Sujet : Re: One-pot dish
De : ft.tryon (at) *nospam* park.invalid (Coogan's Bluff)
Groupes : rec.food.cooking aus.politicsDate : 18. Nov 2024, 19:27:03
Autres entêtes
Message-ID : <vhg0tm$c390$4@solani.org>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
User-Agent : Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/91.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.19
Bruce wrote:
On Mon, 18 Nov 2024 18:09:28 +0000, dsi100@yahoo.com (dsi1) wrote:
On Sun, 17 Nov 2024 21:27:26 +0000, Bruce wrote:
>
On Sun, 17 Nov 2024 21:13:16 +0000, dsi100@yahoo.com (dsi1) wrote:
>
You understand the economics of the situation. That's good. You should
be able to see how everything flows forth from the economics in a
predictable manner. Rational, predictable, economics is good economics.
>
If people used their brain and bought the version without HFCS, like
Ed said, then the better version would be economically superior. But
sheeple will be sheeple. Chew, chew, chew.
>
If pigs could fly, we could use them as food delivery drones.
>
Sucrose is sugar. Fructose is sugar. Sugar is sugar. I don't have any
particular opinion on either. You certainly do. Why? Use your own words
- if that's even possible any more.
If you'd used your brain a bit more before you shoved things into your
pie hole, you might not have ended up with diabetes. Chew, chew, chew.
If you'd ever bothered to talk to the Creator you'd not be such a creepy, hateful asshole about now.
One-pot dish
Re: One-pot dish
