info is not burdensome in any manner

How bout the cost of producing that data?    Having somebody determine the calorie counts for an entire menu.  Think that's free?

They know how many ounces of X are in each dish, and the calorie info on that is readily available. It's like you know you put 1lb of ground beef, 2 eggs, etc into your burger patties, and made 4 patties, you can do some quick maths, and find out. Chain restaurants measure everything.  Also, calorie testing is really cheap.

Who the fark puts egg, etc. in a burger? 'Cuz I will not be eating there! Burger = ground beef salt and pepper cooked for a few mins, on a bun, that's it!

Eggs help the patty stay together. As an aside, have you ever had a fried egg on a burger? Sweet Jesus that is living.


If you want to eat a burger with an egg on it that is fine, awesome in my opinion, but if you count on egg to hold your burger together you are using shiat meat for your burger and nothing can save your soul from that
 
2014-02-01 02:34:37 AM

chitownmike: ValisIV: sufferpuppet: Ritley: What an asinine argument. The cost of a board showing nutrition info is not burdensome in any manner

How bout the cost of producing that data?    Having somebody determine the calorie counts for an entire menu.  Think that's free?

They know how many ounces of X are in each dish, and the calorie info on that is readily available. It's like you know you put 1lb of ground beef, 2 eggs, etc into your burger patties, and made 4 patties, you can do some quick maths, and find out. Chain restaurants measure everything.  Also, calorie testing is really cheap.

Who the fark puts egg, etc. in a burger? 'Cuz I will not be eating there! Burger = ground beef salt and pepper cooked for a few mins, on a bun, that's it!


I work in a restaurant that gets grass-fed, no-hormones or antibiotics added beef that we grind directly and season with only salt and pepper. There are other toppings on our burger obviously: housemade ketchup, housemade mayo, a mix of 3 mustards (our mustard mix: dijon, grainy, and hot), a housemade tomatillo relish (it's awesome), housemade szechuan pickles (awesome), caramelized onions and boston lettuce.

Oh, optional cheese and house-smoked bacon.

It's a good burger. When I make one for myself I sautee some of our mirepoix for mussels (garlic, shallot, celery) and some fine diced jalepenos and throw it in a bowl with what would have been a patty with a bit of worcestershire and some spices if I care enough to toast and sautee them off because ground beef by itself at any weight above 2 oz thickness is bland otherwise. Then I make it a patty and cook it. Aces. (No mayo, sometimes an over easy egg. A remnant from my time in Australia)

Egg and bread crumbs are not neccessary but are not unreasonable binders.

Perhaps as a professional, and also a North American, I've tainted my palate so that it needs to be wowed, but I think it's always desirable to enhance every level of your meal.... Including your patty.
 
2014-02-01 06:17:29 AM
If this is such a great idea why draw the line at businesses with 20+ locations?  Why not make it 10 or 5 or 1?

If you need the nutritional /caloric info on a pizza/fast food I would l suggest that maybe you should not really be eating one.
 
2014-02-01 06:37:38 AM

doctor wu: I always enjoy reading the delusional right wing butt-hurt in the comments below such articles.


Even when they had the white house, they still had epic butt hurt, all the farking time. It is amazing.

I know some of you will not believe me, but salt of the earth repubs (i.e. my in-laws) believed Clinton was storing up Chinese in box cars to attack, they believed (even while Dubya was in office) the liberals were hiding Chinese military in their homes. As soon as obama came in, they were convinced they would release the box car regiments.

The tension lessened, slightly, i must admit while dubya was in office. But it was always, there is a booogdadeee boooo liberal in the closet ready to kill you.

For the "party of patriots", they are quite cowardly.
 
2014-02-01 07:21:20 AM
/Implying chains would raise prices without first conducting an exhaustive study to determine if their biggest advantage, price, would rise above local competitors.  There's no way they'd take the risk of price hikes without knowing it's a sure thing.
 
2014-02-01 08:00:31 AM
The cost of testing the food is not going to stop a chain with 20+ locations.  Several states already required that...  I think that started about 8 years ago.  Several other countries also require it.  Unless they're a chain only in a very limited geographic area, they already have the information.  They just need to print it from their website and stick it on the wall - which is what the Papa John's here did in order to comply.

The FDA has been phasing this rule in for years now.  Haven't people noticed the calorie counts appearing on fast food signs?  Even before most of this became finalized a lot of restaurants had started doing this because it was fairly clear it would eventually be required.
 
2014-02-01 09:06:13 AM

bibli0phile: doctor wu: I always enjoy reading the delusional right wing butt-hurt in the comments below such articles.

Even when they had the white house, they still had epic butt hurt, all the farking time. It is amazing.

I know some of you will not believe me, but salt of the earth repubs (i.e. my in-laws) believed Clinton was storing up Chinese in box cars to attack, they believed (even while Dubya was in office) the liberals were hiding Chinese military in their homes. As soon as obama came in, they were convinced they would release the box car regiments.

The tension lessened, slightly, i must admit while dubya was in office. But it was always, there is a booogdadeee boooo liberal in the closet ready to kill you.

For the "party of patriots", they are quite cowardly.


How in the world did we ever survive all these previous years  without the Feds micromanaging our lives in detail?

What type of person is so helpless in life that they need this information when they go out to eat?  How do they even manage to get out of bed without a Federal approved  waking-up  and exiting the bed safety checklist taped to the ceiling over their bed?
 
2014-02-01 11:01:02 AM
Subby, places like Domino's and Pizza Hut don't serve pizza. They serve grease pies.
 
2014-02-01 11:04:44 AM

Nabb1: 12349876: Nabb1: For example, restaurants that primarily deal with delivery. Customers would never see it.

Every delivery place I know of also does take out.  Little Caesars promotes their 5 buck hot n ready pizzas for carryout with tons of tv commercials recently.

Little Greasers doesn't deliver. And delivery customers still wouldn't see the board. I've never set foot in the Papa John's I've been ordering from for 15 years.


I like the insult at one chain pizza place while using another one.

/they both suck
 
2014-02-01 12:59:10 PM
Seriously? They're biatching about how hard it is to do this? Math is hard? If it is sooooo hard to calculate calorie counts for ~30 menu items, we need to give the motherfarkin Nobel Prize in Mathematics to every fat biatch on WeightWatchers or using MyFitnessPal to calculate calorie counts on a weekly basis for home recipes.

Seriously. The Moonie Times and the whiny pansy restaurant chain CEOs need a big goddam biatchslap.

img.fark.net
 
2014-02-01 01:04:34 PM

sufferpuppet: Ritley: What an asinine argument. The cost of a board showing nutrition info is not burdensome in any manner

How bout the cost of producing that data?    Having somebody determine the calorie counts for an entire menu.  Think that's free?


If you don't already know this stuff about your business, your restaurant that you use to serve this food that you purchase, then you deserve to go out of business.
 
2014-02-01 01:12:49 PM

hasty ambush: If you need the nutritional /caloric info on a pizza/fast food I would l suggest that maybe you should not really be eating one.


Because  healthy people never eaten something bad for them and there is no need to have the information to see what a reasonable amount to consume is or how it affects the rest of their diet.

The whole "if you eat fast food you are a stupid fatty and don't care" is BS.
 
2014-02-01 02:53:44 PM
Lots of regulations like this *create* jobs. It will generate a lot of business for labs that can do the testing and produce calorie counts for restaurants (for a fee).  But as previous commenters have pointed out, most of the big restaurants already know their calorie counts, and some have already posted them in anticipation of this regulation (McDonalds, Chipotle, Subway, etc.)
 
2014-02-01 03:42:14 PM

chitownmike: BigBenny: chitownmike: ValisIV: sufferpuppet: Ritley: What an asinine argument. The cost of a board showing nutrition info is not burdensome in any manner

How bout the cost of producing that data?    Having somebody determine the calorie counts for an entire menu.  Think that's free?

They know how many ounces of X are in each dish, and the calorie info on that is readily available. It's like you know you put 1lb of ground beef, 2 eggs, etc into your burger patties, and made 4 patties, you can do some quick maths, and find out. Chain restaurants measure everything.  Also, calorie testing is really cheap.

Who the fark puts egg, etc. in a burger? 'Cuz I will not be eating there! Burger = ground beef salt and pepper cooked for a few mins, on a bun, that's it!

Eggs help the patty stay together. As an aside, have you ever had a fried egg on a burger? Sweet Jesus that is living.

If you want to eat a burger with an egg on it that is fine, awesome in my opinion, but if you count on egg to hold your burger together you are using shiat meat for your burger and nothing can save your soul from that


No soul here. I'm an atheist.
 
2014-02-01 11:13:38 PM

what_now: creating a nutritional menu for the hundreds of possible food combinations
or, you could do this:

[www.anutinanutshell.com image 400x300]


OUTRAGEOUS!
 
Displayed 197 of 197 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report