Al Burt Boarla <al.burt.boarla@myocarditis.vax> wrote in
news:66fbda80$0$1784$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com:

> citizen winston smith wrote:
>> The entire IRS is a sham and a private corporation beholden to Yuro
>> banksters that must be abolished!
>
> The IRS takes money from working people and gives it to lazy welfare
> people.

https://image.cagle.com/277888/830/john-darkow_its-a-hoax.png

Joel wrote:
> I'm a white piece of shit, cracker. Redneck greasy oinking pig.
> Devil race of Satan.
>
>
INDEED! https://postimg.cc/qtVZ7pDX LOL!

[Default] Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> typed:

>Klaus Schadenfreude <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>>[Default] Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> typed:
>>>Klaus Schadenfreude <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>>[Default] T <T@invalid.invalid> typed:
>>>>>On 9/30/24 15:23, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A steak is $15.00 at the grocery store. It's "fair" if a poor person
>>>>>> buys it or a rich person buys it. It costs either one of them $15
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's fair
>>>>>
>>>>>Do you seriously think both are on the same budget???
>>>>
>>>>What's budget got to do with it, dumb ass?
>>>>
>>>>It's FAIR that BOTH pay the same price for the steak
>>>
>>>The only way it's "fair" is
>>
>>It's fair. The opinions of the mentally ill don't count here.
>
>
>You're a white piece of shit, cracker. Redneck greasy oinking pig.
>Devil race of Satan.

ROFLMAO

Looks like poor Joel eats a lot of hamburger, when he's not eating his
"girlfriend's" sausage.

[Default] Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> typed:

>A rich person buys Wagyu beef for $800/pound, a poor person buys hamburger
>at $3/pound - a poor person doesn't eat steak.

Where are you buying Wagyu for $800 a pound, you stupid fucktard?

I can buy 16 oz. wagyu ribeyes all day long for $85.

On 10/1/2024 11:09 AM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
> [Default] Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> typed:
>
>> A rich person buys Wagyu beef for $800/pound, a poor person buys hamburger
>> at $3/pound - a poor person doesn't eat steak.
>
> Where are you buying Wagyu for $800 a pound, you stupid fucktard?
>
> I can buy 16 oz. wagyu ribeyes all day long for $85.

$20-24 at Wal Mart.

On 10/1/2024 1:09 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
> [Default] Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> typed:
>
>> A rich person buys Wagyu beef for $800/pound, a poor person buys hamburger
>> at $3/pound - a poor person doesn't eat steak.
>
> Where are you buying Wagyu for $800 a pound, you stupid fucktard?
>
> I can buy 16 oz. wagyu ribeyes all day long for $85.

Yes, the lower grades. What about A5?

https://postimg.cc/QVKKJJKB

[Default] Ed P <esp@snet.n> typed:

>On 10/1/2024 1:09 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>> [Default] Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> typed:
>>
>>> A rich person buys Wagyu beef for $800/pound, a poor person buys hamburger
>>> at $3/pound - a poor person doesn't eat steak.
>>
>> Where are you buying Wagyu for $800 a pound, you stupid fucktard?
>>
>> I can buy 16 oz. wagyu ribeyes all day long for $85.
>
>Yes, the lower grades. What about A5?
>
>https://postimg.cc/QVKKJJKB

The USDA (United States Department of Agriculture) separates domestic
beef into eight grades, based on intramuscular fat or marbling, and
other qualities like tenderness, juiciness, and flavor. The two
highest grades are Prime and Choice. Prime is the top grade on the
USDA scale and features an abundant amount of marbling.

Snake River Farms produces beef that measures above the USDA scores.
To grade these higher levels of marbling and quality, we utilize the
12-point BMS (Beef Marbling Score or Beef Marbling Standard) from the
Japanese Meat Grading Association (JMGA). SRF Black™ and SRF Gold™
both score above USDA Prime.

SRF Black™ is rated a BMS of 6 to 8 with significantly more marbling
than USDA Prime graded beef.

SRF Gold™ registers a BMS of 9 to 12 and contains the highest level of
marbling we offer.

On 9/30/24 11:51 PM, T wrote:
> On 9/30/24 15:23, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>> On 9/30/2024 2:38 PM,Fuckwit  -hh wrote:
>>>> On 9/30/24 1:08 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>> [Default]  Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> typed:
>>>>>
>>>>>> T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote in news:vddo52$1u779$4@dont-email.me:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 9/29/24 22:58, me too wrote:
>>>>>>>> "Make them pay their fair share!"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And when the populace is asked what percentage that "fair
>>>>>>> share" is, it is usually under what they are already
>>>>>>> paying.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, it's not - not when a teacher, or nurse pays a greater
>>>>>> percentage of
>>>>>> their income than a billionaire.
>>>>>
>>>>> They STILL pay less in taxes
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> True, but that's being a tad dishonest in avoiding the stated point.
>>>>
>>>> That point was "fair share".  Its metric was "percentage of income",
>>>> which is very consistent with how this topic is discussed.
>>
>> Wrong.
>>
>> A steak is $15.00 at the grocery store. It's "fair" if a poor person
>> buys it or a rich person buys it. It costs either one of them $15
>>
>> That's fair
>
>
> Do you seriously think both are on the same budget???

Klaus has a point, but it isn't the one that you're thinking of.

The reason is that Klaus's analogy relies on an underlying assumption in
his steak analogy, namely that a government service has an equal benefit
to a poor person and a rich person. For example, a public road: the
poor person may not have a car with which to use that service benefit,
whereas the rich person not only uses the roads, but his customers do
too. As such, the rich person benefits _more_ from that service.

-hh

Ed P wrote:
> On 10/1/2024 1:09 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>> [Default]  Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> typed:
>>
>>> A rich person buys Wagyu beef for $800/pound, a poor person buys
>>> hamburger
>>> at $3/pound - a poor person doesn't eat steak.
>>
>> Where are you buying Wagyu for $800 a pound, you stupid fucktard?
>>
>> I can buy 16 oz. wagyu ribeyes all day long for $85.
>
> Yes, the lower grades.  What about A5?
>
> https://postimg.cc/QVKKJJKB

Whaddya doing, running a high end steakhouse, leftard?

Go root for truffles.

--
⛨ 🥐🥖🗼🤪

-hh wrote:
> On 9/30/24 11:51 PM, T wrote:
>> On 9/30/24 15:23, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>> On 9/30/2024 2:38 PM,Fuckwit  -hh wrote:
>>>>> On 9/30/24 1:08 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>> [Default]  Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> typed:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote in news:vddo52$1u779$4@dont-email.me:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 9/29/24 22:58, me too wrote:
>>>>>>>>> "Make them pay their fair share!"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And when the populace is asked what percentage that "fair
>>>>>>>> share" is, it is usually under what they are already
>>>>>>>> paying.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, it's not - not when a teacher, or nurse pays a greater
>>>>>>> percentage of
>>>>>>> their income than a billionaire.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They STILL pay less in taxes
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> True, but that's being a tad dishonest in avoiding the stated point.
>>>>>
>>>>> That point was "fair share".  Its metric was "percentage of income",
>>>>> which is very consistent with how this topic is discussed.
>>>
>>> Wrong.
>>>
>>> A steak is $15.00 at the grocery store. It's "fair" if a poor person
>>> buys it or a rich person buys it. It costs either one of them $15
>>>
>>> That's fair
>>
>>
>> Do you seriously think both are on the same budget???
>
>
> Klaus has a point, but it isn't the one that you're thinking of.

Nor is it the one you're about to shamelessly reconstruct to fit your
own petty argumentative needs:

> The reason is that Klaus's analogy relies on an underlying assumption in
> his steak analogy, namely that a government service has an equal benefit
> to a poor person and a rich person.

And with the definitive you just set ("a government service") it
certainly may.

>  For example, a public road:

For example, your cherry picking "a government service" for him.

> the poor person may not have a car with which to use that service benefit,

Use it _directly_ perhaps not...but indirectly every good or service
they consume relies upon our transportation network.

Doesn't matter if one is buying hamburger or Wagyu steak - it all
travels by road.

> whereas the rich person not only uses the roads, but his customers do
> too.  As such, the rich person benefits _more_ from that service.

And the man with large lungs benefits more from clean air than the man
with small lungs, etc., etc. etc...

You can't even argue respectably Huntzy, you're just an order-taking
lifer who never learned how to think for himself.

You putz.

--
⛨ 🥐🥖🗼🤪

On 10/1/24 3:13 PM, Mittens Romney wrote:
> -hh wrote:
>> On 9/30/24 11:51 PM, T wrote:
>>> On 9/30/24 15:23, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>> On 9/30/2024 2:38 PM,Fuckwit  -hh wrote:
>>>>>> On 9/30/24 1:08 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>>> [Default]  Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> typed:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote in news:vddo52$1u779$4@dont-email.me:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 9/29/24 22:58, me too wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> "Make them pay their fair share!"
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And when the populace is asked what percentage that "fair
>>>>>>>>> share" is, it is usually under what they are already
>>>>>>>>> paying.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No, it's not - not when a teacher, or nurse pays a greater
>>>>>>>> percentage of
>>>>>>>> their income than a billionaire.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They STILL pay less in taxes
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> True, but that's being a tad dishonest in avoiding the stated point.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That point was "fair share".  Its metric was "percentage of income",
>>>>>> which is very consistent with how this topic is discussed.
>>>>
>>>> Wrong.
>>>>
>>>> A steak is $15.00 at the grocery store. It's "fair" if a poor person
>>>> buys it or a rich person buys it. It costs either one of them $15
>>>>
>>>> That's fair
>>>
>>>
>>> Do you seriously think both are on the same budget???
>>
>>
>> Klaus has a point, but it isn't the one that you're thinking of.
>
> Nor is it the one you're about to shamelessly reconstruct to fit your
> own petty argumentative needs:
>
>> The reason is that Klaus's analogy relies on an underlying assumption
>> in his steak analogy, namely that a government service has an equal
>> benefit to a poor person and a rich person.
>
> And with the definitive you just set ("a government service") it
> certainly may.
>
>>   For example, a public road:
>
> For example, your cherry picking "a government service" for him.

I don't see the government selling groceries.

But what they do commonly do is to provide services:
roads/infrastructure, police/fire/education, national security, etc.
If you don't like my example, pick something else that's reasonably
representative of 'government' as a whole, or identify a portfolio and
go through and assess them all.

>> the poor person may not have a car with which to use that service
>> benefit,
>
> Use it _directly_ perhaps not...but indirectly every good or service
> they consume relies upon our transportation network.

And the same is true for the rich too...and since they often consume
more of such goods, that means that their use of roads is proportionally
higher too.

> Doesn't matter if one is buying hamburger or Wagyu steak - it  all
> travels by road.

Yup, and those are *public* roads, so its infrastructure that the
government paid for from their tax revenues as an investment in the
economy and society.

>> whereas the rich person not only uses the roads, but his customers do
>> too.  As such, the rich person benefits _more_ from that service.
>
> And the man with large lungs benefits more from clean air than the man
> with small lungs, etc., etc. etc...

And the rich man with the big mansion, he pays taxes for police & fire
services....but since he's got a bigger house for them to protect, why
shouldn't he pay more? Its just like the private landscapers he hires:
they charge more when there's more acres to mow/trim/etc.

-hh

On 9/30/24 7:24 PM, Ed P wrote:
> On 9/30/2024 6:11 PM, Allen wrote:
>
>>
>> That's political word salad and laughably correct since many
>> billionaires don't get a paycheck like the working class.  They, like
>> all business owners, take draws which are not taxed because it's
>> considered removal of profits and not personal income.  Ever think that
>> through?
>
> It is still income
>
>>
>> Obviously you've never owned a business.  Business owners pay higher
>> interest rates, higher phone rates, higher internet rates, higher
>> electrical, higher everything.  Why?  Because they are a business.  A
>> smart business owner takes advantage of the deductions granted them by
>> state governments and Congress.  That is why they pay less taxes in some
>> cases.
>
> Obviously you have no idea what I've done.  Both my wife and I had
> businesses.  Not everything is a higher rate.

Was thinking the same thing.

>> Something else you may not have considered.  Businesses collect taxes
>> and pay them back to the government in quarterly payments.  Do they
>> get paid for that?  No.  The more they collect due to success the more
>> they must pay.
>
> Cost of doing business.  Hey, its deductible too!

Yes, the latitude for business deductions is quite broad. Wait until
they hear about tickets to sporting events written off as client
entertainment expenses, etc.

Even small business can go there easily, such as by buying a laptop as a
deductible business expense, and once its been depreciated (sometimes in
only 1 year), they can give it to their kid to use for school/etc and
then go buy another laptop as a business expense & deduct that too.

-hh

On 10/1/24 03:27, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
> [Default] T <T@invalid.invalid> typed:
>
>> On 9/30/24 15:23, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>> On 9/30/2024 2:38 PM,Fuckwit -hh wrote:
>>>>> On 9/30/24 1:08 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>> [Default]  Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> typed:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote in news:vddo52$1u779$4@dont-email.me:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 9/29/24 22:58, me too wrote:
>>>>>>>>> "Make them pay their fair share!"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And when the populace is asked what percentage that "fair
>>>>>>>> share" is, it is usually under what they are already
>>>>>>>> paying.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, it's not - not when a teacher, or nurse pays a greater percentage of
>>>>>>> their income than a billionaire.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They STILL pay less in taxes
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> True, but that's being a tad dishonest in avoiding the stated point.
>>>>>
>>>>> That point was "fair share".  Its metric was "percentage of income",
>>>>> which is very consistent with how this topic is discussed.
>>>
>>> Wrong.
>>>
>>> A steak is $15.00 at the grocery store. It's "fair" if a poor person
>>> buys it or a rich person buys it. It costs either one of them $15
>>>
>>> That's fair
>>>
>>
>>
>> Do you seriously think both are on the same budget???
>
> What's budget got to do with it, dumb ass?
>
> It's FAIR that BOTH pay the same price for the steak

You misread me. I was criticizing the "equality of outcome" crowd.

Klaus Schadenfreude <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergent�ter.@gmail.com> wrote
in
news:r2bofj5ldslbmbhen1464sj9g1eck1sg57@Rudy.Canoza.is.a.forging.cocksuck
ing.dwarf.com:

> [Default] Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> typed:
>
>>A rich person buys Wagyu beef for $800/pound, a poor person buys
>>hamburger at $3/pound - a poor person doesn't eat steak.
>
> Where are you buying Wagyu for $800 a pound, you stupid fucktard?

https://highsocietymeats.com/products/japanese-a5-wagyu-top-round-8-lb?
variant=43825814798515
&currency=USD&utm_source=google&utm_medium=kocah&utm_campaign=shopping&srsl
tid=AfmBOooomEA7J7X230Ka_hY4Ieu3JqcxeeQl05ywK09Dv3vKabr1aetTerE

>
> I can buy 16 oz. wagyu ribeyes all day long for $85.
>

Imitatin Wagyu

T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote in news:vdhuh5$2tick$1@dont-email.me:

> On 10/1/24 03:27, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>> [Default] T <T@invalid.invalid> typed:
>>
>>> On 9/30/24 15:23, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>> On 9/30/2024 2:38 PM,Fuckwit -hh wrote:
>>>>>> On 9/30/24 1:08 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>>> [Default]  Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> typed:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote in
>>>>>>>> news:vddo52$1u779$4@dont-email.me:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 9/29/24 22:58, me too wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> "Make them pay their fair share!"
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And when the populace is asked what percentage that "fair
>>>>>>>>> share" is, it is usually under what they are already
>>>>>>>>> paying.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No, it's not - not when a teacher, or nurse pays a greater
>>>>>>>> percentage of their income than a billionaire.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They STILL pay less in taxes
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> True, but that's being a tad dishonest in avoiding the stated
>>>>>> point.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That point was "fair share".  Its metric was "percentage of
>>>>>> income", which is very consistent with how this topic is
>>>>>> discussed.
>>>>
>>>> Wrong.
>>>>
>>>> A steak is $15.00 at the grocery store. It's "fair" if a poor
>>>> person buys it or a rich person buys it. It costs either one of
>>>> them $15
>>>>
>>>> That's fair
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Do you seriously think both are on the same budget???
>>
>> What's budget got to do with it, dumb ass?
>>
>> It's FAIR that BOTH pay the same price for the steak
>
>
> You misread me. I was criticizing the "equality of outcome" crowd.
>

If you think a Flat Tax is fair, then we should price EVERYTHING on
percentage of income too - that would only be fair.

[Default] Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> typed:

>T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote in news:vdhuh5$2tick$1@dont-email.me:
>
>> On 10/1/24 03:27, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>> [Default] T <T@invalid.invalid> typed:
>>>
>>>> On 9/30/24 15:23, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>> On 9/30/2024 2:38 PM,Fuckwit -hh wrote:
>>>>>>> On 9/30/24 1:08 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>>>> [Default]  Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> typed:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote in
>>>>>>>>> news:vddo52$1u779$4@dont-email.me:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 9/29/24 22:58, me too wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> "Make them pay their fair share!"
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And when the populace is asked what percentage that "fair
>>>>>>>>>> share" is, it is usually under what they are already
>>>>>>>>>> paying.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No, it's not - not when a teacher, or nurse pays a greater
>>>>>>>>> percentage of their income than a billionaire.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They STILL pay less in taxes
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> True, but that's being a tad dishonest in avoiding the stated
>>>>>>> point.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That point was "fair share".  Its metric was "percentage of
>>>>>>> income", which is very consistent with how this topic is
>>>>>>> discussed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>> A steak is $15.00 at the grocery store. It's "fair" if a poor
>>>>> person buys it or a rich person buys it. It costs either one of
>>>>> them $15
>>>>>
>>>>> That's fair
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Do you seriously think both are on the same budget???
>>>
>>> What's budget got to do with it, dumb ass?
>>>
>>> It's FAIR that BOTH pay the same price for the steak
>>
>>
>> You misread me. I was criticizing the "equality of outcome" crowd.
>>
>
>If you think a Flat Tax is fair, then we should price EVERYTHING on
>percentage of income too - that would only be fair.

No, you don't know what "fair" means.

T│T: A steak is 15 $.

A semi decent, thickish steak is 30+ $.

A 1 lb pack of Hot Dogs costs 1.54 $ at WalMart,
2.39 $ at Amazon Fresh, 55 % more (2.39/1.54).

Ten days ago, American Sherrol Reid said it's "Delicious", 5 out of 5 stars:

Very versatile. Not just good on a bun but cooked up with
fresh seasoning and accompanied by rice.

I like 'em plain, nothing added.

On Tue, 01 Oct 2024 17:37:32 -0700 (Seattle), Relf wrote:

> A 1 lb pack of Hot Dogs costs 1.54 $ at WalMart,

You'll be lucky if they're pink slime.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_slime

More likely someone was dropping live chickens onto a shredder.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanically_separated_meat

Personally, my supper was pulled pork that started with an identifiable
piece of pig that was $4.29 / lb. I like to know what I'm eating.

Klaus Schadenfreude <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergent�ter.@gmail.com> wrote in
news:tt0pfjtdeccaso9c06c4mbrf8b6d9rkfbn@Rudy.Canoza.is.a.forging.cocksuckin
g.dwarf.com:

> [Default] Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> typed:
>

>>
>>If you think a Flat Tax is fair, then we should price EVERYTHING on
>>percentage of income too - that would only be fair.
>
> No, you don't know what "fair" means.

OTOH, our Society has never strictly wanted "fair" - "To whom much is
given, more is required". Or perhaps you have a different god? Even most
atheists belive in progressivism.

On 10/1/2024 8:15 PM, Baxter wrote:
> Klaus Schadenfreude <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:tt0pfjtdeccaso9c06c4mbrf8b6d9rkfbn@Rudy.Canoza.is.a.forging.cocksuckin
> g.dwarf.com:
>
>> [Default] Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> typed:
>>
>
>>>
>>> If you think a Flat Tax is fair, then we should price EVERYTHING on
>>> percentage of income too - that would only be fair.
>>
>> No, you don't know what "fair" means.
>
> OTOH, our Society has never strictly wanted "fair" - "To whom much is
> given, more is required". Or perhaps you have a different god? Even most
> atheists belive in progressivism.
>

Tax policy affects corporate behavior. When taxes are high, corporations
re-prioritize their spending, and spend on things that are deductible.
That generally means investing in facilities, equipment and people to
grow the company, rather than stock buybacks to get executives a quick
buck on their stock. Executive pay varies similarly when the executive
taxes rise.

The workers benefit significantly from that.

Processed foods ( flour, sugar, white/pink slime ) are cheap & delicious.
Nothing could be more American.

rBowman: My supper was pulled pork, 4.29 $/lb.

I'm doubting that price, 4.29 $/lb; Walmart wants double that.
Does it come in a can, or is it fresh ?

On Tue, 01 Oct 2024 21:01:38 -0700 (Seattle), Relf wrote:

> Processed foods ( flour, sugar, white/pink slime ) are cheap &
> delicious.
> Nothing could be more American.

https://time.com/2938158/youth-fail-to-qualify-military-service/

"Approximately 71% of the 34 million 17-to-24-year-olds in the U.S. would
not qualify for military service "

Could there possibly be a connection?

Note: I'm not suggesting anyone joins the military.

On Tue, 01 Oct 2024 21:11:22 -0700 (Seattle), Relf wrote:

> rBowman: My supper was pulled pork, 4.29 $/lb.
>
> I'm doubting that price, 4.29 $/lb; Walmart wants double that.
> Does it come in a can, or is it fresh ?

If you parsed my post correctly you might have figured out it was a piece
of raw meat that I put in a dutch oven and cooked over an environmentally
unsafe gas range. Towards the end I added both balsamic and Braggs apple
cider vinegar, mustard (actual powdered mustard seed), pink salt (CostCo
no longer calls it Himalayan pink salt but it is still pink, and black
pepper, both freshly ground.

About the only canned goods I use are tuna, salmon, sardines, tomatoes,
and coconut milk if I'm doing curry.

rbowman wrote this post; take it under advisement:

> On Tue, 01 Oct 2024 17:37:32 -0700 (Seattle), Relf wrote:
>
>> A 1 lb pack of Hot Dogs costs 1.54 $ at WalMart,
>
> You'll be lucky if they're pink slime.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_slime
>
> More likely someone was dropping live chickens onto a shredder.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanically_separated_meat
>
> Personally, my supper was pulled pork that started with an identifiable
> piece of pig that was $4.29 / lb. I like to know what I'm eating.

Costco dogs! Yum!

--
Keep cool; process promptly.