The Not-So-Great Depression Diet [1930's Food History]

[GM]

"Many cheap foods still common among the poor today made their debut during the Depression: Wonder Bread (1930), Bisquick (1931), Miracle Whip (1933), and Campbell’s Cream of Mushroom soup (1934). Ragu spaghetti sauce, Kraft mac-n-cheese, and Hormel Spam all appeared during the Roosevelt Recession in 1937... Twinkies (1930), Frito Corn Chips (1934), Ritz Crackers (1934), and Lay’s Potato Chips (1939), also date to the Depression... adult consumption of human breast milk was largely a fictional device used at the end of The Grapes of Wrath...

Many Depression-era Americans increased their consumption of wild edibles during periods of unemployment. In South Dakota, for example, pheasants grew plentiful in fallow fields, and were easily picked off from the porch or roadside. Connecticuters and upstate New Yorkers chowed down on squirrels, rabbits, and even, I kid you not, skunks...

A typical Depression-era breakfast consisted of a piece of seasonal fruit, milk and cereal, and eggs or toast with butter. The noon meal was usually a sandwich with salad or some soup. Dinner was meat and veggies, followed by dessert. What varied between households and over time was the quantity and quality of each of those courses, especially the dinner meat entrée... Overall, simple meals like spaghetti and (mystery) meatballs gained in popularity, at the expense of more costly or harder-to-find specialty and ethnic foods..."

https://intellectualtakeout.org/2023/02/the-not-so-great-depression-diet/

The Not-So-Great Depression Diet

February 9, 2023 Robert E. Wright

"When E.C. Harwood formed the American Institute for Economic Research 90 years ago, the New Deal was just beginning. The Great Depression, though, was over three years old, and it was a hangry, troublesome toddler.

For those with a job, or on a fixed income, the Depression was great, because prices sank a great deal. Unlike today, real wages, or in other words wages adjusted for the declining price level, remained high for many.

For the one-in-four to one-in-three workers without a job, though, the Depression meant lean times. Few resorted to eating insects, which were so thick at times that the Colorado national guard in 1937 used flamethrowers to kill them but, tellingly, not to roast them for dinner. And adult consumption of human breast milk was largely a fictional device used at the end of The Grapes of Wrath. There was, however, genuine dietary privation, especially after the federal government began deliberately destroying food in an effort to raise prices. (And you thought we have it bad!)

Everyone is familiar with the iconic images of those with no better alternative waiting in line for a bowl of thin soup and old bread. Many tend to think of such meals as coming from the state, but in fact much of it came from private charities, especially in places like New England with hoary and robust nonprofit networks. Indeed, most of the response to food shortages was intensely private. Families facing budget deficits temporized or, in the parlance of the day, “made do.” That meant paying bills late or not at all, patching worn clothes instead of buying new ones, and changing their diets.

Some of the dietary changes were unhealthy. Richard Willis, for example, tells of eating lard sandwiches while growing up on a farm in Depression-era Iowa. Other kids (like me, albeit 40 years later during another horrific government-caused economic snafu called the Great Inflation) scarfed down “cheese dreams,” cheap cheese sandwiches grilled to disguise the moldiness of the bread.

Many Depression-era Americans increased their consumption of wild edibles during periods of unemployment. In South Dakota, for example, pheasants grew plentiful in fallow fields, and were easily picked off from the porch or roadside. Connecticuters and upstate New Yorkers chowed down on squirrels, rabbits, and even, I kid you not, skunks. Fish were plentiful in many areas and even if from polluted waters were better than nothing. Wild berries, apples, and other delectables too small to bother gathering during the Roaring Twenties were well worth the trouble when there was nothing else to do but go hungry.

Depression-era Americans also started, or enlarged, home gardens and holdings of domesticated chickens, rabbits, turkeys, and waterfowl. Home “canning” products experienced a resurgence as people preserved their summer bounty and fall harvests for consumption over the winter.

A typical Depression-era breakfast consisted of a piece of seasonal fruit, milk and cereal, and eggs or toast with butter. The noon meal was usually a sandwich with salad or some soup. Dinner was meat and veggies, followed by dessert. What varied between households and over time was the quantity and quality of each of those courses, especially the dinner meat entree.

Many Depression-era recipes disseminated via newspaper, radio, or free (corporate-sponsored) pamphlets were implicitly designed to help food preparers to “stretch” limited supplies and to “spice up” a monotonous menu without breaking the bank, so to speak. The free pamphlets were especially useful because once the recipes in it were copied or memorized they helped to save on toilet paper costs too.

Eleanor, the wife of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR), urged women in her 1933 book, It’s Up to the Women, to engage in thrifty cooking and housekeeping. As usual, the government was behind the curve as The Joy of Cooking (1931) and other popular cookbooks had already entered the market, while radio shows like “The Mystery Chef” provided the latest and greatest cheap culinary ideas that trickled down from people with a working radio to those without. Overall, simple meals like spaghetti and (mystery) meatballs gained in popularity, at the expense of more costly or harder-to-find specialty and ethnic foods.

Many cheap foods still common among the poor today made their debut during the Depression: Wonder Bread (1930), Bisquick (1931), Miracle Whip (1933), and Campbell’s Cream of Mushroom soup (1934). Ragu spaghetti sauce, Kraft mac-n-cheese, and Hormel Spam all appeared during the Roosevelt Recession in 1937. When King George VI visited America in 1939, the infamously stingy FDR served him another poor man’s specialty meat, the “hot dog,” which despite its name included actual canine only in some Asian and American Indian contexts. Spam and hot dogs at least tasted better than lard sammiches.

The Depression also changed the way that Americans shopped. It was during the Depression that the old-style store, where clerks dispensed goods to customers over the counter, began to lose significant market share to less expensive “warehouse food stores” where customers retrieved items themselves, the precursor to the modern grocery store. What the warehouse stores lost in pilferage and spillage they made up for with lower labor costs and higher sales of impulsively purchased junk food, many examples of which, including Twinkies (1930), Frito Corn Chips (1934), Ritz Crackers (1934), and Lay’s Potato Chips (1939), also date to the Depression.

Little wonder, then, that the Schechter brothers felt that they had to fight back when FDR’s Blue Eagle tried to prohibit them from allowing their customers to pick their own chickens for slaughter, as they traditionally had. In 1935, the Schechters won their famous Supreme Court battle, which gutted the Blue Eagle and the National Recovery Administration that hatched it. The poor chicken boys lost the war against the Depression, though, as consumers learned that it was cheaper and easier to buy already-processed chickens from one of the new supermarkets. Already suffering from the harms imposed by the New Deal, the Schechters saw their revenues plummet, forcing them to close their chicken business in 1936.

Moreover, chopping up chickens before retail sale led to big dietary changes in the prosperous postwar period, as Americans increasingly ate just the naked breasts, and by 1964 deep fried wings slathered in spicy and later sugary sauces, while eschewing the most nutritious part of the birds: their skins, gizzards, and livers.

It’s a stretch to blame today’s obesity crisis on America’s second Great Reset – the vast legal and socioeconomic changes ushered in by the Depression, New Deal, and World War II – but it certainly started Americans down the wrong dietary path, one leading to the infamous food pyramid and MyPlate, which pretty much just served the same junk food guidelines in a new way..."

</>

[Thomas]

I was going to copy this and paste in RFC.
I really thought I was reading this somewhere else.

[GM]

The original source:

American Institute for Economic Research

https://www.aier.org/article/the-not-so-great-depression-diet/

--
GM

[Hank Rogers]

No need, when we have Greg and Ed.

[Michael Trew]

On 2/11/2023 17:14, GM wrote:
>
> "Many cheap foods still common among the poor today made their debut
> during the Depression: Wonder Bread (1930), Bisquick (1931), Miracle
> Whip (1933), and Campbell’s Cream of Mushroom soup (1934). Ragu
> spaghetti sauce, Kraft mac-n-cheese, and Hormel Spam all appeared
> during the Roosevelt Recession in 1937... Twinkies (1930), Frito
> Corn Chips (1934), Ritz Crackers (1934), and Lay’s Potato Chips
> (1939), also date to the Depression...

Spam or Crackers are fine on occasion, but the rest of that is just
garbage prepared type foods.

> A typical Depression-era breakfast consisted of a piece of seasonal
> fruit, milk and cereal, and eggs or toast with butter. The noon meal
> was usually a sandwich with salad or some soup. Dinner was meat and
> veggies, followed by dessert. What varied between households and over
> time was the quantity and quality of each of those courses,
> especially the dinner meat entree.

Shucks, that sounds better than I eat. Toast/coffee for breakfast,
maybe a cup of cottage cheese. Maybe sandwich or soup/bread mid day,
perhaps left overs-instead. Supper is left-overs of whatever pot of
food I made a prior day, roast, or an occasional fast-food sandwich.
Dessert is rare.

I'm still working on finishing up that pot of chicken noodle soup.

[Bryan Simmons]

On Saturday, February 11, 2023 at 7:15:27 PM UTC-6, Michael Trew wrote:
> On 2/11/2023 17:14, GM wrote:
> >
> > "Many cheap foods still common among the poor today made their debut
> > during the Depression: Wonder Bread (1930), Bisquick (1931), Miracle
> > Whip (1933), and Campbell’s Cream of Mushroom soup (1934). Ragu
> > spaghetti sauce, Kraft mac-n-cheese, and Hormel Spam all appeared
> > during the Roosevelt Recession in 1937... Twinkies (1930), Frito
> > Corn Chips (1934), Ritz Crackers (1934), and Lay’s Potato Chips
> > (1939), also date to the Depression...
> Spam or Crackers are fine on occasion, but the rest of that is just
> garbage prepared type foods.
>

Spam is "fine," and Lay's Potato Chips are garbage?

>
> > A typical Depression-era breakfast consisted of a piece of seasonal
> > fruit, milk and cereal, and eggs or toast with butter. The noon meal
> > was usually a sandwich with salad or some soup. Dinner was meat and
> > veggies, followed by dessert. What varied between households and over
> > time was the quantity and quality of each of those courses,
> > especially the dinner meat entree.
> Shucks, that sounds better than I eat. Toast/coffee for breakfast,
> maybe a cup of cottage cheese. Maybe sandwich or soup/bread mid day,
> perhaps left overs-instead. Supper is left-overs of whatever pot of
> food I made a prior day, roast, or an occasional fast-food sandwich.
> Dessert is rare.
>

Better than what you eat isn't saying much.

>
>
> I'm still working on finishing up that pot of chicken noodle soup.
>

The freezer burned chicken soup?

--Bryan

[GM]

Yup, Hank... me and Ed are the "group scribes" ya might say...

Much of the intellectual stuff I post is paywalled and I share it with you all for FREE...

it's my "Christian Duty", ya see...

O:-)

--
GM <=== MODESTY IS MY MIDDLE NAME

[GM]

On Saturday, February 11, 2023 at 8:47:52 PM UTC-6, Bryan Simmons wrote:
> On Saturday, February 11, 2023 at 7:15:27 PM UTC-6, Michael Trew wrote:
> > On 2/11/2023 17:14, GM wrote:
> > >
> > > "Many cheap foods still common among the poor today made their debut
> > > during the Depression: Wonder Bread (1930), Bisquick (1931), Miracle
> > > Whip (1933), and Campbell’s Cream of Mushroom soup (1934). Ragu
> > > spaghetti sauce, Kraft mac-n-cheese, and Hormel Spam all appeared
> > > during the Roosevelt Recession in 1937... Twinkies (1930), Frito
> > > Corn Chips (1934), Ritz Crackers (1934), and Lay’s Potato Chips
> > > (1939), also date to the Depression...
> > Spam or Crackers are fine on occasion, but the rest of that is just
> > garbage prepared type foods.
> >
> Spam is "fine," and Lay's Potato Chips are garbage?
> >

I LUV all that stuff, BRYAN...

😎

> > > A typical Depression-era breakfast consisted of a piece of seasonal
> > > fruit, milk and cereal, and eggs or toast with butter. The noon meal
> > > was usually a sandwich with salad or some soup. Dinner was meat and
> > > veggies, followed by dessert. What varied between households and over
> > > time was the quantity and quality of each of those courses,
> > > especially the dinner meat entree.
> > Shucks, that sounds better than I eat. Toast/coffee for breakfast,
> > maybe a cup of cottage cheese. Maybe sandwich or soup/bread mid day,
> > perhaps left overs-instead. Supper is left-overs of whatever pot of
> > food I made a prior day, roast, or an occasional fast-food sandwich.
> > Dessert is rare.
> >
> Better than what you eat isn't saying much.
> >
> >
> > I'm still working on finishing up that pot of chicken noodle soup.
> >
> The freezer burned chicken soup?
>

is this like a "why did the chicken cross the road?" query...???

B-)

--
GM

[Ed Pawlowski]

On 2/11/2023 10:07 PM, GM wrote:

>>> I was going to copy this and paste in RFC.
>>> I really thought I was reading this somewhere else.
>>>
>> No need, when we have Greg and Ed.
>
>
> Yup, Hank... me and Ed are the "group scribes" ya might say...
>
> Much of the intellectual stuff I post is paywalled and I share it with you all for FREE...
>
> it's my "Christian Duty", ya see...
>
> O:-)
>

I'm a scribe? I'm impressed with myself.
My Pledge
I stay true to myself, and allow others to grow into whomever they
choose to be. Commitment: I commit to excellence in all aspects of life,
both inside and outside RecFoodCooking, knowing that pride and success
will follow.

[GM]

Ed, that surely is your "ticket to heaven"... and "First Class" all the way...

I'll give you a "reference" when I talk to God tomorrow morning...

0 ;-)

--
GM

[GM]

Michael Trew wrote:

> On 2/11/2023 17:14, GM wrote:
> >
> > "Many cheap foods still common among the poor today made their debut
> > during the Depression: Wonder Bread (1930), Bisquick (1931), Miracle
> > Whip (1933), and Campbell’s Cream of Mushroom soup (1934). Ragu
> > spaghetti sauce, Kraft mac-n-cheese, and Hormel Spam all appeared
> > during the Roosevelt Recession in 1937... Twinkies (1930), Frito
> > Corn Chips (1934), Ritz Crackers (1934), and Lay’s Potato Chips
> > (1939), also date to the Depression...
> Spam or Crackers are fine on occasion, but the rest of that is just
> garbage prepared type foods.

A lot of this stuff was "convenience" foods, as more women started working in the 1920's...

Some of these items also had the newly - introduced preservatives which retarded spoilage...

> > A typical Depression-era breakfast consisted of a piece of seasonal
> > fruit, milk and cereal, and eggs or toast with butter. The noon meal
> > was usually a sandwich with salad or some soup. Dinner was meat and
> > veggies, followed by dessert. What varied between households and over
> > time was the quantity and quality of each of those courses,
> > especially the dinner meat entree.
> Shucks, that sounds better than I eat. Toast/coffee for breakfast,
> maybe a cup of cottage cheese. Maybe sandwich or soup/bread mid day,
> perhaps left overs-instead. Supper is left-overs of whatever pot of
> food I made a prior day, roast, or an occasional fast-food sandwich.
> Dessert is rare.

Many more people toiled at manual labor in factories and on farms... thus more calories needed...

Farmers especially, before mechanization, would eat HUGE breakfasts before the workday...

--
GM

[cshenk]

I am frequently a 'depression era' cook and the article is slanted.
Only the affluent could afford the fancy things like store bought bread
or canned soups. They grew tomatoes and canned them, instead of ragu.
In an era of lard sandwiches, they didn't buy miricle wimp. They
cooked more like you do.

[songbird]

cshenk wrote:
...

> I am frequently a 'depression era' cook and the article is slanted.
> Only the affluent could afford the fancy things like store bought bread
> or canned soups. They grew tomatoes and canned them, instead of ragu.
> In an era of lard sandwiches, they didn't buy miricle wimp. They
> cooked more like you do.

Grandma would talk about her bread and bacon grease as
the butter, potatoes and onions were big items, tomatoes
and corn, all home grown except for the wheat in the
bread.

i'm quite happy with simple fare. a bread pudding with
toasted bread, butter, tomatoes and onions could be a meal
for days.

recently i've gotten ahold of some boxes of instant grits
(cook in about 6 minutes) and have been changing what i put
in them for variations. i guess i got sick of oatmeal and
dried cherries (and peanut butter) at last because i've not
had that in a month or so... the grits are close enough to
cream of wheat or cocowheats that i consider them about the
same anyways.


songbird

[Thomas Joseph]

GM wrote:

> Many more people toiled at manual labor in factories and on farms... thus more calories needed...
>
> Farmers especially, before mechanization, would eat HUGE breakfasts before the workday...

If depression era food was different than I suppose so too were
the turds of that time. Perhaps even the odor. In the long haul
what difference does it make what we eat, we are moving into
the future as a species, ready willing and able to eat anything
that gets in our way on our path to the top of the mountain.

EAT MY DEPRESSION ERA SHIT!

[Cindy Hamilton]

On 2023-03-27, songbird <song...@anthive.com> wrote:
> cshenk wrote:
> ...
>> I am frequently a 'depression era' cook and the article is slanted.
>> Only the affluent could afford the fancy things like store bought bread
>> or canned soups. They grew tomatoes and canned them, instead of ragu.

Gosh, I wonder what the millions of people who lived in apartments in
cities did.

>> In an era of lard sandwiches, they didn't buy miricle wimp. They
>> cooked more like you do.

If "they" didn't buy Miracle Whip, how on earth did it persist in the
marketplace?

> Grandma would talk about her bread and bacon grease as
> the butter, potatoes and onions were big items, tomatoes
> and corn, all home grown except for the wheat in the
> bread.

My mother, born in 1934, recalls her grandmother killing chickens in
their suburban backyard. Or would it have been a small town outside
Detroit? It's a difference without a distinction, since there was
little undeveloped land between Berkley, MI, and Detroit at that time.

They still bought most of their groceries.

> i'm quite happy with simple fare. a bread pudding with
> toasted bread, butter, tomatoes and onions could be a meal
> for days.

Where's the protein? Consumed at other meals?

--
Cindy Hamilton

[Bruce]

On Mon, 27 Mar 2023 08:53:48 GMT, Cindy Hamilton
<hami...@invalid.com> wrote:

>Where's the protein? Consumed at other meals?

Cindy's always very worried about protein. I wonder if that's of
special concern for people who are obese because they eat too many
apples.

[cshenk]

Smile! Never got into cream of wheat myself but made many a bread
pudding with cinnimon.

[cshenk]

Cindy Hamilton wrote:

> On 2023-03-27, songbird <song...@anthive.com> wrote:
> > cshenk wrote:
> > ...
> >> I am frequently a 'depression era' cook and the article is slanted.
> >> Only the affluent could afford the fancy things like store bought
> bread >> or canned soups. They grew tomatoes and canned them,
> instead of ragu.
>
> Gosh, I wonder what the millions of people who lived in apartments in
> cities did.

That was only a small percent of the USA back then. It started to
shift as factories grew, with jobs to support the workers.

>
> >> In an era of lard sandwiches, they didn't buy miricle wimp. They
> >> cooked more like you do.
>
> If "they" didn't buy Miracle Whip, how on earth did it persist in the
> marketplace?

The affluent (or realitly so) bought it. It doesn't move into
mainstream until more mass production makes it more affordable.

>
> > Grandma would talk about her bread and bacon grease as
> > the butter, potatoes and onions were big items, tomatoes
> > and corn, all home grown except for the wheat in the
> > bread.

Yup.

>
> My mother, born in 1934, recalls her grandmother killing chickens in
> their suburban backyard. Or would it have been a small town outside
> Detroit? It's a difference without a distinction, since there was
> little undeveloped land between Berkley, MI, and Detroit at that time.

We are talking people who were adults by 1929. People like my father,
born 1919. Also, not the few big cities like Detroit with the car
industry awakening.

> They still bought most of their groceries.
>
> > i'm quite happy with simple fare. a bread pudding with
> > toasted bread, butter, tomatoes and onions could be a meal
> > for days.


>
> Where's the protein? Consumed at other meals?

Cindy, not everyone is that fixated on meat. Some of us have it at
most, twice a week and we have several vegetarians here.

[S Viemeister]

On 27/03/2023 14:27, cshenk wrote:

> Cindy Hamilton wrote:

>> Where's the protein? Consumed at other meals?
>
> Cindy, not everyone is that fixated on meat. Some of us have it at
> most, twice a week and we have several vegetarians here.
>

Cindy didn't say 'meat'.
She said 'protein'.
Dairy products. Eggs. Nuts. Various combinations of grains and legumes.

[cshenk]

I know that Susan, but look at her meals. She uses meat in just about
every one of them. Nothing wrong with it but the point is not everyone
is a carbon copy, nor should they be.

[songbird]

Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>songbird wrote:
...

>> i'm quite happy with simple fare. a bread pudding with
>> toasted bread, butter, tomatoes and onions could be a meal
>> for days.
>
> Where's the protein? Consumed at other meals?

peanuts and peanut butter, cheese and other dairy, a
slice of ham, etc.


songbird

[Ed Pawlowski]

On 3/27/2023 9:27 AM, cshenk wrote:
> Cindy Hamilton wrote:

>>

>> Where's the protein? Consumed at other meals?
>
> Cindy, not everyone is that fixated on meat. Some of us have it at
> most, twice a week and we have several vegetarians here.
>

I'm a level 4 vegan. I only eat things that don't cast a shadow.

[Thomas Joseph]

Bruce wrote:

> Cindy's always very worried about protein. I wonder if that's of
> special concern for people who are obese because they eat too many
> apples.

Or it could be anorexia. Remember this one? "If Karen Carpenter
had eaten Mama Cass's sandwich they'd both still be alive."

Now on the serious side, I never read this anywhere, it's just intuition
which to me is better than learned knowledge any day: I agree that
protein is necessary to the human diet but does not have to be eaten
every day. In some ways I favor shock therapy when it comes to healthy
eating. Too much eating the very same healthy food every day builds up
too much tolerance to the nutrients in those foods. Better to eat a whole
bunch of protein only one day a week - like 2 or 3 pounds in one sitting.
This shocks the protein starved body into a state of happiness and
contentment that trickles down to everything and contributes to overall
health extending beyond our customary chickenshit concept of it.

[Thomas Joseph]

S Viemeister wrote:

> Cindy didn't say 'meat'.
> She said 'protein'.
> Dairy products. Eggs. Nuts. Various combinations of grains and legumes.

That is true. However, the person to whom she was responded did
not say they lived exclusively on bread pudding either, they only said
they could eat it for days, meaning they are content with it because
it concerned eating simply, not so much the nutrient factor. And yes,
of course, as Cindy herself suggested, protein can be had with other meals.

[Thomas Joseph]

Ed Pawlowski wrote:

> I'm a level 4 vegan. I only eat things that don't cast a shadow.

In L.A. I lived in the same building with a cabbie who one day
out of nowhere went vegan and when I'd ask him why he would
clam up like it was a big secret. The guy made some decent
stuff with his limited menu. How limited? The guy went so
extreme that he not only exed out all animal products, he also
stopped using oil of any kind. I was at his place a number of
times and saw him eat an entire pound of cooked pasta topped
with jarred salsa. But he also sometimes would cook the food.
it was interesting. I am not a vegetarian but eat a lot of veggies.
He would take fragile veggies and cook them without oil or
lubrication of any kind, just slowly let them wilt down in the
hot skillet till all the natural juices blended. Months later he
confessed to me that sometimes he felt a bit weak and later
gave in to eating dairy products - including ice cream. I see
good ice cream as an actual food, not junk. I think a person
could live a long time on ice cream alone (if they had to).

[songbird]

Thomas Joseph wrote:
...

> eating. Too much eating the very same healthy food every day builds up
> too much tolerance to the nutrients in those foods. Better to eat a whole
> bunch of protein only one day a week - like 2 or 3 pounds in one sitting.
> This shocks the protein starved body into a state of happiness and
> contentment that trickles down to everything and contributes to overall
> health extending beyond our customary chickenshit concept of it.

uh, ok....

most amino acids are not stored in the body in very large
quantities (the liver and muscles might have some) as you
starve a person the muscles will be broken down but i doubt
much is reused but instead is just used as fuel for energy.

a well balanced diet will have everything you need. nuts,
beans, eggs, cheese, meats all will supply them. i don't go
full vegetarian any longer but i may again in the future. i
don't think vegan would be too hard for me either as i do
like about anything if i'm hungry enough.


songbird

[Thomas Joseph]

songbird wrote:

> most amino acids are not stored in the body in very large
> quantities (the liver and muscles might have some) as you
> starve a person the muscles will be broken down but i doubt
> much is reused but instead is just used as fuel for energy.
>
> a well balanced diet will have everything you need. nuts,
> beans, eggs, cheese, meats all will supply them. i don't go
> full vegetarian any longer but i may again in the future. i
> don't think vegan would be too hard for me either as i do
> like about anything if i'm hungry enough.

I enjoy meat and sometimes feel a meal is missing something
without it in some form. But on the whole I could go complete
vegetarian faster than most. I eat a lot of veggies with small
but sufficient amounts of meat. I was only kidding about eating
"too much healthy food", although there is a part of me that
definitely believes pumping extreme amounts of condensed
nutrients into ones body in the form of shakes and so forth - the
center aisle of Whole Foods for example, the supplement aisles
reserved for the "I want to live forever" crowd - I believe there
are some negatives to it. I believe in some way that everything
that goes into our bodies creates a tolerance and perhaps even
a demand for those things if they are overloaded into the body.
I eat a decent balanced diet, very healthy. I eat really healthy
so I can eat a lot of trash later. Like for instance right now I
am putting away 40 or so ounces of coca cola. I could even
go vegan. But I would need some kind of fat, no doubt about
that. We all need it. Even the fatties among us.

[Cindy Hamilton]

On 2023-03-27, songbird <song...@anthive.com> wrote:

> Thomas Joseph wrote:
> ...
>> eating. Too much eating the very same healthy food every day builds up
>> too much tolerance to the nutrients in those foods.

Tolerance to the nutrients? That's bullshit.

> Better to eat a whole
>> bunch of protein only one day a week - like 2 or 3 pounds in one sitting.

And then wait 2 or 3 days to crap.

>> This shocks the protein starved body into a state of happiness and
>> contentment that trickles down to everything and contributes to overall
>> health extending beyond our customary chickenshit concept of it.
>
> uh, ok....
>
> most amino acids are not stored in the body in very large
> quantities (the liver and muscles might have some) as you
> starve a person the muscles will be broken down but i doubt
> much is reused but instead is just used as fuel for energy.
>
> a well balanced diet will have everything you need. nuts,
> beans, eggs, cheese, meats all will supply them. i don't go
> full vegetarian any longer but i may again in the future. i
> don't think vegan would be too hard for me either as i do
> like about anything if i'm hungry enough.

I don't require meat at every meal, but I do need some protein to
steady my blood sugar.

--
Cindy Hamilton

[songbird]

Cindy Hamilton wrote:
...

> I don't require meat at every meal, but I do need some protein to
> steady my blood sugar.

that's another hmmm, from me... :)

i suspect if meat plays much role in your diet for
steadying blood sugar it is just because whatever complex
carbs and the fats are mixing in with the simple sugars
and providing some delay factor, but i'd also wonder what
complex carbs and fiber you'd be eating along with every-
thing else as those are going to be your primary sugars
over time, fats can be used for energy but the body will
take the easy stuff first and foremost. it takes hours
after meals to switch over from the sugars from the gut
to the sugar reserves in the liver and elsewhere and then
eventually you start burning up the fat reserves.

or at least that's how i've been reading what some
docs have published about the whole sugar, fats (and
alcohol) metabolism stuff and how that goes through
the body. the liver is the biggie, of course along
with the other blood sugar hormone regulating organs.
it's a complex ship we're prop't up atop...


songbird

[cshenk]

Yup. Us, mostly seafood (which the world outside western christianity
calls meat). Might have seafood 3 times a week and prk/beef/chicken
once a week. Might go easily a week with only 1 day having animal
protein outside of eggs.

[cshenk]

LOL!

[cshenk]

With surprise and no intention, I find a good bit of our diet qualifies
as vegan. I have no intention of full vegan or even full vegetarian.

[Cindy Hamilton]

On 2023-03-27, songbird <song...@anthive.com> wrote:

> Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> ...
>> I don't require meat at every meal, but I do need some protein to
>> steady my blood sugar.
>
> that's another hmmm, from me... :)
>
> i suspect if meat plays much role in your diet for

Protein. Not meat. Beans, cheese, eggs, milk, and--yes--
sometimes meat. Dinner yesterday was a salad with a couple
ounces of grilled skinless, boneless chicken breast dressed
with lemon vinaigrette and a slice of white bread drizzled
with olive oil.

Lunch had been odd. I took my mother out to lunch and ended up
with a caesar salad and onion rings.

> steadying blood sugar it is just because whatever complex
> carbs and the fats are mixing in with the simple sugars
> and providing some delay factor, but i'd also wonder what
> complex carbs and fiber you'd be eating along with every-

Complex carbs, not as often as I'd like. My husband prefers
white bread so I eat what he eats. Pasta once in a great while.
Rice when we get take-out.

That said, once in a while I'll buy multigrain bread and eat it
myself; I have a loaf in the freezer right now. The bakery has
a "happy meal" card; after you buy 10 loaves you get a free loaf.
I often take that opportunity to buy multigrain.

Other than that, there's lentils, farro, beans, bulgur. I favor
Bob's Red Mill "red" bulgur.

Some sort of fruit or vegetable at nearly every meal or snack. Raisins,
prunes, cherries (with yogurt), apple for snacks; slaw or something
with lunch; salad with dinner. If all else fails, nuked green beans.

--
Cindy Hamilton

[jmcquown]

First of all, you're replying to Sheila, not someone named Susan.
Secondly, Cindy cooks a lot of things that don't contain meat. Sure,
she likes grilled chicken breast to add to her frequent *salads* but she
also eats a lot of things containing garbanzo beans; she makes lentil
soup that doesn't contain meat but does contain vegetables, etc. I
don't keep a list of what everyone eats but seems to me she buys a lot
of eggs and has lots of other sources of protein in her diet that has
nothing to do with meat.

Jill

[jmcquown]

On 3/27/2023 9:05 PM, cshenk wrote:
> songbird wrote:
>
>> Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>> songbird wrote:
>> ...
>>>> i'm quite happy with simple fare. a bread pudding with
>>>> toasted bread, butter, tomatoes and onions could be a meal
>>>> for days.
>>>
>>> Where's the protein? Consumed at other meals?
>>
>> peanuts and peanut butter, cheese and other dairy, a
>> slice of ham, etc.
>>
>>
>> songbird
>
> Yup. Us, mostly seafood (which the world outside western christianity
> calls meat).

Sorry, Carol, you completely lost me there. The world outside western
Christianity calls seafood "meat"? I suppose you're trying to say
fish/seafood takes the place of pork/beef/chicken which it certainly
does but I doubt Christianity other than the old fish on Fridays
chestnut has anything to do with it.

> Might have seafood 3 times a week and prk/beef/chicken
> once a week. Might go easily a week with only 1 day having animal
> protein outside of eggs.

Once again you miss the point. Cindy was asking about protein when
songbird wrote "a bread pudding with toasted bread, butter, tomatoes and
onions could be a meal for days." Cindy did not mention meat. Most of
us know there are many other sources of protein that don't involve meat.

Jill

[Bruce]

On Tue, 28 Mar 2023 17:37:02 -0400, jmcquown <j_mc...@comcast.net>
wrote:

Apples!

[Thomas Joseph]

Cindy Hamilton wrote:

Thomas Joseph wrote:


> Too much eating the very same healthy food every day builds up
> too much tolerance to the nutrients in those foods.


> Tolerance to the nutrients? That's bullshit.

Of course it's bullshit. I eat healthy foods every day and I'm glad.
However, I do believe a bunch of highly condensed nutrients can
have a negative long term effect on people. I can't prove it and
won't try, but I do believe it. I'm talking ultra condensed natural
stuff, like beets to lower the blood pressure, etc. Sure, eat beets
regularly, that's ok. But I suspect that "using" foods in highly
condensed super concentrated form can do as much or maybe
even more harm than the pills they are meant to replace. I'm
not much for the pills either. I am for a well balanced nutrient
dense diet, but not when those foods are condensed and
pumped into the body like some kind of "I'm gonna live forever" vaccine.
Yes, I was bullshitting and I thought it was obvious. But even from
bullshit there can sometimes spring a bit of truth.

[Mike Duffy]

On 2023-03-28, Thomas Joseph wrote:

> Sure, eat beets regularly, that's ok. But I suspect
> that "using" foods in highly condensed super concentrated
> form can do as much or maybe even more harm

It depends a lot on what it is. What about those Jews / Arabs
that eat almost nothing but leaves of a holy tree except for
the minimal protein and carbs of more widespread foods.

They don't concentrate the chemical in the plants, like we
do with cocaine, morphine, peyote, hard liquor, &c.

[Kẻ giả mạo là sâu bọ]

On 3/28/2023 5:22 PM, Mike Duffy wrote:

> What about those Jews / Arabs
> that eat almost nothing but leaves of a holy tree

Er, they eat what now? Please clarify. Do go on.

[Thomas Joseph]

I never heard about the Jew/Arab thing of eating nothing but
leaves from a holy tree. A holy tree - lol. I am half Arab. But
my family was Christian. Syrian Orthodox. Me? I don't believe
in any of it. But I also don't debate it.

It's not the end of the world and there is no debate but I still
am inclined to believe that highly condensed natural sources
for high blood pressure and the like will produce the same
side effects as the pills. If they manage to do the same thing
the pills do, then you're not eating beets, you're taking a pill
in drink form. I'm not saying it's going to kill anybody, only that
due to the well deserved lack of trust in the medical industry
the door has been opened to shiesters hawking 'natural' cures
that are no more effective and in some cases might be even
worse. But I no fan of pills either. And I'm lucky. I take valium
now and then. But I take no prescription meds of any kind and
never would if I had to take them on a daily basis. I'll take meds
to ease pain or to facilitate the departure of an illness but
that's as far as it goes (if I can help it). As for drugs and booze,
I've been there. I don't care how bad some of it might be for
people, at least it's their own choice when they take it.

[Mike Duffy]

On 2023-03-29, Kẻ giả mạo là sâu bọ wrote:

> Er, they eat what now? Please clarify. Do go on.

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

[Thomas Joseph]

This computer of mine is odd, it won't allow me into a lot of sites,
many I know are legit. Some kind of configuration I can't figure
out. Maybe. Anyway it doesn't matter - I don't need the links
although sometimes they can be helpful making a good point.

I never challenged your report by the way. I have no problem
saying "I don't know" about a lot of stuff. Just saying I never
heard of it. But when it comes to religion I certainly am prepared
to believe just about anything when it comes to sacrifices designed
to get you a ticket to heaven. I know you are talking to someone
else, but as an egotist I am forced to admit that I am more concerned
with how I fit into this conversation than anything else and wanted to
make sure you know I am far too open minded to challenge someone's
words in an aggressive and argumentative way. You say you don't
believe me? What the fuck is this, some kind of challenge? Hah
hah hah hah hah. (from now on when I put the hah hah stuff at
the end of something I say that means I'm just joking. Hah hah
hah hah hah.

[Gary]

On 3/29/2023 2:35 AM, Thomas Joseph wrote:
> Mike Duffy wrote:
> Kẻ giả mạo là sâu bọ wrote:
>
>
>>> Er, they eat what now? Please clarify. Do go on.
>
>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khat
>
>
> This computer of mine is odd, it won't allow me into a lot of sites,
> many I know are legit. Some kind of configuration I can't figure
> out. Maybe.

Older computer op systems (like Win98) won't accept the new security
updates - like when webpages changed from "Http" to "Https."
I lost Google when they changed.

It's time to update your computer.
Just buy a brand new cheap laptop - under $200

[Bruce]

With 4 GB RAM?

[Ed Pawlowski]

Yes, possible. They have a total of 1 available
https://tinyurl.com/mvcevx75

In the past hour I was looking as my old 14" laptop is falling apart.
broken at the hinge.

There is one with AMD process or 8MB ram for $369 I may consider. Next
up is $599. I don't need the bigger HD.

[Bruce]

With 8 GB I'd go crazy waiting for the computer to catch up all the
time with Paintshop, torrents, simple DTP, work software, 2 browsers,
email, newsgroups, VLC Media Player, often all open at the same time.
16 GB would work for me, but to be sure I have 32 GB in my current
computer.

[Hank Rogers]

You probably can surely afford whatever you want, but for those
that can't, consider refurbed units. Some can be pretty good deals
if you shop carefully, especially better models that were targeted
for business use.

[Ed Pawlowski]

I don't do anything heavy on this one. Mostly email, newsgroups, some
web stuff. Just not sure how the AMD compares to the Intl.

[Bruce]

I bet it won't make much of a difference, especially for light use.

[Ed Pawlowski]

That is my thinking. Doubt I'd see the difference, but will see $200.

Which is better AMD Ryzen 5 or Intel i5?
Geekbench 5 (Multi-Core)

That being said the AMD Ryzen 5 series is still the undisputed champion
when it comes to offering power efficiency. The AMD Ryzen CPU completely
dominates Intel CPUs in this department. Even with the latest Intel i5
CPU, they required more power compared to the Ryzen 5 series.Feb 7, 2023

[Hank Rogers]

Either will work fine for your use. I think intel still has an edge
as far as not becoming obsolete, but we're talking many years
later. I recommend you go with intel.

I built an AMD T-bird 1.2 ghz system in 2001 and used it until
2019. It still runs. But it can't run later operating systems and a
lot of software programs won't run on it, because it is missing
some of the cpu instructions that AMD didn't have. Some old intel
systems from that era can still run win 10 today, but very slowly.

It may not apply today, but back then AMD processors were also
rather power hungry and required powerful CPU cooling fans, so they
were much louder than intel boxes. I saw one that damn near sounded
like a vacuum cleaner. Without sufficient cooling they died early
deaths.

[dsi1]

The computer I'm using has a processor that's more like one from a cell phone than the desktop processors. It's still pretty fast because it isn't saddled down with an operating system that's bloated and inefficient and requires a power hungry processor just to run at an acceptable speed. I can't say what kind of processor is in this Samsung but it's able to run Android app just fine. The programs I use today are not like the desktop client programs of the Windows era - I suspect they're mostly connections to remote servers.

[Hank Rogers]

dsi1 wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 29, 2023 at 10:29:37 AM UTC-10, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> On 3/29/2023 4:05 PM, Bruce wrote:
>>> On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 15:44:18 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.xxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 3/29/2023 3:03 PM, Bruce wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 12:03:27 -0400, Gary <g.ma...@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> It's time to update your computer.
>>>>>> Just buy a brand new cheap laptop - under $200
>>>>>
>>>>> With 4 GB RAM?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, possible. They have a total of 1 available
>>>> https://tinyurl.com/mvcevx75
>>>>
>>>> In the past hour I was looking as my old 14" laptop is falling apart.
>>>> broken at the hinge.
>>>>
>>>> There is one with AMD process or 8MB ram for $369 I may consider. Next
>>>> up is $599. I don't need the bigger HD.
>>>
>>> With 8 GB I'd go crazy waiting for the computer to catch up all the
>>> time with Paintshop, torrents, simple DTP, work software, 2 browsers,
>>> email, newsgroups, VLC Media Player, often all open at the same time.
>>> 16 GB would work for me, but to be sure I have 32 GB in my current
>>> computer.
>> I don't do anything heavy on this one. Mostly email, newsgroups, some
>> web stuff. Just not sure how the AMD compares to the Intl.
>
> The computer I'm using has a processor that's more like one from a cell phone

Yep, it's a google toy, uncle.

It's all yoose need to shoot yoose mouth off about hiwaya and
asians on usenet.

[Thomas Joseph]

Gary wrote:

Thomas Joseph wrote:


> > This computer of mine is odd, it won't allow me into a lot of sites,
> > many I know are legit. Some kind of configuration I can't figure
> > out. Maybe.


> Older computer op systems (like Win98) won't accept the new security
> updates - like when webpages changed from "Http" to "Https."
> I lost Google when they changed.
>
> It's time to update your computer.
> Just buy a brand new cheap laptop - under $200

You seemed genuinely concerned and I thank you for
that but I am not complaining about not being able to
access the links, just explaining why.

It was funny when you got to the part of your post
where you say "I lost google when they changed",
because it was right around that same time that
YOU lost ME with the tech lingo. I read it because
it was short. But believe me, I am just not into the
tech thing in any way - and I admit it. I agree about
google, I think their changes always suck. But even
there I could be wrong, the changes may be good in
some way for others. I am updating nothing. I am
just waiting to die and trying to relax while doing it.
Buying replacement stuff is a chore I am not looking
forward to. I am not the suicide type, never was. But
there is a part of me that kind of hopes I die before
I have to buy something else. Thanks for the suggestion though.

[Thomas Joseph]

Bruce wrote:

Gary <g.ma...@att.net> wrote:


> It's time to update your computer.
> Just buy a brand new cheap laptop - under $200


> With 4 GB RAM?

I felt the same way reading the tech lingo. LOL.
But it was short so I stuck with it. I think Gary's
version is mild compared to some I've heard.
They talk about this stuff as if everyone knows
or cares about it. Reminds me of car buffs who
talk only about engines and so forth using a
tech speak similar computer geek crowd. But
with the car guys, I couldn't get away. Like if
I'm hitch hiking and get picked up by one and
he starts into it, it doesn't matter if I say politely,
"I don't know much about that kind of stuff", and
no matter how many hints are dropped, that's all
he can talk about and I'm going to listen or at
least pretend to because he just picked me up
and I am his ear.

[Bruce]

What I meant was that if you buy a new laptop for under $200, you'll
get one with 4 GB of RAM. It's like buying a car with half the engine
missing. It's cheap but you might regret it (or add RAM later).

[songbird]

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
...

> That being said the AMD Ryzen 5 series is still the undisputed champion
> when it comes to offering power efficiency. The AMD Ryzen CPU completely
> dominates Intel CPUs in this department. Even with the latest Intel i5
> CPU, they required more power compared to the Ryzen 5 series.Feb 7, 2023

lowest power draw when idling is well worth it as most
of the time if you're just doing e-mail, usenet and a few
minor things it is going to be doing practically nothing.
over the lifetime of the computer that lesser power draw
will probably pay for the computer or a significant chunk
of it.


songbird

[Bruce]

On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 19:57:18 -0400, songbird <song...@anthive.com>
wrote:

That's peanuts. You're talking to someone who keeps his airco on all
year.

[Hank Rogers]

Yeah. Basically, you're kissing his goddamn ass because he gave you
a ride. If it was the other way around, and you picked up some
asshole that wouldn't shut up, you'd pull over and say "Get the
fuck out"

[Thomas Joseph]

Bruce wrote:

> What I meant was that if you buy a new laptop for under $200, you'll
> get one with 4 GB of RAM. It's like buying a car with half the engine
> missing. It's cheap but you might regret it (or add RAM later).

God dammit, for a minute there I thought I had an ally.
I'm good with the machine, good at figuring things out,
but when it comes to computer speak I'm done. I admit
it. I see humor in it though. I am not much of a consumer,
never was. I have owned 3 computers and all were bought
from my brother who is a photographer and graphics guy
who uses only Macs. He is an upgrader. I gave him $300
for this one. I will not deny it, I am not Mr. Fix it. I see
a wall switch and I know up means the lights go on and
down means they go off - I don't care what's behind the
box. I look under the hood of a car and see too many
wires and plugs and all I see is a bunch of stuff waiting
to go wrong. Thanks for the explanation though.

[Thomas Joseph]

Hank Rogers wrote:

> Yeah. Basically, you're kissing his goddamn ass because he gave you
> a ride. If it was the other way around, and you picked up some
> asshole that wouldn't shut up, you'd pull over and say "Get the
> fuck out"

I see your point but I don't care for the wording. No, if it were
reversed I would not pull over and say "Get the fuck out." I might
put a stop to it earlier but would not resort to aggressiveness to
do it. I would say I'm kissing the guy's ass if I were to respond with,
"Wow that's really interesting", or, "Tell me more about it", as if I
were really into it. But I did not lie to the guy. I told him I wasn't
into it. Sure, it can be said a hitchhiker is a whore, but the same
could be said about any person hired at any job. What am I supposed
to do, say, "Hey man, all I asked for was a ride, not some dumb speech
about carburetors and transmissions. Let's talk about something else or
I'm getting out!" Your point is well taken Rogers, we are all whores at
times. But I am not an ass kisser. I don't think I am. Wait, maybe I
could be. My response to you now, even that is a form of ass kissing,
isn't it?

Eat my shorts Daddio

[Ed Pawlowski]

Looking at the specs more, it comes with Windows 11-S. The -S version
is for safe computing. You can only download app from the Microsoft
Store and the only browser you can use is Edge.

It can be turned off but I wonder what other issues may be lurking.

[Bruce]

I don't worry about what's inside much either. I only pay attention
when I buy one, because it needs to be able to do what I need. And
then I'm good for many years.

[Bruce]

So they'll basically kidnap you, but with your permission.

[dsi1]

The Windows S mode is a stripped down OS that looks like Windows but is more like Chrome OS in that it's faster and, I suppose, more secure - hopefully. My guess is that it's a Linux OS disguised to look like Windows. My understanding is that it's peppy enough on cheap machines but you won't be able to run any of your Windows desktop client programs. You'll only be able to run apps from the Microsoft Store. Essentially, it's Window's version of a Chromebook platform. You do have the option to load in a full version of Windows 10/11 but once you do that, you can't go back. I can't imagine anybody being happy with Windows 11 on a slow computer.

[Hank Rogers]

I think they work OK after you get rid of the nanny stuff.

Ask at https://forums.anandtech.com/

Lot's of knowledgeable and helpful folks there. One user named
"virtual larry" knows about everything regarding that microsoft
edition.

Good luck

[Bruce]

I'm happy with Windows on a fast computer. Actually, I don't think
about Windows much. I just work with the programs that run under it.
If I had a 5 year old who needed its first computer, I'd get it a
Chrome computer, dsi1 approved :)

[Ed Pawlowski]

Found a better deal on Amazon.
HP Newest Flagship 14" HD Business Laptop Computer, 4-Core i5-1135G7(Up
to 4.2GHz, Beat i7-1060G7), 16GB RAM, 512GB PCIe SSD, Iris Xe Graphics,
Webcam, WiFi, Bluetooth, Win 11 Home, w/GM Accessories

Used my reward point so out of pocked was $250.

[songbird]

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
...

> Looking at the specs more, it comes with Windows 11-S. The -S version
> is for safe computing. You can only download app from the Microsoft
> Store and the only browser you can use is Edge.
>
> It can be turned off but I wonder what other issues may be lurking.

eww, newp, nothing i'd want any part of.


songbird

[Bruce]

I don't know much about processors, but that looks like a good deal to
me.

[Bruce]

On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 22:04:46 -0400, songbird <song...@anthive.com>
wrote:

newp, isn't that another word for salamander?

[dsi1]

You might be happy with Windows on a fast computer but my guess is that you'd hate Windows on a $200 computer. I don't care for Windows on any computer. I don't care for a fast computer with any OS if it meant that I'd be chained to a desktop. That's what it means to be a slave.

[Hank Rogers]

I think that will do fine for you, if you're happy with a 14"
screen, and with the home edition of windows. I haven't kept up
with prices these days, but $250 sounds pretty good.

[Ed Pawlowski]

My desktop has a big screen but the laptop sits on my belly much of the
time and it travels easily. It has been to five countries and about 15
states. Easily packed and carried.

[Bruce]

On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 19:26:24 -0700 (PDT), dsi1

True.

> I don't care for Windows on any computer. I don't care for
>a fast computer with any OS if it meant that I'd be chained to
>a desktop. That's what it means to be a slave.

I wouldn't like to type on a mini keyboard or watch things on a mini
screen so all's good.

[dsi1]

You'd like my son's monitor It's a wide one with a curved screen. That's way too much for me. I'm a no-frills, no-nonsense kind of guy i.e., a real man's man.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/hbhPMiQSd8HbuWWv7

[Bruce]

On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 21:27:29 -0700 (PDT), dsi1

I speak for entire RFC when I say that we're impressed.

>https://photos.app.goo.gl/hbhPMiQSd8HbuWWv7

Is the cat wearing something or is it tied to your arm?

[dsi1]

That cat is wearing a Janis Joplin t-shirt. I didn't have nothing to do with that. We men don't dress dress up critters in "cute" clothes.

[Bruce]

On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 22:10:18 -0700 (PDT), dsi1

I agree. By the way, isn't Hawaii tropical?

[Gary]

Bruce wrote:
> What I meant was that if you buy a new laptop for under $200, you'll
> get one with 4 GB of RAM. It's like buying a car with half the engine
> missing. It's cheap but you might regret it (or add RAM later).

It all depends on what you use the computer for.

My current (and newest) computer is cheap but it does all that I need it
for with plenty of room left over. It cost $200-something 5 years ago

HP 15.6" screen laptop
- Windows10
- cheap intel celeron processor
- 4 GB RAM
- 500 MB hard-on Drive

Compare to what I upgraded from:
- 20 year old Windows 98 desktop (which I still use offline)
- 64 MB RAM
- 8 GB hard drive

I also used snail-speed dial-up service. I just learned to deal with it.
Now I use a very fast WIFI

Note: I don't keep MANY programs open and running constantly, only the
ones I'm using - mainly Firefox and Thunderbird. Other programs only
opened as needed.

[Bruce]

On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 06:25:42 -0400, Gary <g.ma...@att.net> wrote:

>It all depends on what you use the computer for.
>
>My current (and newest) computer is cheap but it does all that I need it
>for with plenty of room left over. It cost $200-something 5 years ago
>
>HP 15.6" screen laptop
>- Windows10
>- cheap intel celeron processor
>- 4 GB RAM
>- 500 MB hard-on Drive
>
>Compare to what I upgraded from:
>- 20 year old Windows 98 desktop (which I still use offline)
>- 64 MB RAM
>- 8 GB hard drive
>
>I also used snail-speed dial-up service. I just learned to deal with it.
>Now I use a very fast WIFI
>
>Note: I don't keep MANY programs open and running constantly, only the
>ones I'm using - mainly Firefox and Thunderbird. Other programs only
>opened as needed.

4 GB RAM is really nothing these days. But if you're a super light
user, why not? Even dsi1's Mickey Mouse computer might be enough for
you. It helps that youse are all retired.

[Gary]

On 3/29/2023 9:03 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> Looking at the specs more, it comes with Windows 11-S.  The -S version
> is for safe computing.  You can only download app from the Microsoft
> Store and the only browser you can use is Edge.

I'll never upgrade to Windows11 then.
The Edge browser is ok but if they forbid anything else... they're going
too far.

[Cindy Hamilton]

I bought a used computer last fall. 4 GB of ram, 3.10 GHz processor,
4 CPUs. Looks like 500 GB hard drive, of which 466 G is free.
I doubt I'll ever need more.

I almost always have solitaire, a terminal window, Chrome, and Thunderbird
running. Sometimes I open a second terminal window.

--
Cindy Hamilton

[Cindy Hamilton]

On 2023-03-30, Gary <g.ma...@att.net> wrote:

> On 3/29/2023 9:03 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> Looking at the specs more, it comes with Windows 11-S.  The -S version
>> is for safe computing.  You can only download app from the Microsoft
>> Store and the only browser you can use is Edge.
>
> I'll never upgrade to Windows11 then.

There's a difference between Windows 11 and Windows 11-S. Details
matter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_11#Versions

--
Cindy Hamilton

[Lenona]

Amy Dacyczyn (author of The Complete Tightwad Gazette, Navy wife, and mother of six children now in their 30s) pointed out, in one article about the Depression, that there was a big difference in the attitude between those who were born before 1920 and those born later. Namely, those born later had little or no memory of life BEFORE the Depression and so had little sense of any crushing loss - and did not need to recover emotionally as much, once it was over.

I had to spell that out to a man born in 1961 who recoiled in horror when he heard of the book "Stories and Recipes of the Great Depression of the 1930's" by Janet Van Amber Paske and Rita Van Amber. He said that only a white person would write a book like that (he assumed it was a sentimentalization of the era, and he was black).

There are five volumes by the authors, with that title - at least one has the subtitle "Low-Fat Pantry Cooking."

And yes, some of the recipes are pretty good.

[Lenona]

And here's what it says in the introduction to the spiral-bound "Hershey's 1934 Cookbook" (revised in 1971 and again in the 1990s):

“The American housewife in the early 1930’s, with the economy the way it was, had an extremely difficult job. She was expected to make do for her family in times when there was little or no money coming in. Economy and thrift were the watchwords of the day. All the everyday purchases, whether for dinner, cleaning, dressing or general housework, were made with eye on the pocketbook. Meals were planned around the general staple sold by the local butcher and baker with vegetables and fruits that were canned at home. (In the 1930’s sirloin steak sold for $0.29 a pound, bacon was $0.11 a pound, potatoes were $0.02 a pound and bread was $0.05 a loaf. Soup, selling at $0.12 a can and serving four, augmented many a meal. . . (snippage of info on housecleaning and sewing) . . . The kitchen of the American home of the 1930’s was the domain of the housewife. Besides being a place for preparation and preserving, it was also the place where countless hours were spent baking. Cookies, cakes pies, icings and frostings were made— and “from scratch” (an event of much pleasure to younger members of the family who got to lick the mixing bowl). . . . All the natural ingredients were used (butter was $0.28 a pound, milk $0.10 a quart, eggs were $0.29 a dozen and sugar was $0.05 a pound).”

I love the B&W photos of famous and anonymous people of the 1930s - plus the color photos of the desserts.

You can see a few photos here from the 1971 edition here (the same as my copy):

https://averydulllife.wordpress.com/2014/09/28/cookbook-analysis-hersheys-1934-cookbook/

And you can see the layout from the original edition here:

http://www.newenglandrecipes.org/html/1934-hershey-book.html

[Lenona]

"...All the natural ingredients were used (butter was $0.28 a pound, milk $0.10 a quart, eggs were $0.29 a dozen and sugar was $0.05 a pound).”


And I just found out something a bit shocking.

According to the Inflation Calculator (assuming we're talking about the year 1934, of course), those prices, in today's money, would be...

...$6.38 a pound, $2.28 a quart, $6.61 a dozen, and $1.14 a pound!

[Ed Pawlowski]

Windows 11 is fine. Windows 11-S is the one to watch for. Seems mostly
on the lower end computers.

[dsi1]

Windows in S mode will run pretty good and fast on a low end computer because it's not Windows. You won't be able to run any of your old Windows desktop client programs. You're pretty much stuck with using Google Groups. That would be a deal breaker for a lot of rfc'ers. The only reason to stick with real Windows is that you need to run your old Windows programs. Otherwise, you're better off using Windows S mode and running apps from the Microsoft Store.
Microsoft tried this before with Windows RT in 2011. They discontinued it after a couple of years. My guess is that's what's going to happen with Windows S. Windows S will probably still be unpopular with Windows users even though it's what Microsoft needs to bring their OS for the modern era.

[cshenk]

Ed Pawlowski wrote:

> On 3/29/2023 4:35 PM, Bruce wrote:
> >On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 16:29:30 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.xxx>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > I don't do anything heavy on this one. Mostly email, newsgroups,
> > > some web stuff. Just not sure how the AMD compares to the Intl.
> >
> > I bet it won't make much of a difference, especially for light use.
>
> That is my thinking. Doubt I'd see the difference, but will see $200.
>
> Which is better AMD Ryzen 5 or Intel i5?
> Geekbench 5 (Multi-Core)

>
> That being said the AMD Ryzen 5 series is still the undisputed
> champion when it comes to offering power efficiency. The AMD Ryzen
> CPU completely dominates Intel CPUs in this department. Even with the
> latest Intel i5 CPU, they required more power compared to the Ryzen 5
> series.Feb 7, 2023

Overkill. Intel i3 does what you need. Works with XP->win7

[cshenk]

Ed Pawlowski wrote:

> On 3/29/2023 7:57 PM, songbird wrote:
> > Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> > ...

> > > That being said the AMD Ryzen 5 series is still the undisputed
> > > champion when it comes to offering power efficiency. The AMD
> > > Ryzen CPU completely dominates Intel CPUs in this department.
> > > Even with the latest Intel i5 CPU, they required more power
> > > compared to the Ryzen 5 series.Feb 7, 2023
> >

> > lowest power draw when idling is well worth it as most
> > of the time if you're just doing e-mail, usenet and a few
> > minor things it is going to be doing practically nothing.
> > over the lifetime of the computer that lesser power draw
> > will probably pay for the computer or a significant chunk
> > of it.
> >
> >
> > songbird
>
>

> Looking at the specs more, it comes with Windows 11-S. The -S
> version is for safe computing. You can only download app from the
> Microsoft Store and the only browser you can use is Edge.
>

> It can be turned off but I wonder what other issues may be lurking.

Works fine. Turn off the -s

[Hank Rogers]

Hush. Ed's on a budget and he's worried about how much power his
computer uses, He's not rich like kuth.

[Hank Rogers]

Isn't that dangerous?

[GM]

Yes, cshenkie got preggers that way...

--
GM

[Hank Rogers]

I bet kuth done it on a sunday.

[GM]

EEK - via "anal" intercourse...!!!???

Lol...

--
GM

[Thomas Joseph]

Bruce wrote:

> I don't worry about what's inside much either. I only pay attention
> when I buy one, because it needs to be able to do what I need. And
> then I'm good for many years.

I am a worrisome consumer. I put off shopping because I hate it
so much. Food shopping is different, I know what I'm doing there.
But clothes, tech shit, all of it - it's always changing due to marketing
and I look back now and (if I have the money) and would have bought
enough of some things to last a life time. That is one good thing: The
older you get the greater your chances that whatever you buy will last
a lifetime.

[Thomas Joseph]

Bruce wrote:

> What I meant was that if you buy a new laptop for under $200, you'll
> get one with 4 GB of RAM. It's like buying a car with half the engine
> missing. It's cheap but you might regret it (or add RAM later).

I agree. But the quantitive motive of your subjective presentation, though based on truth and in fact at times the very essence of truth itself - that motive is flawed. Let’s examine it. The inner vortex of the systemic quantified ebb and flow of commerce seems to indicate that the future is ready to accept the misgivings of the past with a sense of deliberate vengeance based not on fact or reason but on the gusto of thrill seeking youth scum chuckle-dancing their way through a dauntless of homeless punching bags But this is not about the homeless, it is about the scientific principles laid down years ago by Newton and later Einstein himself. I have the proof. The RT-X40 is without a about the best operating system around today, but nobody will ever hear of it because the makers of the C2-900 and others in the marketplace have conspired to keep it a secret forever. I suspect the 4G-RAM people could be in on it too. I don't know where it's going to end but I vow to get to the bottom of it if it takes forever.

[Bruce]

Yes, now that you mention it.

[dsi1]

I suppose we are. My granddaughter went to volleyball practice and I saw a giant plant on the other side of the fence. It was impressive.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/H3poEWQ8y1PGRiwT9