TampaYankee

I suspect that tax is determined by the state and not MacDonald's. My state doesn't care where you eat it, they want their money. For all of you youngsters who are too young to have known the real MacDonals's fries, it is a culinary experience that is unable to put into simple words. Today's rendition is more akin to cardboard fries. In my youth they peeled and cut real potatoes in plain view in the restaurant, from Idahos damn near the size of footballs. Nothing cooked out of bags from freezers. The fresh fries were cooked in animal fat and was the world gold standard for fries. Truly delicious. A bag of fries cost 12 cents. Hamburgers were 15 cents and a shake was 20 cents. An entire meal -- a couple of burgers, fries and a shake -- for under a dollar with change back. Yeah, that was a while ago. There was one downside to the perfect fry. When they got cold they were really greasy, but that was easily avoided by eating them hot.

I've been around this scene for the better part of a dozen years. In that time I have read hundreds of posters. It was easy to identify the region some of them resided in from their posts, for one reason or another. The vast majority remain unknown to me. That is no big deal as I don't really care where particular individuals live. However, it is a curiosity to me where most of our traffic and posters reside in the large. It is my impression during my tenure here that more regulars are West Coasters, although the South and Northeast and Midwest are represented as well as Europe. To feed my curiosity I have created a poll to find out where our concentration of particpants are located. If you have more than one residence then please choose what you deem to be your primary residence. I hope that all posters and readers will take this opportunity to participate in this poll. I do not care who you are or if you post in the forums or submit reviews. Any level of participation in the site qualifies you for the poll. That means everyone who reads a review or profile or forum post. The poll is 100% anonymous. No need to identify your residence with your screen name. If you wish to that is no problem either. Please take a second to participate. P.S. I have had to add a second list to accommodate more locations. Although your residence location is in one of the lists the software requires that you make a selection in both lists. (It thinks the poll is asking two questions. That is how I tricked it to add more locations beyond the first 20 which was a limit for one list.) Thus you MUST make a selection in each list for the software to register your location entry. I have added a dummy response line in each list to satisfy the software. So, if you are not in the first list then select the last button in that list and make your selection in the second list. Else, select your location in the first list and select the 'Not in this list; button in the second list. Sorry for the cumbersome set up.

Five Guys, Subway Top In-N-Out, Taco Bell In Zagat's Fast Food Survey Zagat recently polled 6,064 people for its annual Fast Food Survey, in categories ranging from best coffee (Starbucks) to best salad (Panera). Among chains with up to 5,000 locations, Five Guys was deemed the most popular (which perhaps comes as no surprise), followed by Panera, Chipotle, Chick-fil-A and in fifth place, In-N-Out. Last year, Five Guys also took top prize, though In-N-Out was the victor in 2009. Five Guys was not only the most popular chain; it also dominated the best burger category, putting In-N-Out in second place and McDonald's in fifth. McDonald's did, however, rank highest in value, child-friendliness and drive-thru experience. Among chains with over 5,000 locations, Subway took the top popularity spot, followed by McDonald's, Wendy's, Burger King and Taco Bell bringing up the rear. The survey also covered full-service chains. Cheesecake Factory won in best salads, appetizers, desserts and value, but fell to fifth place for its pasta offerings. Although Maggiano's Little Italy dominated the pasta category, its value, steak and seafood were not as well-liked. Other notable winners included Red Robin for its burger, IHOP for its coffee and Cracker Barrel for its breakfast. The survey participants averaged 6.3 meals per month at a fast food chain (the national average is about 10 fast food meals monthly) and 4.4 visits to a full-service chain. Here are some of the key results of Zagat's fast food survey: Fast Food - Large Chains 1. Five Guys 2. Panera Bread 3. Chipotle Mexican Grill 4. Chick-fil-A 5. In-N-Out Burger Fast Food - Mega Chains 1. Subway 2. McDonald's 3. Wendy's 4. Burger King 5. Taco Bell Best Burger 1. Five Guys 2. In-N-Out Burger 3. Wendy's 4. Burger King 5. McDonald's Best French Fries 1. McDonald's 2. Five Guys 3. Wendy's 4. In-N-Out Burger 5. Chick-fil-A See original article for more and to vote if so moved: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/06/zagat-fast-food-survey_n_950167.html

Thanks for sharing your experiences the very informative post. It adds very useful data for this Brazilian city.

5 Nutrients You're Not Getting Enough Of By Bill Phillips and the Editors of Men's Health Sep 01, 2011 After a long hard day at the office, I crave a manly dinner. Something that will sharpen my mind, feed my muscles, and infuse me with energy to keep up with two young kids till bedtime. So, often, I have a bowl of cereal. With bananas and whole milk. Mmm. Do I feel like I’m depriving my body of key nutrients? Quite the opposite, actually. My favorite dinner isn't just for kids. It contains high levels of three nutrients that American adults need much more of: B12, potassium, and iodine. Our shortfalls with these nutrients—along with vitamin D and magnesium—have serious health consequences, including a higher risk of heart disease and stroke, fatigue, and weight gain. Here's the good news: These nutrients are readily available in the foods you know and love. You can get more of one simply by spending more time outside. That doesn't sound so hard, does it? Here's how to fortify your diet—and your health. 1. VITAMIN D This vitamin's biggest claim to fame is its role in strengthening your skeleton. But vitamin D isn't a one-trick nutrient: A study in Circulation found that people deficient in D were up to 80 percent more likely to suffer a heart attack or stroke. The reason? Vitamin D may reduce inflammation in your arteries. Also, a University of Minnesota study found that people with adequate vitamin D levels release more leptin, a hormone that conveys the "I'm full" message to your brain. Even more impressive, the study also found that the nutrient triggers weight loss primarily from the belly. Another study found that people with higher D levels in their bloodstream store less fat. The shortfall: Vitamin D is created in your body when the sun's ultraviolet B rays penetrate your skin. Problem is, the vitamin D you stockpile during sunnier months is often depleted by winter, especially if you live in the northern half of the United States, where UVB rays are less intense from November through February. When Boston University researchers measured the vitamin D status of young adults at the end of winter, 36 percent of them were found to be deficient. Hit the mark: First, ask your doctor to test your blood levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D. "You need to be above 30 nanograms per milliliter," says Michael Holick, M.D., Ph.D., a professor of medicine at Boston University. Come up short? Eat foods like salmon (900 IU per serving), mackerel (400 IU), and tuna (150 IU). Milk and eggs are also good, with about 100 IU per serving. But to ensure you're getting enough, take 1,400 IU of vitamin D daily from a supplement and a multivitamin. That's about seven times the recommended daily intake for men, but it takes that much to boost blood levels of D, says Dr. Holick. 2. MAGNESIUM This lightweight mineral is a tireless multitasker: It's involved in more than 300 bodily processes. Plus, a study in the Journal of the American College of Nutrition found that low levels of magnesium may increase your blood levels of C-reactive protein, a key marker of heart disease. The shortfall: Nutrition surveys reveal that men consume only about 80 percent of the recommended 400 milligrams (mg) of magnesium a day. "We're just barely getting by," says Dana King, M.D., a professor of family medicine at the Medical University of South Carolina. "Without enough magnesium, every cell in your body has to struggle to generate energy." Hit the mark: Fortify your diet with more magnesium-rich foods, such as halibut, navy beans, and spinach. Then hit the supplement aisle: Few men can reach 400 mg through diet alone, so Dr. King recommends ingesting some insurance in the form of a 250 mg supplement. One caveat: Scrutinize the ingredients list. You want a product that uses magnesium citrate, the form best absorbed by your body. 3. VITAMIN B12 Consider B12 the guardian of your gray matter: In a British study, older people with the lowest levels of B12 lost brain volume at a faster rate over a span of five years than those with the highest levels. The shortfall: Even though most men do consume the daily quota of 2.4 micrograms, the stats don't tell the whole story. "We're seeing an increase in B12 deficiencies due to interactions with medications," says Katherine Tucker, Ph.D., director of a USDA program at Tufts University. The culprits: acid-blocking drugs, such as Prilosec, and the diabetes medication metformin. Hit the mark: You'll find B12 in lamb and salmon, but the most accessible source may be fortified cereals. That's because the B12 in meat is bound to proteins, and your stomach must produce acid to release and absorb it. Eat a bowl of 100 percent B12-boosted cereal and milk every morning and you'll be covered, even if you take the occasional acid-blocking med. However, if you pop Prilosec on a regular basis or are on metformin, talk to your doctor about tracking your B12 levels and possibly taking an additional supplement. 4. POTASSIUM Without this essential mineral, your heart couldn't beat, your muscles wouldn't contract, and your brain couldn't comprehend this sentence. Why? Potassium helps your cells use glucose for energy. The shortfall: Despite potassium's can't-live-without-it importance, nutrition surveys indicate that young men consume just 60 percent to 70 percent of the recommended 4,700 mg a day. To make matters worse, most guys load up on sodium: High sodium can boost blood pressure, while normal potassium levels work to lower it, says Lydia A. L. Bazzano, M.D., Ph.D., an assistant professor of epidemiology at Tulane University. Hit the mark: Half an avocado contains nearly 500 mg potassium, while one banana boasts roughly 400 mg. Not a fan of either fruit? Pick up some potatoes—a single large spud is packed with 1,600 mg. Most multivitamins have less than 100 mg of potassium, so eat your fruits and vegetables, folks! 5. IODINE Your thyroid gland requires iodine to produce the hormones T3 and T4, both of which help control how efficiently you burn calories. That means insufficient iodine may cause you to gain weight and feel fatigued. The shortfall: Since iodized salt is an important source of the element, you might assume you're swimming in the stuff. But when University of Texas at Arlington researchers tested 88 samples of table salt, they found that half contained less than the FDA-recommended amount of iodine. And you're not making up the difference with all the salt hiding in processed foods—U.S. manufacturers aren't required to use iodized salt. The result is that we've been sliding toward iodine deficiency since the 1970s. Hit the mark: Sprinkling more salt on top of an already sodium-packed diet isn't a great idea, but iodine can also be found in a nearly sodium-free source: milk. Animal feed is fortified with the element, meaning it travels from cows to your cereal bowl. Not a milk man? Eat at least one serving of eggs or yogurt a day; both are good sources of iodine. Also, check out our list of the 40 Foods with Superpowers—foods that, even in moderation, can strengthen your heart, fortify your bones, and boost your metabolism so you can lose weight more quickly. See original article for more links at: http://health.yahoo.net/experts/menshealth/5-nutrients-youre-not-getting-enough

What are you smoking?????? Even the majority of the GOP don't want her.

I think she is nuts!

It's about time -- long over due actually. Unfortunately, it appears the government is seeking penalties nowhere consistent with the damage done and the money stolen from Fannie, Freddie, Pension Funds, Mutual Funds and individual investors. Better something than nothing though. If the penalties eat in to company dividends then that is just tough. The stock holders should be greatful and satisified that they haven't lost all of their equity that the bailout saved them from. There ought to be some penality for corporate malfeasance that amounts nothing less than fraud and grand larceny. It's criminal that these guys aren't doing hard jail time for RICO violations. The Obama DOJ ought to be ashamed for not pursuing them criminally. ANother case where money talks. The Democratic Party is little better than the GOP when it comes to doing Wall St and Big Bank bidding. We are lucky to get any satisfaction

U.S. to sue big banks over mortgage securities: report WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The agency that oversees mortgage markets is preparing to file suit against more than a dozen big banks, accusing them of misrepresenting the quality of mortgages they packaged and sold during the housing bubble, The New York Times reported on Thursday. The Federal Housing Finance Agency, which oversees mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, is expected to file suit against Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs and Deutsche Bank, among other banks, the Times reported, citing three unidentified individuals briefed on the matter. The suits stem from subpoenas the finance agency issued to banks last year. They could be filed as early as Friday, the Times said, but if not filed Friday it said the suits would come on Tuesday. The government will argue the banks, which pooled the mortgages and sold them as securities to investors, failed to perform due diligence required under securities law and missed evidence that borrowers' incomes were falsified or inflated, the Times reported. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac lost more than $30 billion, due partly to their purchases of mortgage-backed securities, when the housing bubble burst in late 2008. Those losses were covered mostly with taxpayers' money. The agency filed suit against UBS in July, seeking to recover at least $900 million for taxpayers, and the individuals told the Times the new suits would be similar in scope. A spokesman for the Federal Housing Finance Agency was not immediately available for comment. The Times said Bank of America, JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs all declined comment. A Deutsche Bank spokesman told the Times, "We can't comment on a suit that we haven't seen and hasn't been filed yet." The practice of subprime lending, wherein mortgage brokers lowered their standards to entice homebuyers to take out large mortgages to buy more expensive homes than they could afford, was a root cause of the mortgage market implosion. News of the suit could have a negative impact on stocks of the banks in question on Friday. JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America and Goldman Sachs are traded on the New York Stock Exchange, while Deutsche Bank is traded on the German exchange. S&P 500 stocks index futures were trading down 0.6 percent in Asia. U.S. Treasury futures also ticked higher.. The Times report said investors fear that if banks are forced to pay out billions for mortgages that defaulted, the suit could sap earnings for years and contribute to further losses across the financial services industry. See oringal article at: http://news.yahoo.com/u-sue-big-banks-over-mortgage-securities-report-031719348.html

Hmmm.... 10000.... 99999... and 15000 is mid? My math is different from yours... 99999 - 10000 / 2 = much bigger

My response to him: "Show me the money!" You work cheap. I was figuring a mid-range figure like $35K, not to be greedy at $50K .

America's Top Suburbs for Retirees By William P. Barrett, Forbes.com August 26, 2011 It’s a perpetual question for the older set: Where to retire? A lot of people simply stay put where they’ve been for decades. Others move far away—-even abroad–for adventure or to save money. Another retirement option is a change to an inner-city neighborhood. But there’s a middle ground that might be appealing to those who have spent comfortable decades in the suburbs, those largely residential towns full of larger homes with back yards within reasonable commuting distance of the big city they generally ring and draw energy from. Consider relocating to another suburb, maybe in another part of the country. There can be savings and value generated, especially if one takes advantage of what can be the country’s widely differing tax environments. Texas and Florida, for instance, has no state income tax (although other higher taxes make up some of the difference). Some states like Pennsylvania and Florida afford retirees with special tax incentives. Here’s how our roster came together. First, we set a 25-mile limit for the distance from the suburb to the center of the big city. A longer trip than that struck us as interfering too much with getting to the cultural, sporting and other amenities found in larger cities. House prices everywhere are way down. We sought towns where the average home price was under $400,000. In nearly half, the price was $200,000 or less. The one exception was Davis, Calif., where home prices are in the mid 400,000’s but plenty of other factors offset this. Drawing data from such sources as city-data.com, we scrutinized a variety of other factors. They included cost of living and the tax climate for retirees (generally a function of state law). We evaluated availability of hospitals and higher education (it’s never too late to keep learning). We took into account data for crime rates (almost all the towns listed register less than half the national crime rate) and air quality. Finally, we looked at mass transit options—-especially the proximity of rail–back to the big city. No single town excelled on every factor. But hey, life is full of trade-offs. We found plenty of interesting places worth your consideration. Not every suburb we highlight is a tiny burb. From a 1960 population under 4,000, the Dallas suburb of Plano now tops 260,000, one reason for its five hospitals. But average home prices barely nudge $200,000, there’s no state income tax and rail can take you to the big (or bigger) city 18 miles south. The smallest suburb on the list is Lauderdale, Minn., whose population of 2,200 sits just four miles from Minneapolis. The winters are cold, but homes go for less than $200,000. Here are 10 of the top suburbs for retirees: Broomfield, Colorado Thirteen miles northwest of Denver, this 55,000-person city enjoys easy access to the big city, a nearby hospital and college, low crime and good air quality. Average home price is less than $300,000, although the cost of living is 7% above the national average. Davis, California The average home price of $450,000 is the highest on our list. But this Sacramento suburb of 65,000 has a lot going for it anyway. Favorable factors include a local hospital, its own University of California campus and rail links to both Sacramento 15 miles east and the San Francisco Bay area 50 miles southwest. There are good weather and above-average air quality, too. Brentwood, Missouri Its population of 7,000 is on the smallish side, but this close-in St. Louis suburb (six miles) has a rail link, low crime, a low cost of living, and a home price average in the mid 200,000’s. Downsides are temperature extremes and below average air quality. Ft. Thomas, Kentucky Although in another state, this 15,000-person suburb is so close to Cincinnati--five miles--that buses on their route double-back to Kentucky. Typical homes go for under $200,000. Cost of living is 9% below the national average. There's also a local hospital. Meridian, Idaho Eight miles south of Boise, this 70,000-person suburb also has an average home price below $200,000. Other favorable factors include low crime, a hospital, a low cost of living, and Idaho's hospitable tax environment for retirees. Lauderdale, Minnesota The winters are cold in this close-in (four miles) Minneapolis suburb of barely 2,000 people. But the town has low crime, an average home price below $200,000, and a nearby hospital and college. One drawback: the cost of living is 15% above the national average. Allen, Texas With a median home price of barely $200,000, this northern Dallas suburb of 84,000 has a low cost of living and crime, that favorable Texas tax climate and a local hospital. It sits near rail to downtown Dallas. One drawback: below-average air quality. See the original article and more top suburbs for retirees at: http://realestate.yahoo.com/promo/americas-top-suburbs-for-retirees.html

One frustrated megalomanic wannabe and unfulfilled BDSM master trippin' on a fantasy dream.

Entertaining read. Very clever and talented writer. Knows how to get and keep your attention -- critical for a marketeer. Obviously a bitchin' queen. How else can one explain eight pairs of shoes.

You have to drink in better establishments.

Welcome back BBB! I watch the show occasionally... well a bit more than occasionally. Well written, good actors but a bit dark. I have to be in the mood. I recommend for anyone that likes good TV and can deal with not so happy trips.

I enjoy the summers in the Northwest or the Northeast, above or below the border. Try it.

You must be hell on escorts. lol

I got a much better price at Overstock that day. However, that can change on any day. Keep both in mind when you get down to business.

I've seen a couple of articles about companies getting near the point of pulling the plug on employer provided health care. Other businesses seem ready to phase it over to the employee by freezing and ultimately reducing dollar amount contributions as costs increase. (My employer did that over ten years ago.) Personally, I believe it is bad policy for employers to be the middle man. Bad for business and ultimately bad for the health care system. It inhibits American Business competitiveness with foreign companies who do not have that burden and shields much of the population from feeliing the daily pinch of the rising health care costs which does little to inhibit rising costs. As long as people can use as little or as much of health care services without feeling the cost of each visit or service it does nothing to cut back on unecssary visits or testing. To the contrary, if consumers have more day-to-day rubs with the expensiveness of health care then they would care more about getting the costs contained. Right now some third party takes care of it for them until time to set rates for the new year and business eats a lot of that... for now. However, as long as we have employer provided health care, I feel it is not only good health policy and business policy but imperative for fairness that all health care benefits should be taxed as regular income. It amounts to a government subsidy, nothing less. I know this would hit me hard as I have employer subsidized health care. However, if we do not get the system on a sound long term cost containment track then only the chosen will end up having health care. The government should not be in the business of subsidizing the chosen if they cannot subsidize everyone. I believe that commercial for-profit insurance companies are bad for the basic health care system. Profits, affordability, and not-optional health care are inconsistent concepts. I see nothing wrong with not-for-profits offering a nongoverment alternative which was the original concept for Blue Cross & Blue Shield before going Wall St. Only a few regional nonprofits are found: Mayo Clinics, Cleveland Clinic, and the hybrid nonprofit/profit Kaiser Permanente to name a some standouts. Not suprisingly these are well known for delivering high quality cost effective health care. I also favor a government option as a realistic alternative source of competition in health care. In my world I would see a single payer universal health care system or a cooperative effort of a pubic option with not-for-profits for basic health care coverage with supplemental insurance provided by not-for-profit and for-profit insurance companies for those that prefer expensive brand name drugs over generics, private rooms or over semiprivate, extraordinary above-and-beyond end-of-life care coverage. That should meet the need of everyone with those who can afford more getting more.

What a dumb misuse of Craigslist!! Doesn't he know where to look? I guess those megabucks baseball contracts proceeds didn't last too long. Seems he settled into a life of crime when he wasn't hanging 10 on the maid. <-- literary license

Lenny Dykstra charged with indecent exposure in LA AP Associated Press LOS ANGELES (AP) Former New York Mets and Philadelphia Phillies outfielder Lenny Dykstra has been charged in Los Angeles for allegedly exposing himself to women he met on Craigslist. The city attorney's office said Thursday the 48-year-old former baseball star could face up to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine for each indecent exposure count. Dykstra is accused of finding victims by placing online ads seeking personal assistants or housekeepers. He allegedly exposed himself to women who responded to the ads on several occasions between 2009 and 2011. County records show Dykstra has been jailed since June on $455,000 bail on car theft and drug possession charges. He also faces bankruptcy fraud charges. Mark Hathaway, whose law office represented Dykstra in the past, does not know who is now representing Dykstra. See original article at: http://news.yahoo.com/lenny-dykstra-charged-indecent-exposure-la-011715723.html

When Steve Jobs shorts himself the handwriting is on the wall. He did not retire, he resigned. Wish this analysis were wrong. He's a tech giant of the 20th Century, not to imply he is any less in the 21st.

Amazon is my first shopping stop. I have gotten some earth-shattering bargains there like a 42in flatscreen plasma TV for $699 with free shipping when the competition was charging $200-$400 more. I get most items usally with free shipping. Occasionally, I find a better price elsewhere and buy it, but not often. I also check Overstock.com for appropriate items. I got a queen size 10" memory foam mattress for $339 + $2 shopping. Check the local and other online quotes. Nothing close.

I think your view would be more credible if they were polling students not applicants. If they are seeking to recruit gay students then they should say so on their application along with other minorities they actively seek. If not then they should not inquire at all. Also, often it is quite easy for a single adminstrator with clout to deny admission. Any college worth attending has many more applicants that slots available. If the administrator finds it undesirable to outright veto an admission on his own then it is quite easy to steer an admission away from one student to another based on any number of tangible and intangible considerations.