FaustianBargain

Unionised cooks. What an intriguing concept. Something that will invite a lot of resistance, I imagine? Opinions/Comments?

Let it not be said that I am commenting upon Chef Gordon Ramsay's cheffy attributes or the pleasure of dining at any one of his restaurants..because I won't. but..unrelatedly we have a saying back home...that the food absorbs the cook's feelings..I remember from my childhood an instance where my grandfather refused to eat the food my grandmother painstakingly prepared for him while muttering angry utterances over an issue that happened outside the house...unrelated to him and some few days ago.(what can I say..she is a woman, afterall..and we never forget. as shalom aleychem once said..a woman is made of seven measures of talk.) Gastronomic superstition? Maybe. But it is nice to know that the food you are eating comes from happy cooks.

Speaking for myself, I am not sure if its a 'primal memory'. I am positive that I wont be enjoying the slaughter of any animal. It is rather messy, noisy and quite unpleasant, isnt it? But then again, I dont rear animals. I think I like butchery(rather..cutting up of dead animals) because it gives me a sense of 'putting things in the right place'. There is a sense of adventure, of dismantling something secretive. It is like a puzzle. It is also a little like sculpting...in a slightly different sense. And not very unlike cleaning a messy cupboard. Also, the 'feel' of the animal(even when its dead) underneth my fingertips is oddly comforting.

I was under the impression that St.Johns(while emphasising on British produce) has its niche in the offal dept. The comparison doesnt exist. I dont find that much of a difference between British and French cooking techniques. The availability and range of produce is a different matter. Although my training and education is devoted French cooking and tradition, learning it in London introduced me to British cuisine. It was two good deals for the price of one! French food is not always frilly and tall. If you go back to their peasant roots, there is little difference between British and French cooking. But the impact of the two mini ice ages and the world wars that Britain had to endure has certainly taken a toll. British food has always existed. It doesnt need to 'look up'. It simply needs to be re discovered. My 2c. edited to add: Flashback

I was initially very impressed with Booth's offerings. And then I found the strength and size of better and bigger white truffles.

Thanks. I will look it up at the bookstore tomorrow. The old 70s Time Life series? They are wonderful! Quaint, but wonderful and *very* useful.

I hear you. It is oddly cathartic. I wonder why. I must investigate. And I was raised a vegetarian too. My mother thinks that I just finished a patisserie course. She'd go ape-shit if she knew that I enjoyed butchery.(which is actually a very good reason to tell her. where is that phone now...)

Hey there, Chufi. This is what I do.. 1.Determine budget 2.Determine ingredients 3.Devise recipes 4.Create timetable To make a dining experience great, the devil is in the details. Flowers, wine and fine table 'cluttery'. I noticed that you are signing in from Netherlands. If you can give us a clue about step#2(after you factor in step#1), then we can have a fun discussion.

I forget the author's name..(xxx Wolke, maybe?). What Einstein told his cook, iirc. Edited to add: Yup. What Einstein Told His Cook: Kitchen Science Explained by Robert.L.Wolke. Thats where I read about this.

Maybe this one? I wonder how the Canadians fared...

I always thought that Tapas was 'Spanish cuisine'. If I miss anything on this side of the pond, its Mexican. Both authentic and Tex-Mex. If the English people can invent their own version of tongue scorching Indian food AND love it, I am sure that they will simply adore Mexican food. Although, the food costs will be ridiculously high considering that most of it will probably have to be imported into the country. High prices are incongruous with the pleasure of dining Mexican. LOL!

Ahh..thanks.

I am not sure potatoes really do 'soak' up the excess salt. This, I believe, is a kitchen myth. The golden rule: You can always add, but you cannot take away. I doubt if the stew can be saved. Unless you want to multiply the recipe several times over. Start over? There seems to be way too much salt to multiply the recipe. My 2c. edited to add: Oh Dear! Baby yukon potatoes. NON!! NON!! NON!! re what Fat Guy's suggestion...if the mushrooms have taken in the excess salt(as have the other veggies, if any), there would be no point 'fixing' it.

forgive my ignorance, but what exactly is an offset pastry spatula?

John T, did you ever hear of these "town sin eaters"? Real life stuff or pure folklore? Sin eaters used to be real life stuff in parts of Europe up until a hundred years ago. (ref: encyclopedia britannica)

A recent study revealed that Southerners are prone to higher testosterone surges than the Northerners because they are descended from Celtic stock who genetically tend towards higher testosterone levels. This study was conducted by two mid western professors and everyone expected moral outrage over this most simplistic slant of sociobiology. Surprisingly, the southerners chose to interpret this veiled implication to higher aggression as a badge of honour. To them, theirs is a culture of honour. It is not about aggression or violence. It was merely about the just and appropriate response to any slight upon their honour or wound on their pride. While left leaning liberals prepared to attack the study, the southerners rejoiced. P.S. I can dig up references. I am not making political statements. The results of said study does not indicate my opinions upon this issue either way.

You said that more than once in your post. I'd like to thank you for a well written post. I would also like to share my appreciation with the others who have contributed to this thread in a manner that is far more balanced and eloquent than my occasionally emotional input.

Au contraire.. Monsanto is reviled *because* of its aggressive legal and lobbying practices. Nobody else swings in and out of the White House' revolving doors as much as Monsanto. Maybe it is also because it holds about 70-100% market share for various crops. Monsanto, iirc, holds monopoly status for the world's GM soybean market.(80% of world's soybean is GM) It is also a multinational agri-biotech company. It integrates all its products..herbicides, seeds, hormones etc and literally chokes the farmer by shoving it all as a package deal down their collective throats. p.s. syngenta donated the patents for golden rice because it was created using public funds. however, ironically, simultaneously, they applied for a multi-genome patent thereby attempting to monopolise all rice dna resources. however, it is still the little evil compared to the giant evil, Mon Satan.

The Australians are incensed, no doubt. Relatedly: Returning war-torn farmland to productivity The Army is distributing seeds to Iraqi farmers Earlier, Australia exported wheat to Iraq under the oil for food exchange program set in place by the UN. They were unceremoniously chucked out because of alleged mishandling of prices. Now, America is expected to export over 3 million tonnes of wheat to Iraq. It is good that they are trying to bring agriculture back to Iraq, but it also carries with it the hidden extracted promise(or threat...depends on which side you are on)that the farmers cannot save the seeds. The seed bank in Allepo(its in Syria) can be used to develop 'new' strains of wheat that is suited for Iraq. Surely, the seeds developed for the American Mid west arent suited for Iraq. But those seeds will belong to the GMOs that develop them and the hundreds and thousands of years invested by Iraqi farmers who saved seeds now belongs to a agri business backed by the military. This NewScientist article is highly recommended reading.

I was a very yellow as a little girl. Here is why...every weekend, my grandmother would plead,cajole, negotiate and bribe me for the 'oil bath'. This involved a head to toe hot oil massage. I do have fond memories of the tap-tap hair massage. No soap. No shampoo. The powder used in lieu of soap was not lathery nor did it smell of spring or Aphrodite's arse. It was coarse and had a generous helping of turmeric among other weird and wonderful things. She firmly believed that turmeric was good for the skin. And so..yea..I glowed for a while and was rather yellow. In the kitchen, the fresh turmeric is definitely better(and distinctly different) than the powdered or the dry version. However, if you are simply using turmeric for the colour(lemon rice, for example...altho' the lemon rice's main ingredient is lemon..its not really lemon rice without the yellow colour...try eating lemon rice without the turmeric and it wouldnt taste the same), the powdered version should do. edited to add: to pam: indian version of lemon rice also includes curry leaves, seasonings and green chillies. and of course..rice, lemon juice and turmeric.

Yes. No problem, though. Just wanted to hear your side of it because you offered.

i am looking for general principles of cutting costs and raising profit margins. edited to add: if it is not about butchery, then I think we should take it up a fresh topic elsewhere?

When we did a dinner party, we got a price list from the school's meat suppliers(Allan's of Mayfair, iirc..hmm..or maybe it was someone else). There was way too much cash to be lost. Also, when you get a side of animal, you get all the other 'non premium'/less tender bits/bones attached. They can be used for other dishes. I simply cannot accept that buying piece rate from the butcher while running a restaurant can be even 'sorta/kinda' preferable. Also, I am not willing to wait around, peer from behind someone and watch to learn. Being knowledgeable and having practical experience is a marketable skill, as far *I* am concerned. If there were some sort of butchery certification course, I'd take it in a heartbeat. I am always interested in knowing about ways to lower costs and raise profit margins. Please do tell.

Ok. Here goes: 1.Most Americans want labelling of their products. 2.Monsanto actively protests against the milk from cows given Posilac being labelled. 3.Some would ask WHY? Like..gee...I dont know..YOU! 4.In 2002, Oregan tried to label milk from Posilac injected cows. They failed in their initiative. refer: Measure 27 This proves that labelling 'milk from cows given Posilac' is a. possible. b.desired by the American public. c. actively opposed by Monsanto 5.When Maine dairy farmers attempted the same, they were sued by Monsanto. They conceded to Monsanto's demands of slightly altered labelling. refer: State of Maine Supports Dairy Being Sued by Monsanto 6.WHY? WHY? WHY? Totally unrelated and of no significance is the fact that Monsanto's growth hormones is the DIRECT cause of the dairy glut in the market and the number ONE reason for dairy farmers going bankrupt. [source] I am pleased that you agree. Huh? Ahh, I get it! Basically, you are saying that since Posilac doesnt alter the genetic make up of the cow that gives milk, milk from said cow cannot be labelled as 'GM milk'. Nobody wanted to label it as 'GM milk'. The American public simply wants to label the milk derived from cows injected with Posilac as 'milk derived from cows given growth hormones'. FDA does not impose this requirement. I will cut and paste from the links mentioned above. GET IT? Monsanto SUED Maine farmers from labelling milk that WAS NOT treated by Posilac. The Maine dairy farmers COULD NOT stick the label: "Our Farmers' Pledge: No Artificial Growth Hormones". The Maine farmers gave in. Ok, Sparky..once more. This means that Monsanto DOES NOT WANT the consuming public to know the DIFFERENCE between milk derived from Posilac injected cows and milk derived from Posilac free cows. ONCE MORE!! Monsanto wants to MISLEAD the public into believing that Posilac injected cows are NO DIFFERENT than Posilac free cows. This is a falsehood. This is an untruth. This is a travesty. This is what you are trying to defend. NO! It is my BASIC right to demand that my food is labelled. Yes. 'GMO medicines' are labelled. Once again: A. Monsanto does not want to label its products as GM products or in the case of milk from Posilac cows as product derived from the application of growth hormone. B. Monsanto actively opposes honest labelling that basically declares that it is Monsanto/growth hormone free. C. Those who do not use Monsanto's products cannot advertise that they do not use Monsanto's products. D. This, in informal terms, is called a DOUBLE WHAMMY. Oops. Non. You didnt edit to delete it. But it's ok. I edited my response for politeness.

An April 2003 report paid for by the National Academy of Sciences concluded that during the Vietnam War, 3,181 villages were sprayed directly with herbicides. Between 2.1 and 4.8 million people "would have been present during the spraying." Furthermore, many U.S. military personnel were also sprayed or came in contact with herbicides in recently sprayed areas. The study was originally undertaken for the U.S. military to get a better count of how many veterans served in sprayed areas. Researchers were given access to military records and Air Force operational folders previously not studied. The re-estimate made by the report places the volume of herbicides sprayed between 1961 and 1971 to a level 7,131,907 liters more than an uncorrected estimate published in 1974 and 9.4 million more liters than a 1974 corrected inventory. It was produced under contract for the Army by Diamond Shamrock, Dow, Hercules, Monsanto, T-H Agricultural & Nutrition, Thompson Chemicals, and Uniroyal. [source] Monsanto developed a synthetic version of bST, known as recombinant bovine somatotropin (rbST), which goes by the brand name Posilac®. Injected into dairy cattle, the product can increase milk production by anywhere from an average of 10% up to 40%. In November 1993, the product was approved for use in the U.S. by the FDA, and its use began in February 1994. The product is now sold in all 50 states. According to Monsanto, approximately one third of dairy cattle in the U.S. are injected with Posilac; approximately 13,000 dairy producers use the product. It is now the top selling dairy cattle pharmaceutical product in the U.S. The FDA does not require special labels for products produced from cows given rbST. [source] The major producer, Monsanto, marketed PCBs under the trade name Aroclor from 1930 to 1977. Their commercial utility was based largely on their chemical stability, including low flammability, and desirable physical properties, including electrical insulating properties. Their chemical and physical stability has also been responsible for their continuing low-level persistence in the environment, and the lingering interest decades after regulations were imposed to control environmental contamination. [source] This is a logical fallacy. It is irrelevant to bring up Dupond and Corning while discussing Monsanto. It is like getting hysterical about a rape when someone pipes in and mentions why there is no reaction to the rape that is happening in the neighbouring county. I am relieved that it is just about my presentation skills. I am sure someone will saunter along to give facts in the most compelling light as the public likes it. Hopefully, it wont be too late. If it is too late, *I* would simply have to kill myself out of sheer guilt.