Fast Food Restaurants

[risky biz]

You don't think this kind of thing happens much? A certain percentage
(probably small but significant)who work at places like this are just
plain pigs.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/100785975

Follow should chime in here. Will the market take care of this? No need
for food handling regulations?

If I owned this restaurant that pig would have an appointment with a
baseball bat.

[Dave the Clueless]

Are you insinuating that there are no regulations already in existence
that prohibit the behavior in the photo?

-------
JerryFOREX the retard thinks "Cornel Ronald West (born June 2, 1953) is an
American philosopher, academic, activist, author and prominent member of
the Democratic Socialists of America" is a right-winger! LOL! HAHAHAHAH!
What a moron!!!

[risky biz]

On Jun 4 2013 9:45 AM, Dave the Clueless wrote:

> On Jun 3 2013 8:25 PM, risky biz wrote:
>
> > You don't think this kind of thing happens much? A certain percentage
> > (probably small but significant)who work at places like this are just
> > plain pigs.
> > http://www.cnbc.com/id/100785975
> >
> > Follow should chime in here. Will the market take care of this? No need
> > for food handling regulations?
> >
> > If I owned this restaurant that pig would have an appointment with a
> > baseball bat.
>
> Are you insinuating that there are no regulations already in existence
> that prohibit the behavior in the photo?

No. What I'm insinuating is that food handling regulations are necessary.
Follow has, in the past, expressed a belief in the superiority of a food
industry with no regulations.

[Dave the Clueless]

Well, that is just silly.

[double....@hotmail.com]

On Jun 3, 6:25 pm, "risky biz" <a31d...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
> You don't think this kind of thing happens much? A certain percentage
> (probably small but significant)who work at places like this are just

> plain pigs.http://www.cnbc.com/id/100785975

>
> Follow should chime in here. Will the market take care of this? No need
> for food handling regulations?
>
> If I owned this restaurant that pig would have an appointment with a
> baseball bat.

I used to work at a McD's in high school and I saw a lot more than
that! Let's just say you never know what all went into that oil in
their fryer! LOL

[Follow]

I love this article. You make my point for me, Risky.

From the article:
"The restaurant has an A rating from the Kern County public health
department."

What I've said in the past, and I hold firm today, is that these
regulations are bullshit and don't do anything to protect anybody. This
restaurant has an A rating, the highest you can get, and probably has had
that rating for a very long time. But there is some jackhole in the back
licking taco shells, and despite what the article says, probably served
them. There is nothing in the world that can stop this from happening.

I've also said that in the absence of a health department (a useless,
bloated agency that does nothing well besides spend money, get in the way
of legitimate business, and give the ignorant masses warm fuzzies), one or
more private organizations would step up to fill the gap and certify
restaurants their own way. In time, through competition, we would find a
much better way to protect the public than a bloated, wasteful,
bureaucracy.

To support my argument, I'll point you to the USDA meat standards, which
changed due to large food producers wanting their formerly "select" grade
beef to be included in the "choice" grade. That's why you can buy choice
beef from one place and have it be completely different than the high
choice you get from somewhere else. Prime, is thankfully not sullied yet.
When the USDA did this, private organizations (like Certified Black
Angus) stepped up and began doing their own grading. When you buy a steak
with the "Certified Black Angus" label, you aren't necessarily buying a
cut from a Black Angus cow, you are buying a superior grade of beef that
is what choice used to be.

Government usually sucks at everything they do. There are really very few
exceptions to this rule, Risky, and the Health Dept. is certainly not one
of them. I'm glad you invited me to chime in here, and I'm glad I
happened upon this thread.



Follow :)

[popinjay999]

On Jun 4, 6:02 pm, "Follow" <lamemailna...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
> Government usually sucks at everything they do.  There are really very few
> exceptions to this rule, Risky, and the Health Dept. is certainly not one
> of them.  I'm glad you invited me to chime in here, and I'm glad I
> happened upon this thread.
>
> Follow :)

I've played poker in Ridgecrest, several times, back in the day. It
was only 5-card draw back then.

[popinjay999]

On Jun 4, 1:17 pm, "double.down....@hotmail.com"

>
> I used to work at a McD's in high school and I saw a lot more than
> that!

So we're talking like what, 2009? 2010?

[risky biz]

On Jun 4 2013 6:02 PM, Follow wrote:

> On Jun 3 2013 5:25 PM, risky biz wrote:
>
> > You don't think this kind of thing happens much? A certain percentage
> > (probably small but significant)who work at places like this are just
> > plain pigs.
> > http://www.cnbc.com/id/100785975
> >
> > Follow should chime in here. Will the market take care of this? No need
> > for food handling regulations?
> >
> > If I owned this restaurant that pig would have an appointment with a
> > baseball bat.
>
> I love this article. You make my point for me, Risky.
>
> From the article:
> "The restaurant has an A rating from the Kern County public health
> department."
>
> What I've said in the past, and I hold firm today, is that these
> regulations are bullshit and don't do anything to protect anybody. This
> restaurant has an A rating, the highest you can get, and probably has had
> that rating for a very long time. But there is some jackhole in the back
> licking taco shells, and despite what the article says, probably served
> them. There is nothing in the world that can stop this from happening.

It may not stop a moronic individual or two but the fact that the health
department can shut down a restaurant ensures that the owner will make
every effort to minimize asinine behavior like this and limit it's
occurrence by making it clear that action will be taken against
individuals for infractions.

> I've also said that in the absence of a health department (a useless,
> bloated agency that does nothing well besides spend money, get in the way
> of legitimate business, and give the ignorant masses warm fuzzies), one or
> more private organizations would step up to fill the gap and certify
> restaurants their own way. In time, through competition, we would find a
> much better way to protect the public than a bloated, wasteful,
> bureaucracy.
>
> To support my argument, I'll point you to the USDA meat standards, which
> changed due to large food producers wanting their formerly "select" grade
> beef to be included in the "choice" grade. That's why you can buy choice
> beef from one place and have it be completely different than the high
> choice you get from somewhere else. Prime, is thankfully not sullied yet.
> When the USDA did this, private organizations (like Certified Black
> Angus) stepped up and began doing their own grading. When you buy a steak
> with the "Certified Black Angus" label, you aren't necessarily buying a
> cut from a Black Angus cow, you are buying a superior grade of beef that
> is what choice used to be.

Pardon me for being a pessimist but I don't really believe that an
industry certification is as believable as a government certification.

I also doubt that the certification you're speaking of is anything other
than a marketing ploy. Black Angus isn't just a different grade of meat.
It's a different kind of cow. There can't be much to the certification in
terms of rigorousness. It's an apples and oranges comparison.

In any case, if industry participants are able to prevail upon regulators
to lower standards what is the magic wand that prevents them from
prevailing upon their own fellow industry participants if they decide to?

In the example you provide why hasn't the industry established it's own
certification for the former standard of the "choice" grade? It's because
it would require a rigorous testing regimen and, most important, they
don't want it and are happy with the lowered standard.

The public should be asking why the standard was lowered. If activists
made an issue of this they would be labeled "big government" oppressors by
the industry.

[Follow]

So you're saying that if the health department didn't exist and this
picture went public like it did, Taco Bell would (or might) be less
inclined to take serious action against the perpetrator of this incident?
That's a ridiculous assertion. Also, I am 99% sure the health department
didn't even register an infraction against the restaurant for this. They
can't, they didn't witness it and have no grounds to charge the restaurant
with anything at all.

Even if they did witness this, and many other infractions like it, do you
know that the health department *still* can't shut the restaurant down?
The fact of the matter is that the health department really doesn't have
any teeth. There has to be an immediate threat to public health for the
inspector to actually take action to close the place down. In the end, if
an inspector witnessed what happened, they might have been able to
downgrade the restaurant from an A rating to a B. That would teach them a
lesson, I'm sure. Even if they could shut the place down, if some damned
kid working in the back licked a bunch of taco shells in front of an
inspector, do you think that warrants shutting the place down immediately
for? Or should they maybe have the manager fire the kid, fix the problem,
and carry on like they did before?

In the end, it is nearly impossible for an inspector to witness something
like this and they can do nothing as a result of a picture. All they can
do is continue to waste your money, do a piss poor job of inspection, send
out a pile of gibbering monkeys who really don't know anything about
restaurant work, and give you warm feelings that you are somehow more safe
as a result of your wasted time and money.

Take a look at the scenario you've just provided; it illustrates perfectly
the complete and utter futility of the various health departments in the
US. I've actually personally dealt with some people from this (Kern
County) health department myself, and I can tell you, I haven't been
impressed with their knowledge.

If a government bureaucracy is doing nothing to help you and is throwing
your money down an endless sinkhole while making it more difficult for
business to operate, don't you think it is the very definition of useless
and should be cut?

> > I've also said that in the absence of a health department (a useless,
> > bloated agency that does nothing well besides spend money, get in the way
> > of legitimate business, and give the ignorant masses warm fuzzies), one or
> > more private organizations would step up to fill the gap and certify
> > restaurants their own way. In time, through competition, we would find a
> > much better way to protect the public than a bloated, wasteful,
> > bureaucracy.
> >
> > To support my argument, I'll point you to the USDA meat standards, which
> > changed due to large food producers wanting their formerly "select" grade
> > beef to be included in the "choice" grade. That's why you can buy choice
> > beef from one place and have it be completely different than the high
> > choice you get from somewhere else. Prime, is thankfully not sullied yet.
> > When the USDA did this, private organizations (like Certified Black
> > Angus) stepped up and began doing their own grading. When you buy a steak
> > with the "Certified Black Angus" label, you aren't necessarily buying a
> > cut from a Black Angus cow, you are buying a superior grade of beef that
> > is what choice used to be.
>
> Pardon me for being a pessimist but I don't really believe that an
> industry certification is as believable as a government certification.

Backwards really. A government certification is bullshit. What does the
government bureaucracy lose if they make an inaccurate reading of a
threat? Did even a single government agent lose their job as a result of
all of the breakouts of E.Coli or others (not to mention things like Libya
or 9/11)? A private organization has *far* more to lose. If their
certification turns out to be fake or not up to standard, they could lose
their business, at the very least someone would lose their job over it.

Government schleps have nothing to lose, nothing, and they don't care if
you get sick. Do they care how long you wait in line at the DMV? The
Post Office? Police have no duty to protect you, Risky, why do you think
a health department does?

> I also doubt that the certification you're speaking of is anything other
> than a marketing ploy. Black Angus isn't just a different grade of meat.
> It's a different kind of cow. There can't be much to the certification in
> terms of rigorousness. It's an apples and oranges comparison.

Sorry, it's not "Certified Black Angus" it's actually "Certified Angus."
Most cows in the country are Angus, and "Certified Angus" does not
actually mean they are technically Angus. The certification is about the
grade of meat and it is very trusted, they grade only choice (old choice
with stricter standards) and prime beef. So when you see "Certified
Angus" you can be sure that it is a top quality beef, but you can't be
sure of the breed.

> In any case, if industry participants are able to prevail upon regulators
> to lower standards what is the magic wand that prevents them from
> prevailing upon their own fellow industry participants if they decide to?

Good question. Corruption will exist everywhere, does in public and
private sectors. The difference in public sectors is that there is no one
to blame or fire, in private sectors, I imagine they would need to be more
vigilant to retain public trust or they run the risk of losing their
business. Will the health department ever lose their business if they
mess up? How many outbreaks before we hear about a regulator stepping
down?

> In the example you provide why hasn't the industry established it's own
> certification for the former standard of the "choice" grade? It's because
> it would require a rigorous testing regimen and, most important, they
> don't want it and are happy with the lowered standard.
>
> The public should be asking why the standard was lowered. If activists
> made an issue of this they would be labeled "big government" oppressors by
> the industry.

All this was answered. The industry has established a grade and it is
very successful and popular. Go buy yourself a "choice" steak from
Walmart, then go to a higher end grocery and buy a "Certified Angus" steak
that isn't prime. Grill them both and taste them and you'll plainly taste
the difference between public sector certification and private sector.

I choose private every damned time.

Bottom line: Health Department can't prevent these things, private sector
is already proving they can take care of these things themselves. Health
Department wastes money and time doing no good at all, private sector
can't waste money by definition. Why persist?



Follow :)

[risky biz]

A lot of what you're saying above is just not the real world. Do you think
if health inspectors witnessed that and the manager didn't fire the kid
immediately they wouldn't shut the place down? Why wouldn't that be
considered a threat to public health? I'll bet they would suspend their
license temporarily anyway even if the owner did fire him while they
reviewed their hiring and training procedures.

Also, many local newspapers publish weekly lists of restaurants that have
had their licenses suspended or revoked for health violations and some
even elaborate what the violations were. This would never happen if there
weren't health inspectors. People would just unkowingly eat dirty,
contaminated food until it became obvious from people dying. Is that what
you call the magic of the market? Sounds more like a curse.

The far more important incidences are the number of times that their work
prevented outbreaks. It's disingnuous to assume that they aren't
accomplishing anything due to an absence of news about outbreaks being
avoided by preventative, proactive inspections.

> A private organization has *far* more to lose. If their
> certification turns out to be fake or not up to standard, they could lose
> their business, at the very least someone would lose their job over it.
>
> Government schleps have nothing to lose, nothing, and they don't care if
> you get sick. Do they care how long you wait in line at the DMV? The
> Post Office? Police have no duty to protect you, Risky, why do you think
> a health department does?
>
>
> > I also doubt that the certification you're speaking of is anything other
> > than a marketing ploy. Black Angus isn't just a different grade of meat.
> > It's a different kind of cow. There can't be much to the certification in
> > terms of rigorousness. It's an apples and oranges comparison.
>
> Sorry, it's not "Certified Black Angus" it's actually "Certified Angus."
> Most cows in the country are Angus, and "Certified Angus" does not
> actually mean they are technically Angus. The certification is about the
> grade of meat and it is very trusted, they grade only choice (old choice
> with stricter standards) and prime beef. So when you see "Certified
> Angus" you can be sure that it is a top quality beef, but you can't be
> sure of the breed.

This certification you think is such a great example is curious. Why is a
grade of beef communicated with the name of a cattle breed which is also
the primary beef cattle breed in the US? That doesn't even make sense. It
tells you that the beef you're eating is certified to be from a breed of
cow that almost every other piece of beef in the US comes from but, in
actuality, you say it may not even be from that breed of cattle. So it
tells the consumer nothing. It just gives them a vague impression that it
must be higher quality by implication because the packaging brags. Similar
to all the "healthy" packaged foods that are drenched with high fructose
corn syrup and sodium.

If the USDA lowered their standards it wasn't because they just decided to
do it on their own. It's because the beef industry put pressure on them to
do so. Yet, you say it's the beef industry that will insure the quality of
our beef. That doesn't make sense, either. And consumers should probably
be writing to their political representatives to question why the industry
got it's way.

What you are saying about quality may actually be applicable to a small
subset of the beef industry but it is very likely to be the exception to
the rule of the larger self-serving beef industry. You are presenting
tunnel vision while proclaiming it's universality.

[Travel A]

One big problem, I believe, are the managers "these days." They're of
the same idiocy being spit-out of the left-wing-destroyed, public school
system: you have managers with low critical thinking skills and a
culture-attitude confusion on accepted, proper behavior. Firing one of
these high school dumbasses is probably viewed as a gigantic, big huge
deal.

[Bea Foroni]

One big problem, I believe, are the managers. They are a product of the short-sighted, right-wing MBA school system. You have managers with low ethical thinking skills and a culture-attitude confusion on what a fellow human is. Firing one of these workers is viewed as business as usual, especially when he can get a job across the street at the same pay rate (minimum wage).

We no longer see employees as assets, to be trained, rewarded and kept. Instead employees are seen as a cost factor, only. Each employee as seen as easily replaceable, a cog in a wheel whose purpose is turn out profits. And because they are not valued, they are paid as little as possible.

No longer is an employer seen as part of the community. He takes what he can from society, and when there is no more to take, he moves on. No consideration is given for individuals, family or community. That's why I try to never eat at where my food is in the hands of minimum wage workers. As cheap as it is, it is never a bargain.

[Pepe Papon]

On Fri, 7 Jun 2013 06:59:10 -0700 (PDT), Bea Foroni
<wilm...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Friday, June 7, 2013 5:23:18 AM UTC-7, Travel wrote:
>> One big problem, I believe, are the managers "these days." They're of
>>
>> the same idiocy being spit-out of the left-wing-destroyed, public school
>>
>> system: you have managers with low critical thinking skills and a
>>
>> culture-attitude confusion on accepted, proper behavior. Firing one of
>>
>> these high school dumbasses is probably viewed as a gigantic, big huge
>>
>> deal.
>
> One big problem, I believe, are the managers. They are a product of the short-sighted, right-wing MBA school system. You have managers with low ethical thinking skills and a culture-attitude confusion on what a fellow human is. Firing one of these workers is viewed as business as usual, especially when he can get a job across the street at the same pay rate (minimum wage).

Don't blame the business schools. Students who enroll in MBA
programs are old enough that they ought to know right from wrong
without having to learn it in graduate school. Even so, the top
schools nowadays do offer courses in ethics.

It's on the students. Business school tends to attract a certain type
of person.

> We no longer see employees as assets, to be trained, rewarded and kept. Instead employees are seen as a cost factor, only. Each employee as seen as easily replaceable, a cog in a wheel whose purpose is turn out profits. And because they are not valued, they are paid as little as possible.
>
> No longer is an employer seen as part of the community. He takes what he can from society, and when there is no more to take, he moves on. No consideration is given for individuals, family or community. That's why I try to never eat at where my food is in the hands of minimum wage workers. As cheap as it is, it is never a bargain.

These things are, unfortunately, true.
--

Pepe Papon

[Travel A]

Looks like Bea Foroni didn't like something (chortle).

[Pepe Papon]

On Fri, 07 Jun 2013 22:39:41 -0700, Pepe Papon
<hitme...@mindspring.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 7 Jun 2013 06:59:10 -0700 (PDT), Bea Foroni
><wilm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Friday, June 7, 2013 5:23:18 AM UTC-7, Travel wrote:
>>> One big problem, I believe, are the managers "these days." They're of
>>>
>>> the same idiocy being spit-out of the left-wing-destroyed, public school
>>>
>>> system: you have managers with low critical thinking skills and a
>>>
>>> culture-attitude confusion on accepted, proper behavior. Firing one of
>>>
>>> these high school dumbasses is probably viewed as a gigantic, big huge
>>>
>>> deal.
>>
>> One big problem, I believe, are the managers. They are a product of the short-sighted, right-wing MBA school system. You have managers with low ethical thinking skills and a culture-attitude confusion on what a fellow human is. Firing one of these workers is viewed as business as usual, especially when he can get a job across the street at the same pay rate (minimum wage).
>
>Don't blame the business schools. Students who enroll in MBA
>programs are old enough that they ought to know right from wrong
>without having to learn it in graduate school. Even so, the top
>schools nowadays do offer courses in ethics.
>
>It's on the students. Business school tends to attract a certain type
>of person.

Found an interesting article on this topic:

http://tinyurl.com/mr9233u
--

Pepe Papon

[Follow]

On Jun 5 2013 10:29 PM, risky biz wrote:


> A lot of what you're saying above is just not the real world. Do you think
> if health inspectors witnessed that and the manager didn't fire the kid
> immediately they wouldn't shut the place down? Why wouldn't that be
> considered a threat to public health? I'll bet they would suspend their
> license temporarily anyway even if the owner did fire him while they
> reviewed their hiring and training procedures.

First, which manager, no matter how stupid, wouldn't fire the kid if he
did this in front of an inspector? Second, I'm not sure what the
definition in Kern County is for imminent threat. It could very well be
that the act would earn the restaurant a red mark on their inspection, but
not shut them down. All of the things you get marked down for at a health
inspection, from dirty ceilings to rats on your counters are technically a
"threat to public health," that's why they are inspected and they're on
the forms. But the only thing that will shut you down is a credible and
imminent threat. A healthy person licking taco shells might not fit that
very narrow and specific criteria.

> Also, many local newspapers publish weekly lists of restaurants that have
> had their licenses suspended or revoked for health violations and some
> even elaborate what the violations were. This would never happen if there
> weren't health inspectors. People would just unkowingly eat dirty,
> contaminated food until it became obvious from people dying. Is that what
> you call the magic of the market? Sounds more like a curse.

Sure, they get shut down all the time, the records are public, you can log
on to most county health dept. sites and find the reports from each
inspector of restaurants. I do it all the time and it amazes me how
filthy and horrible some of these places are. But again, this just
further illustrates my point that health departments are wasteful, bloated
organizations that really do nothing at all. I read about a whole bunch
of awful violations that are at least on par, if not worse than this one
all the time, they just get a bad report and the inspector charges them a
"re-inspection" fee to come back at a later date when the trouble is
cleared.

I've dealt with these people for years, I've had hundreds of my own
inspections and read the results of hundreds more. I know what I'm
talking about.

> The far more important incidences are the number of times that their work
> prevented outbreaks. It's disingnuous to assume that they aren't
> accomplishing anything due to an absence of news about outbreaks being
> avoided by preventative, proactive inspections.

You should look over a common health inspection and the criteria for it.
Not much of it is meant to prevent the outbreak of any kind of disease.
If it were, the food itself would be tested and temperatures checked. As
of now, the temperature checking is hardly done, the criteria is that your
cook has a probe thermometer available, not that he ever uses it and
usually inspectors don't either. Food itself is never taken from a
restaurant and tested for anything.

Also, cooking temperatures are different from one county to another. If
it's a science, why is it that pork needs to be cooked to 165 in one
county, but only 145 in another? Do bacteria act differently in those
counties? Why is there a mark down on a Salt Lake County health
inspection for a burnt out light bulb in the walk-in, even though there
are many others intact and really no noticeable light lost? Is that a
threat of some kind to public health? What about a cracked ceiling tile
in the bathroom?

Health departments are self-perpetuating bureaucracies, Risky. They have
no purpose but to keep themselves afloat and they will feed you whatever
bullshit they can to keep raising their fees and keep the bureaucracy
going.

> This certification you think is such a great example is curious. Why is a
> grade of beef communicated with the name of a cattle breed which is also
> the primary beef cattle breed in the US? That doesn't even make sense. It
> tells you that the beef you're eating is certified to be from a breed of
> cow that almost every other piece of beef in the US comes from but, in
> actuality, you say it may not even be from that breed of cattle. So it
> tells the consumer nothing. It just gives them a vague impression that it
> must be higher quality by implication because the packaging brags. Similar
> to all the "healthy" packaged foods that are drenched with high fructose
> corn syrup and sodium.

What it tells those of us who know the brand is that it is a high quality
beef with good marbling that will produce a good flavor and tenderness
that we want in our steaks. I don't know why they chose the name they
chose. Write them a letter.

> If the USDA lowered their standards it wasn't because they just decided to
> do it on their own. It's because the beef industry put pressure on them to
> do so. Yet, you say it's the beef industry that will insure the quality of
> our beef. That doesn't make sense, either. And consumers should probably
> be writing to their political representatives to question why the industry
> got it's way.

No, I didn't say the beef industry would protect the standards. I said
the private sector would. Certified Angus Beef is a business that gets
paid by the beef industry to grade their beef. If they were to be bought
too often, like the government is, and put their standard on lower grades
of beef, like the government does, then they would no longer have a useful
standard or a useful business, like the government. :)

> What you are saying about quality may actually be applicable to a small
> subset of the beef industry but it is very likely to be the exception to
> the rule of the larger self-serving beef industry. You are presenting
> tunnel vision while proclaiming it's universality.

No, I'm using it as one example, because it is the only well known
example. My assertion is that without government, more of these entities
would form out of necessity, and I'm pointing to this one entity as an
example of success through voluntary private industry standards.



Follow :)

[risky biz]

I've read restaurant inspections that included the temperatures at which
food is kept, both hot and cold, in both California and Nevada.

> Food itself is never taken from a
> restaurant and tested for anything.
>
> Also, cooking temperatures are different from one county to another. If
> it's a science, why is it that pork needs to be cooked to 165 in one
> county, but only 145 in another? Do bacteria act differently in those
> counties? Why is there a mark down on a Salt Lake County health
> inspection for a burnt out light bulb in the walk-in, even though there
> are many others intact and really no noticeable light lost? Is that a
> threat of some kind to public health? What about a cracked ceiling tile
> in the bathroom?
>
> Health departments are self-perpetuating bureaucracies, Risky. They have
> no purpose but to keep themselves afloat and they will feed you whatever
> bullshit they can to keep raising their fees and keep the bureaucracy
> going.

When they shut down restaurants that are a danger to public safety (which
they do although you claim they don't) then they have earned their money.

[otter]

On Jun 3, 6:25 pm, "risky biz" <a31d...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:

> You don't think this kind of thing happens much? A certain percentage
> (probably small but significant)who work at places like this are just

> plain pigs.http://www.cnbc.com/id/100785975

>
> Follow should chime in here. Will the market take care of this? No need
> for food handling regulations?
>
> If I owned this restaurant that pig would have an appointment with a
> baseball bat.

Jeeze, guys. First of all, the taco shells weren't destined for human
consumption. They were part of some supplies that the employees were
being trained to make a new menu item with. No one was going to eat
those.

The guy was having a joke. Too bad it blew up in the kids face. I
guess some things you just can't joke about.

[risky biz]

u r n' idjit.