In article ,
Tony Hwang wrote:
Cindy Hamilton wrote:
In article ,
Tony Hwang wrote:
Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 10/21/2013 4:26 PM, Ashton Crusher wrote:

If I'm working I want the fast part. But it surprises me how little
actual difference there is in price between my wife and I eating at a
typical fast food place, maybe $16 versus a real sit down restaurant,
which for a non-fancy outing might be $21. For the extra $5 you get
served, real plates, actual food.....


If you're still able to find it for $21, you are doing OK. Seems most
of the time now it is $30+. Not difficult to hit $50 either.

Hmmm,
Eating out? We never go to a fast food joint to eat junk food.
Respectable eatery costs ~100.00 per person including tip at least.

Really? I generally figure about half that. Of course, we rarely
have any kind of alcohol when we eat in restaurants.

Perhaps we have differing definitions of "respectable". We don't do
"cuisine". The places we go most often (in no particular order):
German
Indian
Turkish
Japanese
Chinese
Italian
Syrian
Steakhouse

Some quite tasty ethnic meals can be had for $25 for two people.

That's all in Ann Arbor, Michigan. Prices are of course higher
in a large metropolis.

Cindy Hamilton

Hi,
You left out my old country Korea. Korean beef BBQ is good!

You're right. (Doh!) We have two Korean places we like to go;
one is a barbecue-at-the-table place, the other is a tiny
mom-and-pop joint.

The place we may be going to eat is formal suit and tie place.

Suit and tie. I can't remember the last time he wore a tie,
except for weddings and funerals. Luckily we live in a college
town, where a lot of informality is tolerated.


Cindy Hamilton
--

On 10/21/2013 04:26 PM, Ashton Crusher wrote:
On Mon, 21 Oct 2013 14:06:11 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 21 Oct 2013 01:01:47 -0700, Ashton Crusher
wrote:

On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 07:40:42 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 06:23:31 -0400, "dadiOH"
wrote:



Of course, that is "at home"expenditure, not total.

When I was a kid, eating out was maybe a once or twice a year thing and
there was no such thing as "fast food". Now, restaurants of all kinds have
proliferated and people eat out frequently; they patronize fast food places
even more frequently.

A few weeks back, my wife had a late doctor's appointment so we
stopped at a restaurant on the way home. This was a local chain, the
99, similar to Applebees and the like. It was a little after 5, just
enough time for parents to leave work and grab the kids from a sitter.
I was amazed at how many families were there. Like you, eating out
was a rare treat when we were kids. It was a big deal to go shopping
with mom and have lunch at the counter in Woolworths.


For us, eating out was a once or twice a month thing and it WAS fast
food. I don't think I ate in a real restaurant till I was 16.

I don't recall my parents ever taking the family out to a fast-food
restaurant (there weren't many). We would occasionally go out to a
restaurant but certainly not once or twice a month, even before my
father died. Rarely, in fact, unless we were traveling.

OTOH, we've been going out three times a week, lately (over the
weekend), but never to a fast-food restaurant, again, unless we're
traveling (eat on-the-go). Don't need the fast part - would rather
have the food part.


If I'm working I want the fast part. But it surprises me how little
actual difference there is in price between my wife and I eating at a
typical fast food place, maybe $16 versus a real sit down restaurant,
which for a non-fancy outing might be $21. For the extra $5 you get
served, real plates, actual food.....


Around here, I can't get full on fast food for less than $10-12 just for
myself. But there's several all you can eat lunch buffets - off the top
of my head, Italian, Chinese, and Indian nearby - where you can get out
the door for about the same price. I honestly hardly ever make myself
lunch because I doubt I could do it for significantly less money. Used
to be a Japanese place too but they raised their prices so I don't go
there anymore (which is sad because I love Japanese food.)

I would say that the food is better for you as well, but I do have to
admit a weakness for cheese and fat (especially when it's stuffed shells
day at the Italian place.)

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

On Wednesday, October 23, 2013 7:30:56 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Tuesday, October 22, 2013 10:27:03 PM UTC-4, bud-- wrote:





I regularly watch Fox, CBS, everyday during the week. On



weekends I watch ABC. Catch NBC at least a couple times


a week too. Maybe you should actually watch Fox, instead



of blindly disparaging it.





I watched Fox some and gave up because of misinformation.



Perhaps you'd like to give us some examples of that

"misinformation". I've issued that challenge many times

and the best anyone has ever come up with was one story

that Fox got wrong and corrected within hours.

This is, oh, so inaccurate!

Fox dispenses only the Party line as dictated by Roger Ailes and his co-conspirators in anti-American iniquity.

It's actually hysterically funny to watch Jon Stewart. Whatever the subject, his staff puts together a montage of clips, including from Fox,* illustrating how the radical wing of the once-respectable Republican Party marches in lock-step like good little totalitarian subjects. Terrifying.

* as well as the even more radical (read: "crazy") members of the radical wing of the Tea Party which has now ***cost us taxpayers more than $24 BILLION*** for the government shutdown. Which even they have to admit gained them absolutely nothing- zilch - nada.


The non-news is worthless. But stories from the commentators become "news" which can wind up on the news programs.

Personally, I get my news from several sources, some radio, much on-line, a few TV -- each of which has to be weighed against the others to try to screen out bias. None of these is guaranteed 100%, but at least you get to do some thinking and comparing. To preserve Democracy we need to WORK, not to sit back and passively absorb what feeds our particular bias.


Fox at least has significant people on every day from the lib

As soon as we see that abbreviation "lib", we know EXACTLY where poster is coming from. And it's not a thinking place. Epithets may be handy, but they do betray an irrational mind-set -- no matter who uses them, I hasten to specify.

to debate the issue with conservatives. They would have even more
on, but many refuse to come.

Gee...I wonder why? Maybe they have neither the time or interest to "debate" Fox's laughable outright lies -- which are quickly exposed by unbiased or opposed sources. *****Does our friend watch or listen to the debunking of those outright lies? Or would that destroy his belief system.*****

A poll by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press found that

almost half of regular Fox viewers thought "health care legislation will

create death panels", an absurd propaganda piece.

....which should be engraved upon the headstone of Sarah Palin when she goes to her eternal rest.

[...snip...]


Giborah

On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 17:26:42 -0700, Oren wrote:

On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 20:02:56 -0400, wrote:

I can make a cheap turkey taste good.

Sure. Dunk it in gravy.

Why? It taste better when smoked; moist and tender.

Because you can make cheap turkey taste good that way.

Pull off the bone food.

It doesn't come any other way.

On Wed, 23 Oct 2013 09:17:44 -0700 (PDT), Higgs Boson
wrote:

This is, oh, so inaccurate!

Fox dispenses only the Party line as dictated by Roger Ailes and his co-conspirators in anti-American iniquity.

What a crock of ****.

Ask Roger how many from the left wing are watching Fox News.

You are pathetic.

On 10/23/2013 2:23 PM, Oren wrote:
On Wed, 23 Oct 2013 09:17:44 -0700 (PDT), Higgs Boson
wrote:

This is, oh, so inaccurate!

Fox dispenses only the Party line as dictated by Roger Ailes and
his co-conspirators in anti-American iniquity.

What a crock of ****.

Ask Roger how many from the left wing are watching Fox News.

You are pathetic.


Whenever I see/hear Progressive Liberal Leftist Commiecrat Freaks
complain about Fox News and claim the network only broadcasts lies.
I ask them if they've ever watched Fox News and their answer is always
something like "Hell no, I'm not watching that pack of lies!" I ask how
do they know Fox News is lying and their answer is something like, "I've
heard about from everyone!" When I ask if they should watch Fox News and
determine for themselves if Fox News is lying? The answer is
usually, "Hell no, I'm not watching that pack of lies!" ^_^

TDD

On Wed, 23 Oct 2013 15:53:35 -0500, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 10/23/2013 2:23 PM, Oren wrote:
On Wed, 23 Oct 2013 09:17:44 -0700 (PDT), Higgs Boson
wrote:

This is, oh, so inaccurate!

Fox dispenses only the Party line as dictated by Roger Ailes and
his co-conspirators in anti-American iniquity.

What a crock of ****.

Ask Roger how many from the left wing are watching Fox News.

You are pathetic.


Whenever I see/hear Progressive Liberal Leftist Commiecrat Freaks
complain about Fox News and claim the network only broadcasts lies.
I ask them if they've ever watched Fox News and their answer is always
something like "Hell no, I'm not watching that pack of lies!" I ask how
do they know Fox News is lying and their answer is something like, "I've
heard about from everyone!" When I ask if they should watch Fox News and
determine for themselves if Fox News is lying? The answer is
usually, "Hell no, I'm not watching that pack of lies!" ^_^

TDD

Facts still remain. Higgs is a lonely Jewish woman without a lover or
handyman. Malformed Malcolm is also from California. They think the
same way as Bobby G. from around D.C.

Try not to get me started, okay? please...

None of them want you or I to think for ourselves.

On 10/23/2013 4:53 PM, The Daring Dufas wrote:
On Wed, 23 Oct 2013 09:17:44 -0700 (PDT), Higgs Boson

Fox dispenses only the Party line as dictated by Roger Ailes and
his co-conspirators in anti-American iniquity.


Whenever I see/hear Progressive Liberal Leftist Commiecrat Freaks
complain about Fox News and claim the network only broadcasts lies.
I ask them if they've ever watched Fox News and their answer is always
something like "Hell no, I'm not watching that pack of lies!" I ask how
do they know Fox News is lying and their answer is something like, "I've
heard about from everyone!" When I ask if they should watch Fox News and
determine for themselves if Fox News is lying? The answer is
usually, "Hell no, I'm not watching that pack of lies!" ^_^

TDD
I've noticed that with modern libs. Not only are they
totally opinionated, they are resistant to facts.

Usually also driven by anger. Any hint of questing
their beliefs is met with blasts of anger.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On Wed, 23 Oct 2013 09:17:44 -0700 (PDT), Higgs Boson
wrote:

On Wednesday, October 23, 2013 7:30:56 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Tuesday, October 22, 2013 10:27:03 PM UTC-4, bud-- wrote:





I regularly watch Fox, CBS, everyday during the week. On



weekends I watch ABC. Catch NBC at least a couple times


a week too. Maybe you should actually watch Fox, instead



of blindly disparaging it.





I watched Fox some and gave up because of misinformation.



Perhaps you'd like to give us some examples of that

"misinformation". I've issued that challenge many times

and the best anyone has ever come up with was one story

that Fox got wrong and corrected within hours.

This is, oh, so inaccurate!

Fox dispenses only the Party line as dictated by Roger Ailes and his co-conspirators in anti-American iniquity.

It's actually hysterically funny to watch Jon Stewart. Whatever the subject, his staff puts together a montage of clips, including from Fox,* illustrating how the radical wing of the once-respectable Republican Party marches in lock-step like good little totalitarian subjects. Terrifying.

At least you're honest enough to show where you get your information,
old bag. Typical lefty.

* as well as the even more radical (read: "crazy") members of the radical wing of the Tea Party which has now ***cost us taxpayers more than $24 BILLION*** for the government shutdown. Which even they have to admit gained them absolutely nothing- zilch - nada.

Welfare has cost us $3.7TRILLION over the last five years. Kinda puts
your absurd claim in perspective.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/...rs_764582.html

The non-news is worthless. But stories from the commentators become "news" which can wind up on the news programs.

Personally, I get my news from several sources, some radio, much on-line, a few TV -- each of which has to be weighed against the others to try to screen out bias. None of these is guaranteed 100%, but at least you get to do some thinking and comparing. To preserve Democracy we need to WORK, not to sit back and passively absorb what feeds our particular bias.

BS. Jon Stewart.

Fox at least has significant people on every day from the lib

As soon as we see that abbreviation "lib", we know EXACTLY where poster is coming from. And it's not a thinking place. Epithets may be handy, but they do betray an irrational mind-set -- no matter who uses them, I hasten to specify.

You *ARE* a lib, old bag. Too bad you don't like the label. It is
descriptive.

to debate the issue with conservatives. They would have even more
on, but many refuse to come.

Gee...I wonder why? Maybe they have neither the time or interest to "debate" Fox's laughable outright lies -- which are quickly exposed by unbiased or opposed sources. *****Does our friend watch or listen to the debunking of those outright lies? Or would that destroy his belief system.*****

Because they can't defend their position, like all leftists.

A poll by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press found that

almost half of regular Fox viewers thought "health care legislation will

create death panels", an absurd propaganda piece.

...which should be engraved upon the headstone of Sarah Palin when she goes to her eternal rest.

She should be rewarded for speaking the truth.

On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 11:15:31 -0600, Tony Hwang
wrote:

Cindy Hamilton wrote:
In article ,
Tony Hwang wrote:
Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 10/21/2013 4:26 PM, Ashton Crusher wrote:

If I'm working I want the fast part. But it surprises me how little
actual difference there is in price between my wife and I eating at a
typical fast food place, maybe $16 versus a real sit down restaurant,
which for a non-fancy outing might be $21. For the extra $5 you get
served, real plates, actual food.....


If you're still able to find it for $21, you are doing OK. Seems most
of the time now it is $30+. Not difficult to hit $50 either.

Hmmm,
Eating out? We never go to a fast food joint to eat junk food.
Respectable eatery costs ~100.00 per person including tip at least.

Really? I generally figure about half that. Of course, we rarely
have any kind of alcohol when we eat in restaurants.

Perhaps we have differing definitions of "respectable". We don't do
"cuisine". The places we go most often (in no particular order):
German
Indian
Turkish
Japanese
Chinese
Italian
Syrian
Steakhouse

Some quite tasty ethnic meals can be had for $25 for two people.

That's all in Ann Arbor, Michigan. Prices are of course higher
in a large metropolis.

Cindy Hamilton

Hi,
You left out my old country Korea. Korean beef BBQ is good!
The place we may be going to eat is formal suit and tie place.
Or if I want freebee we can push ourselves to in-laws' private
club house, he,he. Some people live to eat, it seems but we eat to live.
If I can live without eating, that will be just fine with me.

Here in Calgary AB, there are more hidden rich folks than other cities
and consumer price and inflaation rate is higher than national average.
Likewise average income of household is higher too. We're retired but we
have been able to manage so far. Unemployment rate in the city
at the moment is ~4.3%. I used to live in S.S. Marie ON, way back in the
'60s. Then to Toronto and transfered out here in the spring of '70
where I raissed family and retired. Now just two of us and a dog in an
empty nest. No more cat. Our old cat died in April this year and if we
get another kitten, it may outlive losing us.

We love Italian food(our daughter-in-law is Southern Italian) I don't
like French cuisine, just good to look at, nothing much to eat,LOL!


If I have to wear a suit and tie someone else better be paying for the
dinner. I would certainly never inflict such dining on myself.

On Wed, 23 Oct 2013 23:24:53 -0700, Ashton Crusher
wrote:

On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 11:15:31 -0600, Tony Hwang
wrote:

Cindy Hamilton wrote:
In article ,
Tony Hwang wrote:
Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 10/21/2013 4:26 PM, Ashton Crusher wrote:

If I'm working I want the fast part. But it surprises me how little
actual difference there is in price between my wife and I eating at a
typical fast food place, maybe $16 versus a real sit down restaurant,
which for a non-fancy outing might be $21. For the extra $5 you get
served, real plates, actual food.....


If you're still able to find it for $21, you are doing OK. Seems most
of the time now it is $30+. Not difficult to hit $50 either.

Hmmm,
Eating out? We never go to a fast food joint to eat junk food.
Respectable eatery costs ~100.00 per person including tip at least.

Really? I generally figure about half that. Of course, we rarely
have any kind of alcohol when we eat in restaurants.

Perhaps we have differing definitions of "respectable". We don't do
"cuisine". The places we go most often (in no particular order):
German
Indian
Turkish
Japanese
Chinese
Italian
Syrian
Steakhouse

Some quite tasty ethnic meals can be had for $25 for two people.

That's all in Ann Arbor, Michigan. Prices are of course higher
in a large metropolis.

Cindy Hamilton

Hi,
You left out my old country Korea. Korean beef BBQ is good!
The place we may be going to eat is formal suit and tie place.
Or if I want freebee we can push ourselves to in-laws' private
club house, he,he. Some people live to eat, it seems but we eat to live.
If I can live without eating, that will be just fine with me.

Here in Calgary AB, there are more hidden rich folks than other cities
and consumer price and inflaation rate is higher than national average.
Likewise average income of household is higher too. We're retired but we
have been able to manage so far. Unemployment rate in the city
at the moment is ~4.3%. I used to live in S.S. Marie ON, way back in the
'60s. Then to Toronto and transfered out here in the spring of '70
where I raissed family and retired. Now just two of us and a dog in an
empty nest. No more cat. Our old cat died in April this year and if we
get another kitten, it may outlive losing us.

We love Italian food(our daughter-in-law is Southern Italian) I don't
like French cuisine, just good to look at, nothing much to eat,LOL!


If I have to wear a suit and tie someone else better be paying for the
dinner. I would certainly never inflict such dining on myself.

No children? Think wedding.

On 10/23/2013 6:05 AM, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In raweb.com,
wrote:


Interesting that no one from the Feds that I have found even
mentioned that. You would think that if they could shift the blame to
someone nefarious they would be trumpeting it to the heavens. Besides,
you could get to the site, then THEIR banner would say to wait. DOS
would normally be such that you wouldn't get that far and the website
certainly wouldn't have a banner up asking you to wait.

Not at all obvious to me that is true. DNS can crash a system. It can
make it too busy. It is, in any case, only one of the possible reasons
the fed exchange has problems.
Except even the Feds have said DNS wasn't a problem.

All I have said is DNS was a problem at the start. I have no idea if it
is still a problem. Appears it would likely be insignificant compared to
other problems.


to the states that don't want it being
responsible.

Some states that do not want ACA to be successful increased the work in
creating a fed exchange.
How? It is the Fed's program so why is it the responsibility of the
states to make sure it runs right?

It was still a move, at least in part, to make building the fed exchange
more difficult.
You mind reading? It was a move largely because the Dems pushed
this through with no GOP support and the GOP wasn't all that keen to
take even a part of the fall when it screwed up.

It was still a move, at least in part, to make building the fed exchange
more difficult.
Again without a shred of evidence. Even assuming you are correct.
This is something they knew from the getgo and were (or at least should
have) planning around. It isn't like the states said they were going to
and then changed their minds and pulled out at the last minute. Actually
it was other way around as some such as FL, said they weren't going to
the build their own and then did.

States did not have to announce until Feb this year. I have not seen a
list of when sates actually announced. Tennessee was at the deadline.
That is really late for a system to be running Oct 1.


I have also heard a few more reported.

Interesting that my points were very specific and (yes I admit)
verbose. This is the best you can do as a comeback?

I didn't know we were sharing all the reasons that we have heard.
Rather pointless since they are largely guesses what the major sticking
points are.
I would have settled for one or two. If rather pointless why, then
did you make a point to point them out?

I didn't point anything out.

"problems are to be expected (and were expected) for this
fast track very complicated system. ... The continuing problems the
fed system is having should not be happened. But I have not heard a
clear explanation of what is going wrong."


Amazon managed to do that from the get.

Amazon at the start was not as complex as Amazon now and was not as
complex as the exchanges.
Again, this was something that the Feds knew about from the start
and should have worked around. Although, it is hardly only a Fed thing
to dither around before making the original RFP and then changing their
minds multiple times (and probably from the programmer's standpoint,
random intervals) during the runup. These are the problems most of the
experts have talked about most often.

From the Washington Post:
“These are systems that typically take two or three years to build,”
Xerox's Kevin Walsh said when we talked about the exchanges right after
the election. “The last time I looked at the calendar, that’s not what
we’re working with.”

Finalizing sounds like one of multiple problems. I would like to see a
comprehensive list of major problems and what caused them from a
competent source.


You have yet to give me anything remotely resembling an actual
fact (a few others, heard many times) and you suggest I get real?

Apparently you have not looked very hard.
Can't tell how hard you looked, or even IF you looked since you have
given nothing but nebulous "I have heard" responses.

For example a minimal look finds, relating to trader's nbcnews link
"Since she has not looked at the options she has not made a decision."


Since the fed rules are the same it is not obvious to me why an insurer
would not want to be in a state. Could be because the state rules are
onerous, but the low-plan states don't seem to be ones that would have
much state regulation.

Mostly because they can't be all places at all times. The rules may
be the same, but the populations, markets, expenses, etc., aren't. Some
pulled out because of current penetration consideratinos that they
thought made it unlikely that they could get a big enough group of
patients to make any money. There are many things other than just the
structure of the plans that enter into it.

I don't understand how that explains how only 2 (for sake of argument)
companies put up plans for a state.
The big one is penetration. Especially with community rating (where
you can't underwrite for anything other than age, place, and smoking ),
you have to have a VERY big group to make any money. And that group has
to be made up a diverse group of people age and conditions. If you don't
have this diversity, say a concentration of us old farts with health
issues, then you can't balance the cheaper kids with the expensive old
farts and the policy gets very expensive and people leave. Unlike before
where just certain policies were in this death spiral, there is a
possibility that the whole system will go into a death spiral.
So, if you can't get enough people, they can't make any money and
you can lose great amounts.
For this alone, it is makes sense that companies pulled out of
marginal states and were hesitant to go into others. Add in the great
amount of uncertainty and resources that needed to be put in to get the
new policies up and functioning, and you have some states with only a
couple of insurance companies interested.

If they were in the state they would know the market. Still not obvious
to me why companies would pull out and split the market between 2 (if
that is what it is) companies.

And why would a state with a similar population have more companies?

As I mentioned, the
interesting thing will be if this changes after a couple of years of
experience and things have settled down.

Agree with that.

Also, it should be noted that there is no requirement that a plan
work for the entire state. There is at least one group in Indiana that
is only available in Indy and the donut counties. So, even if a state
has some large number of providers, a given area is likely to have many
fewer.

On Thu, 24 Oct 2013 12:24:59 -0600, bud-- wrote:

Except even the Feds have said DNS wasn't a problem.

All I have said is DNS was a problem at the start. I have no idea if it
is still a problem. Appears it would likely be insignificant compared to
other problems.


Golly Gee. Just skip the DNS concerns as they are not the problems.

What we have here is a (paraphrase) "glowing impact crater of the
face of the earth"...

I testimony today a congress critter summed it up. I forget his exact
words but it goes like this - You cannot re cook eggs.

In better words: The system HAS to be rebuilt.

He has a Master's in Computer Science, integrated systems in the
private sector, for the military, for the Pentagon and globally.

He ate the contractor's lunch.... if you know what I mean.

On Thu, 24 Oct 2013 13:12:29 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 23 Oct 2013 23:24:53 -0700, Ashton Crusher
wrote:

On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 11:15:31 -0600, Tony Hwang
wrote:

Cindy Hamilton wrote:
In article ,
Tony Hwang wrote:
Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 10/21/2013 4:26 PM, Ashton Crusher wrote:

If I'm working I want the fast part. But it surprises me how little
actual difference there is in price between my wife and I eating at a
typical fast food place, maybe $16 versus a real sit down restaurant,
which for a non-fancy outing might be $21. For the extra $5 you get
served, real plates, actual food.....


If you're still able to find it for $21, you are doing OK. Seems most
of the time now it is $30+. Not difficult to hit $50 either.

Hmmm,
Eating out? We never go to a fast food joint to eat junk food.
Respectable eatery costs ~100.00 per person including tip at least.

Really? I generally figure about half that. Of course, we rarely
have any kind of alcohol when we eat in restaurants.

Perhaps we have differing definitions of "respectable". We don't do
"cuisine". The places we go most often (in no particular order):
German
Indian
Turkish
Japanese
Chinese
Italian
Syrian
Steakhouse

Some quite tasty ethnic meals can be had for $25 for two people.

That's all in Ann Arbor, Michigan. Prices are of course higher
in a large metropolis.

Cindy Hamilton

Hi,
You left out my old country Korea. Korean beef BBQ is good!
The place we may be going to eat is formal suit and tie place.
Or if I want freebee we can push ourselves to in-laws' private
club house, he,he. Some people live to eat, it seems but we eat to live.
If I can live without eating, that will be just fine with me.

Here in Calgary AB, there are more hidden rich folks than other cities
and consumer price and inflaation rate is higher than national average.
Likewise average income of household is higher too. We're retired but we
have been able to manage so far. Unemployment rate in the city
at the moment is ~4.3%. I used to live in S.S. Marie ON, way back in the
'60s. Then to Toronto and transfered out here in the spring of '70
where I raissed family and retired. Now just two of us and a dog in an
empty nest. No more cat. Our old cat died in April this year and if we
get another kitten, it may outlive losing us.

We love Italian food(our daughter-in-law is Southern Italian) I don't
like French cuisine, just good to look at, nothing much to eat,LOL!


If I have to wear a suit and tie someone else better be paying for the
dinner. I would certainly never inflict such dining on myself.

No children? Think wedding.


I didn't consider those two occasions "going out to dinner".

On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 00:41:02 -0700, Ashton Crusher
wrote:

On Thu, 24 Oct 2013 13:12:29 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 23 Oct 2013 23:24:53 -0700, Ashton Crusher
wrote:

On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 11:15:31 -0600, Tony Hwang
wrote:

Cindy Hamilton wrote:
In article ,
Tony Hwang wrote:
Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 10/21/2013 4:26 PM, Ashton Crusher wrote:

If I'm working I want the fast part. But it surprises me how little
actual difference there is in price between my wife and I eating at a
typical fast food place, maybe $16 versus a real sit down restaurant,
which for a non-fancy outing might be $21. For the extra $5 you get
served, real plates, actual food.....


If you're still able to find it for $21, you are doing OK. Seems most
of the time now it is $30+. Not difficult to hit $50 either.

Hmmm,
Eating out? We never go to a fast food joint to eat junk food.
Respectable eatery costs ~100.00 per person including tip at least.

Really? I generally figure about half that. Of course, we rarely
have any kind of alcohol when we eat in restaurants.

Perhaps we have differing definitions of "respectable". We don't do
"cuisine". The places we go most often (in no particular order):
German
Indian
Turkish
Japanese
Chinese
Italian
Syrian
Steakhouse

Some quite tasty ethnic meals can be had for $25 for two people.

That's all in Ann Arbor, Michigan. Prices are of course higher
in a large metropolis.

Cindy Hamilton

Hi,
You left out my old country Korea. Korean beef BBQ is good!
The place we may be going to eat is formal suit and tie place.
Or if I want freebee we can push ourselves to in-laws' private
club house, he,he. Some people live to eat, it seems but we eat to live.
If I can live without eating, that will be just fine with me.

Here in Calgary AB, there are more hidden rich folks than other cities
and consumer price and inflaation rate is higher than national average.
Likewise average income of household is higher too. We're retired but we
have been able to manage so far. Unemployment rate in the city
at the moment is ~4.3%. I used to live in S.S. Marie ON, way back in the
'60s. Then to Toronto and transfered out here in the spring of '70
where I raissed family and retired. Now just two of us and a dog in an
empty nest. No more cat. Our old cat died in April this year and if we
get another kitten, it may outlive losing us.

We love Italian food(our daughter-in-law is Southern Italian) I don't
like French cuisine, just good to look at, nothing much to eat,LOL!


If I have to wear a suit and tie someone else better be paying for the
dinner. I would certainly never inflict such dining on myself.

No children? Think wedding.


I didn't consider those two occasions "going out to dinner".

A rehearsal dinner is, by any definition of the term. ;-) I'm sure
there are many similar cases.