Rick Bayless and Burger King - Part 2

[Fat Guy]

It's a sad commentary on the state of the nation when there is not time to cook the simplest of foods.

Yet Americans still have time to watch four hours of television per day. Something doesn't add up.

It takes less time and costs less money to cook simple dishes like spaghetti with meat sauce than it does to make a round-trip to Burger King and buy food there.

A large Whopper Value Meal costs $5.49 (plus tax) at the Burger King near me. Even with kids' meals at lower prices, it costs almost $20 to feed a family of four at Burger King. For $20, you don't have to eat brown rice and squash. You can eat good-quality food that doesn't take very long at all to prepare.

At the ShopRite where I do much of my grocery shopping:

How long does it take to cook a London broil? 12 minutes? $1.49 per pound on sale this week.

How about some steamed asparagus to go with that? $1.49 per pound.

Potatoes. Maybe 20 minutes if you cut them up and roast them. 5 lbs for 99 cents.

A whole boneless pork loin? Maybe cut into medallions so it only takes 8 minutes or so to cook. $1.79 per pound. (Too expensive? The whole hams are 69 cents a pound.)

Broccoli. 99 cents a pound.

Two pounds of pre-mixed, pre-washed Dole green salad for $3.

Hypothetically, assuming I could find the right size packages, for $18 I could make, for four people:

1/2 pound per person of London broil ($3)

1/2 pound per person of steamed asparagus ($3)

2 pounds per person of potatoes ($2)

3/4 pound per person of pork loin ($5)

1/2 pound per person of broccoli ($2)

1/2 pound per person of green salad ($3)

I think there might be some leftovers.

That's what you can get for what it costs to take 4 people to Burger King. And everything on that list could go from package to table in half an hour.

We keep hearing how food is too cheap; we keep hearing how people can't afford to cook at home. At least one of those statements has to be false.

[elyse]

Agreed.

[fifi]

I think you nailed it FG. That was my whole point. Priorities are out of whack.

[jhlurie]

It takes less time and costs less money to cook simple dishes like spaghetti with meat sauce than it does to make a round-trip to Burger King and buy food there.

I'm not going to argue that it isn't WORTH the extra trouble--because I wouldn't argue very convincingly something I don't believe--but you are forgetting the same part of the equation everyone does. Things you cook yourself need to be bought, and the time it takes to do that should be figured into how "long" it takes.

Spaghetti can be stored virtually forever, so that's not an issue. But meat, for meat sauce, needs to be either bought or de-frosted in close proximity to the time you make that spaghetti with meat sauce--and that also takes time.

It's worth the trouble. But its inaccurate and a bit misleading to pretend that its just as "easy" as hopping on down to your local Burger King.

[eliotmorgan]

It's a sad commentary on the state of the nation when there is not time to cook the simplest of foods.

Ah, for those halcyon days of mom spending the day in the kitchen, dad winning the bread and schedules that allowed all to eat the fare of iceberg lettuce, boiled meat, and dessert made from a box. It was even worse outside of Europe, and until the liberty revolutions of the 18th Century the general population ate like crap and it took the better part of a day to do so.

Do you really think the pretty precious food in Saveur, the African-American fare in an Edna Lewis book, or a Madhur Jaffery whose food has as much to do with daily life in India as Thomas Keller’s does in America, represents the past? It represents the future, and an idealized one at that. Ask someone over 60 to go with you to Johnny Rockets and they’ll describe it as a greasy spoon without the grease. Kinda like what the house of Blues is to a real blues joint like the Checkerboard. All cleaned up for ya.

Great line from Woody Allen's Radio Days: "Brooklyn was rarely this beautiful and rain swept, but I always remember it that way."

If you can think of a time in the past when people generally ate safer, cleaner and better food than we eat now please note it. If you can think of a time when that food could be prepared and still allowed couples to have separate careers then great! In the meantime, I’ll check the Flux Capacitor for you and make sure the DeLorean can get up to 88 mph.

[eliotmorgan]

It takes less time and costs less money to cook simple dishes like spaghetti with meat sauce than it does to make a round-trip to Burger King and buy food there.

If both spaghetti comes from a box and sauce come from a jar. I guess I'd agree with you times provided boiling water was already at the ready.

"Potatoes. Maybe 20 minutes if you cut them up and roast them. 5 lbs for 99 cents."

Roasted potatoes in 20 minutes?!!! Even Barbara Kafka (and I'm no fan of her high heat 500 degree flash roasts) suggest at least 40 minutes for a russert.

"That's what you can get for what it costs to take 4 people to Burger King. And everything on that list could go from package to table in half an hour."

You forgot to mention the magic dishes that wash themselves, the self cleaning pots and pans, and the source of the new found energy for the working folks to do all of this?

[ExtraMSG]

Fat Guy, jhurlie only mentions the beginning, in addition to going to the grocery store, don't forget:

Doing dishes

Cleanings pots and pans

Cleaning kitchen

Prep time

Time spent learning to cook

I'm not saying this stuff isn't worth it. But hell, on the face of it it's worth it for me, probably, to spend the time learning how to fix my car. But the opportunity cost....The time learning, the time cleaning, the time screwing up, the time getting the parts, etc, probably isn't worth it compared to me just spending more time at work or time not getting frustrated and bloddy knuckles (see I did try once or twice).

I'm not saying that learning to cook and that having meals don't have a value that can't be quantified and for that reason aren't largely "worth it" or even that given the investment and having some organization skills that cooking isn't economical. I'm just saying that in the day to day realities of life, it's quite understandable why someone would instead spend 15 minutes grabbing a meal at BK on the way home, or ordering a pizza, or grabbing a couple burritos from Taco Hell, when it takes no investment of time or resources, and when you're done, you can just toss whatever's left in the garbage.

[Fat Guy]

you are forgetting the same part of the equation everyone does.  Things you cook yourself need to be bought, and the time it takes to do that should be figured into how "long" it takes.

Or maybe you're forgetting that most everybody is shopping anyway! It's not as though the people who take the family to Burger King on Monday are doing it Tuesday through Sunday as well. Most likely, on some of those nights, they're heating frozen dinners and other convenience foods. They probably go to the grocery store at least once a week. And they could just as easily buy good food at the grocery store as they could buy bad food.

Of course we're talking about various groups of people, so it's hard to generalize. It might be helpful to specify what group of people we're analyzing. Maybe there are subcategories of the population for whom Burger King is a reasonable option. I imagine there are plenty of large working poor families with radical time constraints -- and that's a tragedy. But for most anybody else, "no time to cook so I've got to eat Burger King" is a bullshit excuse.

[Fat Guy]

Fat Guy, jhurlie only mentions the beginning, in addition to going to the grocery store, don't forget:

Doing dishes

Cleanings pots and pans

Cleaning kitchen

Prep time

I could easily do all that for the London broil, asparagus, potatoes, and salad in 45 minutes: prep it, cook it, serve it, and do all the cleanup. I'd just have to subtract that from my TV allowance and settle for 3 hours and 15 minutes, I guess.

Learning to cook, sure, that takes time. But kids have nothing but time to learn stuff. That's why it's important for people to learn about food and cooking when they're young, because once they're working double shifts at some crappy job they're not going to bother.

And as I mentioned before, I doubt this trend will ever be reversed. But that doesn't change how lame it is in the first place.

[jhlurie]

Or maybe you're forgetting that most everybody is shopping anyway! It's not as though the people who take the family to Burger King on Monday are doing it Tuesday through Sunday as well. Most likely, on some of those nights, they're heating frozen dinners and other convenience foods. They probably go to the grocery store at least once a week. And they could just as easily buy good food at the grocery store as they could buy bad food.

Ah, but think this through. If someone eats like that, they shop only when they have to, and buy only what they are sure they need. They don't plan. It's just easier to get/find food when they feel like eating it.

So the real issue may be an avoidance of planning.

Of course none of this dismisses the fact that even prepared food can be better tasting/less artificial/less icky than Burger King without necessarily being that much more expensive.

[Fat Guy]

Well then Jon who are those people I see in ShopRite who are clearly doing a week's worth of shopping, yet their carts runneth over with frozen dinners, frozen pizzas, and all manner of terribly overpriced garbage? Why is it, do you think, that the overwhelming majority of shelf and cooler space in even the big, nice supermarkets is given over to this stuff, and not to fresh produce? I think plenty of the Burger King excuse-niks do shop weekly and do plan ahead. And of course some don't -- I'm just pointing out that, with the exception of some deeply impoverished urban and very rural people who don't have access to decent supermarkets (thanks, politicians, for protecting those great bodegas where food costs five times what it should), they could.

Let's break this down into two lines of argument:

1) People are too poor to buy real food instead of Burger King food. Can we all agree that this argument is completely and utterly false?

2) People don't have enough time to buy and cook real food (and do the dishes, etc.) instead of ordering Burger King food. Can we define what groups of people have this as a legitimate excuse? Because it's being thrown around as this be-all-end-all excuse, yet for most people I doubt it's reasonable. For most people it's a choice. And while I very much sympathize with a single mother who works her fingers to the bone at a sweatshop in order to feed five kids and who truly has zero free minutes to do anything, I don't think most people who use the excuse (or have it applied to them by educated, affluent commentators) are in that position. For most of them, it's just a tradeoff with TV viewing. Maybe they should be told that it's possible to watch TV while cooking, whereas they don't have TV at Burger King.

Oops. Did I just give Burger King a really good idea? Probably not, given that the Burger King near me places a 20 minute time limit on occupying a table. They want you out of there. That's why they play that awful music and make the chairs as uncomfortable as science allows.

[friedclams]

Let's break this down into two lines of argument:

1) People are too poor to buy real food instead of Burger King food. Can we all agree that this argument is completely and utterly false?

2) People don't have enough time to buy and cook real food (and do the dishes, etc.) instead of ordering Burger King food. Can we define what groups of people have this as a legitimate excuse? Because it's being thrown around as this be-all-end-all excuse, yet for most people I doubt it's reasonable. For most people it's a choice. And while I very much sympathize with a single mother who works her fingers to the bone at a sweatshop in order to feed five kids and who truly has zero free minutes to do anything, I don't think most people who use the excuse (or have it applied to them by educated, affluent commentators) are in that position. For most of them, it's just a tradeoff with TV viewing. Maybe they should be told that it's possible to watch TV while cooking, whereas they don't have TV at Burger King.

Oops. Did I just give Burger King a really good idea? Probably not, given that the Burger King near me places a 20 minute time limit on occupying a table. They want you out of there. That's why they play that awful music and make the chairs as uncomfortable as science allows.

FG,

[1] agreed...Trying to discover the "typical" BK customer? Trying to discover who BK markets to ? lol

People buy fast food as a lifestyle choice having nothing to do with economics. That is how fast food is marketed.

[2] BTW, you haven't given BK a good idea. BK doesn't want their key US market group to use the restaurant as a substitute living or working area for their primary customers. In fact, some BK restaurants haven't a phone for that reason. Mothers with kids aren't the group that BK markets to or the majority of their prime customer base. Competitors, eg McD may market their food to parents, BK doesn't.

In these times Starbucks and other upscale environs have taken over as substitute for living/working spaces.

Fast food isn't the munchie of choice for those customers.

FC

[Fat Guy]

People buy fast food as a lifestyle choice having nothing to do with economics.

No doubt.

[Peckish]

RB & RR are both talented people. I believe they both care about food.

Sometimes we gulleters are snobs. I have cooked professionally for 26 years. Hey, I get excited about El Bulli, the latest and greatest EVO (ha!) and fresh peaches, but know what...I stop @ BK once in a while.

Yes, I am a 30k a year sellout.

[fresco]

Fat Guy, jhurlie only mentions the beginning, in addition to going to the grocery store, don't forget:

Doing dishes

Cleanings pots and pans

Cleaning kitchen

Prep time

I could easily do all that for the London broil, asparagus, potatoes, and salad in 45 minutes: prep it, cook it, serve it, and do all the cleanup. I'd just have to subtract that from my TV allowance and settle for 3 hours and 15 minutes, I guess.

Learning to cook, sure, that takes time. But kids have nothing but time to learn stuff. That's why it's important for people to learn about food and cooking when they're young, because once they're working double shifts at some crappy job they're not going to bother.

And as I mentioned before, I doubt this trend will ever be reversed. But that doesn't change how lame it is in the first place.

Fat Guy, you've observed a couple of times at least that home cooking is becoming the preserve of hobbyists, and I don't think that's much of an exaggeration. Preparing one's own food is, obviously, a strong value for people on eGullet, and there are probably all sorts of cases to be made that there are sound financial, nutritional and social reasons to cook and dine at home, just as there are strong cases to be made that people should refrain from driving cars and all sorts of other things.

But many of us are going to continue to drive cars and to take most of our meals out at places like Burger King, some for convenience, some because they don't know how to cook, and some because they just prefer Burger King over home cooking.

I guess I'd prefer to see a world where most of us prepare our own food and made it impossible for places like Burger King to thrive. Mostly, though, I'm grateful to be in a position where I can cook at home or not, as I choose.

[jbraynolds]

Give up TV time for time cooking real food and spending time with your family, maybe actually, gulp, talking with them? Now there's a subversive idea.

[Jinmyo]

Give up TV time for time cooking real food and spending time with your family, maybe actually, gulp, talking with them? Now there's a subversive idea.

Fat Guy is radical that way.

[Nick]

Give up TV time for time cooking real food and spending time with your family, maybe actually, gulp, talking with them? Now there's a subversive idea.

That is subversive. Corporate America will NOT like that idea.

[Fat Guy]

Even I won't go so far as to suggest that people actually talk to their families. That's a bit out-there.

[hillbill]

Give up TV time for time cooking real food and spending time with your family, maybe actually, gulp, talking with them? Now there's a subversive idea.

If I don't watch TV how will I know what to eat and where to get it?

Everything I need to know I learned from watching commercials.

[hjshorter]

This is sounding just a wee bit elitist. So those of us who can afford a good restaurant are allowed to dine out, while those who can only afford BK should stay at home and cook instead? Even low income people (and I have been there) want a meal out occasionally. Perhaps we should be complaining about the lack of quality restaurants in the BK price range?

[slkinsey]

This is sounding just a wee bit elitist.  So those of us who can afford a good restaurant are allowed to dine out, while those who can only afford BK should stay at home and cook instead?  Even low income people (and I have been there) want a meal out occasionally.  Perhaps we should be complaining about the lack of quality restaurants in the BK price range?

I don't quite uinderstand what you're getting at here. Who is saying this and how, exactly is it elitist?

I don't think anyone is suggesting that no one should ever go to BK. I think people are suggesting that going to BK five times a week because it's "cheaper than cooking" and "there is not enough time to cook at home" is a lame excuse. That is not quite the same thing as saying that low income people should never go out to eat. In fact, if most low income habitual BK patrons cooked as Steven has suggested, they could certainly save enough money on food to eat at a better place a few times a month (assuming that they have such a priority).

As for quality restaurants at the BK price level... this is exactly why people shouldn't go to BK and should instead support their local businesses. The sad thing is that quality local places (burger and other) with a similar convenience/price point still lose business to the BKs of the world, because of television advertising.

[hjshorter]

In fact, if most low income habitual BK patrons cooked as Steven has suggested, they could certainly save enough money on food to eat at a better place a few times a month (assuming that they have such a priority).

No doubt.

I defer to your obviously greater knowledge of the low income lifestyle.

[Mayhaw Man]

It's a sad commentary on the state of the nation when there is not time to cook the simplest of foods.

Yet Americans still have time to watch four hours of television per day. Something doesn't add up.

It takes less time and costs less money to cook simple dishes like spaghetti with meat sauce than it does to make a round-trip to Burger King and buy food there.

A large Whopper Value Meal costs $5.49 (plus tax) at the Burger King near me. Even with kids' meals at lower prices, it costs almost $20 to feed a family of four at Burger King. For $20, you don't have to eat brown rice and squash. You can eat good-quality food that doesn't take very long at all to prepare.

At the ShopRite where I do much of my grocery shopping:

How long does it take to cook a London broil? 12 minutes? $1.49 per pound on sale this week.

How about some steamed asparagus to go with that? $1.49 per pound.

Potatoes. Maybe 20 minutes if you cut them up and roast them. 5 lbs for 99 cents.

A whole boneless pork loin? Maybe cut into medallions so it only takes 8 minutes or so to cook. $1.79 per pound. (Too expensive? The whole hams are 69 cents a pound.)

Broccoli. 99 cents a pound.

Two pounds of pre-mixed, pre-washed Dole green salad for $3.

Hypothetically, assuming I could find the right size packages, for $18 I could make, for four people:

1/2 pound per person of London broil ($3)

1/2 pound per person of steamed asparagus ($3)

2 pounds per person of potatoes ($2)

3/4 pound per person of pork loin ($5)

1/2 pound per person of broccoli ($2)

1/2 pound per person of green salad ($3)

I think there might be some leftovers.

That's what you can get for what it costs to take 4 people to Burger King. And everything on that list could go from package to table in half an hour.

We keep hearing how food is too cheap; we keep hearing how people can't afford to cook at home. At least one of those statements has to be false.

Hey Fat Guy,

I have a great idea for a new TV show......... Fat Guy's 30 Minute Meals..........after you drove everyone wild with your sparkling personality and razor sharp wit you could get a gig promoting Burger King Baguette #6....."The Fat Guy Special".

[jhlurie]

Yes, but the Fat Guy Baguette would have Triple Helpings of Bacon, and the "sauce" would have enough calories to put most small children into a coma.