YoBimbo

Inside D.C.'s Food-Truck Wars: How some of Washington's most powerful interests are trying to curb the city's most popular new cuisine - Washington City Paper

If anyone can understand the tension between brick-and-mortar restaurants and the mobile army of food trucks that has stormed D.C. in the past year, it’s Stephan Boillon. After he lost his job at Dino in Cleveland Park in 2008, the veteran chef sought to launch an upscale sandwich shop on Connecticut Avenue NW. His plan was to offer only cold sandwiches, which would enable him to build a restaurant with no burners, no oven, and no deep fryers.

via www.washingtoncitypaper.com

I don't know any stats on this, but I do know that the lobster truck can have a line that's nearly 2 hours long at times. If these brick & mortars were smart, they'd offer good food that is fast and portable so they can pick up some of those folks who can't wait 2 hours (but were brought to the neighborhood by the truck).

Take, for instance, Tru in Chicago. Tru is a place where two people can easily drop $1,000 on dinner. However, they've recently added a side business where, during the day, lucky Chicagoans can get a really tasty burger for $5. It's just around the corner from the main restaurant and shares Tru's kitchen. Read about M Burger here: UrbanDaddy.com

So... All those whiners who are going on about how they "knew" what their competition was when they set up shop and are blindsided by these "Wild West" squatters, need to shut up and do what other businesses are forced to do: adapt or die. Compete or quit.

As for me, I hope they all get run out of DC and come to Arlington and stay here.

P.S.  Here's a list of the trucks I currently follow on Twitter. Please feel free to add more from the DC area in the comments.

Fojol Brothers (fojolbros)
El Floridano (FLmeetsDC)
Eat Wonky (eatwonky)
Sweetbites Mobile Cafe (SweetBitesTruck)
DC Slices (dcslices)
Red Hook Lobster DC (LobstertruckDC)
District Taco (districttaco)
Solar Crepes (solarcrepes)
Rebel Heroes (rebelheroes)

Pope: Condoms Not The Answer To AIDS

"You can't resolve it with the distribution of condoms," the pope told reporters aboard the Alitalia plane heading to Yaounde. "On the contrary, it increases the problem."

The pope said a responsible and moral attitude toward sex would help fight the disease, as he answered questions submitted in advance by reporters traveling on the plane. His response was presumably also prepared in advance.

via www.huffingtonpost.com

Well, you know, and I'm just being Devil's Advocate here (pun kind of intended), there could be some validity to that.

DON'T FLAME ME YET.

Consider the seat belt. The seat belt was intended to reduce the number of vehicle passenger deaths and make driving a car safer. Well, they did. But at the same time, people began to drive more recklessly because they believed they were safer.

The results? Higher speeds, MORE accidents, and - get this - more pedestrian deaths.

See:  An Economist on How Seat Belts Kill

Now, we all know why the Catholic church opposes condom use - they oppose anything that stops people from making new Catholics.

But from a non-emotional point of view, I wonder if condoms give Africans a false sense of security (they break, you know), which leads to more reckless behavior?

I'm absolutely NOT agreeing with the church, and I certainly would never go so far as to say that condoms exacerbate the HIV/AIDS crisis, but it is an interesting thought, no?

No, YOU helped this happen.

(Source of the quote:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-CAcdta_8I)

via teapartyjesus.tumblr.com

I find it interesting that people see god's punishment in so many things... 9-11, Katrina, the earthquake in Haiti...

But in the three years since Falwell's death, I haven't heard one single Christian ponder this:

"One week before his death, Falwell told CNN's Christiane Amanpour he needed at least 20 more years to accomplish his vision for Liberty University."

Tax Rebate = Stimulus Package

Once again, I'm sharing a conversation from Facebook. After "Pastor" Terry Jones called off his planned bonfire of Korans down in Florida, a friend wrote:

"Maybe now we can concentrate on getting people JOBS. RT @dmataconis: Dear America, you just got played for a fool by a wingnut Pastor in Florida."

I "liked" his status update. His brother, on the other hand, had something else to say:

• 

  BROTHER OF FRIEND:  what we need is more stimulus spending. The 800 billion worked so well we need to waste another 800 billion then maybe we can get the unemployment number down to a respectable 9.1 %

So, I wrote:

• 

  ME:  Actually, I shudder to think what the jobless rate would be had it not been for the stimulus.

• 

  BROTHER OF FRIEND: it would have been better because small buisiness wont hire when they are worried about there taxes going up and there medical costs going up as well.

Now, we all have family members with whom we don't agree. I have a cousin who thinks white people can do no wrong (if you get my drift), and a brother who thinks people on welfare are just lazy. Be that as it may, my friend and another friend of his picked up the conversation because, frankly, I didn't want to blast a member of my friend's family. This is not easy for me, mind you. I've been working on restraint.

• FRIEND: ...we've seen firsthand how much companies invested in themselves when given the choice - before and since the recession -- Companies that asked us to wait a few weeks for our paychecks, transferred jobs to East Jabib and treat stockholders, customers and employees like trash. I wouldn't mind criticising the stim spending if I thought it didn't work, but all the impartial people who know better than us say that we'd be in worse shape without that spending. Either way, I'd rather that people argue over spending than bs issues dreamed up for the election cycle.
  
  

  FRIEND OF FRIEND: The stimulus spending worked. As Economists like Paul Krugman pointed out about before and since, it was about half of what was necessary. 
   "...the inadequacy of the administration’s initial economic plan has landed it — and the nation — in a political trap. More stimulus is desperately needed, but in the public’s eyes the failure of the initial program to deliver a convincing recovery has discredited government action to create jobs. 

  In short, welcome to 1938." 
  http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/06/opinion/06krugman.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Right now I'm reading a book about Behavioral Economics, called 'Animal Spirits'. In it, they talk about the "Keynesian Multiplier". Fascinating stuff, and it's been taught to economics students for generations.

"Any initial government stimulus, say a program of increased government expenditure, puts money into people's hands, which they then spend. The initial government stimulus is the first round. Each dollar spent by the government ultimately becomes income to some people, and, once it has been put into their hands, they spend some fraction of it. That fraction is called the marginal propensity to consume (MPC). Thus the initial increase of expenditures feeds back into a second round of expenditures, made by people, not the government. This then feeds back again into income for yet more people, in an amount equal to the MPC dollars. These people in turn spend a fraction of the MPC, called the MPC squared dollars. This is the third round. But the story is not over yet. Round after round of expenditure follows..."

So... anyway... remember that "tax rebate" Bush gave us? The one that was the equivalent of one Happy Meal per week for a year? And he told us all to spend it, not save it? 

Dude... That was a stimulus program cloaked in a PR package called a tax "rebate" to make all you tax-averse fools think you were getting what you wanted.

NPR-ProPublica Investigation: Purple Hearts Elusive For Traumatic Brain Injuries : NPR

The U.S. Army honors soldiers wounded or killed in combat with the Purple Heart, a powerful symbol designed to recognize their sacrifice and service.

Yet Army commanders have routinely denied Purple Hearts to soldiers who have sustained concussions in Iraq, despite regulations that make such wounds eligible for the medal, an investigation by NPR and ProPublica has found.

via www.npr.org

Someone on Facebook asked, "Why do people keep joining the military?"

Aside from needing a job and education, they join because they believe the idealistic bullsh*t that they're fighting for freedom and democracy. What they're really fighting for are capitalism and securing scarce resources. We're a capitalist nation. That's just the way it is.

But people won't lay their lives down for that. They WILL, however, die for lofty ideals like freedom and democracy.

As for the soldiers who suffer neglect and a lack of medical care when they return, maybe if people would quit buying flag stickers and "Support Our Troops" magnets for their cars and donate that money to organizations that help soldiers...

Oh, wait. I'm also talking about the people who don't want to see body counts and coffin-draped flags. Never mind.

The Anosognosic's Dilemma: Something's Wrong but You'll Never Know What It Is (Part 1) - NYTimes.com

Unknown unknown solutions haunt the mediocre without their knowledge. The average detective does not realize the clues he or she neglects.  The mediocre doctor is not aware of the diagnostic possibilities or treatments never considered.  The run-of-the-mill lawyer fails to recognize the winning legal argument that is out there.  People fail to reach their potential as professionals, lovers, parents and people simply because they are not aware of the possible.  This is one of the reasons I often urge my student advisees to find out who the smart professors are, and to get themselves in front of those professors so they can see what smart looks like.

via opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com

Are you too stupid to know that you're stupid?

Rotten eggs: Deregulation isn't the only problem.

On a Facebook page, someone asked, "Are food-borne illness outbreaks increasing?" and someone wrote, "YES! All of Bush's deregulation is coming back to haunt us!"

The thing is, deregulation isn't the only problem (although I agree it's part of it), but sidestepping the law time and time again is an even bigger problem. For instance, WHY hasn't Jack DeCoster been put in jail? Why is he still in business? He's a well-documented habitual offender and the latest egg recall comes directly from his sleazy operations. 

Why? Because he's rich. He bought his way out of everything from animal cruelty to unsafe working conditions to filthy factory farms to hiring illegal immigrants (and housing them like his chickens with feces-laden water to drink) to rape and sexual harassment by his managers.

He simply pays the fines or settles out of court. These fines are the cost of doing business for this guy.

And so he continues doing what he does and, to date, over 1300 people have been affected by this salmonella outbreak.

It's not the failure of regulations. The regulations are there. The problem is that the government is unable to enforce them, and the government is far too complacent. To me, the question should be, "With all these regulations in place, why is this guy still in business? Who weakened the penalties to the point where fines are simply a business expense?"

Google Jack DeCoster's name. You'll see.

dKosopedia

Teflon Chicken Don Agrees to Cruelty Plea

Wright County Egg Recall

Protest against donation by Target to anti-gay politician.

I don't think we have enough beer.

holy crap.

I totally forgot I had this blog. And I found it because I was editing my profile on Facebook and saw this as my web site. haha!

Okay then. I guess I'll fire the old thing back up and see what develops.