Sujet : Re: One-pot dish
De : Bruce (at) *nospam* invalid.invalid (Bruce)
Groupes : rec.food.cookingDate : 18. Nov 2024, 19:24:38
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <vhg0pd$1cb47$4@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
User-Agent : ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
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.
-- Bruce<https://i.postimg.cc/zf7JhPvB/the-lord-of-the-rings.jpg>
One-pot dish
Re: One-pot dish
