Forums » Off-Topic
If you can find it, try Czechvar - the original Budweiser recipe.
If by "original" you mean the original Pilsner recipe, then wasn't that actually Pilsner Urquelle? I may be mistaken, they're both from the same region.
Anyway, if it's beer your after, you really should make sure you don't neglect to sample as many craft brews as possible from the Northwest (or Southwest, depending on your geographical orientation), particularly Oregon, and if you're in the neighbourhood, British Columbia (although Northern California and Washington have plenty as well).
And if you ever, ever see anything on tap labeled "Cask-aged" you owe it to yourself to try it. My mouth is watering just thinking about it.
If by "original" you mean the original Pilsner recipe, then wasn't that actually Pilsner Urquelle? I may be mistaken, they're both from the same region.
Anyway, if it's beer your after, you really should make sure you don't neglect to sample as many craft brews as possible from the Northwest (or Southwest, depending on your geographical orientation), particularly Oregon, and if you're in the neighbourhood, British Columbia (although Northern California and Washington have plenty as well).
And if you ever, ever see anything on tap labeled "Cask-aged" you owe it to yourself to try it. My mouth is watering just thinking about it.
To be accurate, the beer called "Czechvar" here is the original "Budweiser" in Europe, and is similar (but better) than the Anheiser Busch/North American Budweiser. The European Bud predates the North American version by a century or so. I'm not a fan of either, but I was attempting to lead a fellow beer drinker to the literal dark side in baby steps.
Peytros, I'll let you know how I came to love the PBR: $1 pints of either PBR, Honey Brown or Michael Shea's. You drink the PBR because Honey Brown is sweeter than candy and if you wanted to drink Sam Adams, you'd order one.
hehe it was a joke divisionbyzero PBR has become fashionable with the young urbanite crowd because of its old school blue collar roots
To be accurate, the beer called "Czechvar" here is the original "Budweiser" in Europe
Interesting. I've actually seen Budweiser Budvar up here, so I never made that connection.
Interesting. I've actually seen Budweiser Budvar up here, so I never made that connection.
Rare.
Although, a good roast beef is great when kept in the oven at 65°C for a few hours.
Although, a good roast beef is great when kept in the oven at 65°C for a few hours.
Living in Norway spoils you in so many ways. A fairly bleh steak served by a decent restaurant is still fine to order medium rear. Most places will serve you very good "rare" steaks, but if you order in an american dialect (which I might, as that's what my wife and I speak together), you might wish to make sure of what "rear" entails for you.
I've been known to order it "still mooing" from pretty decent places, but if you've got a star in the guide, I pretty much just assume the chef knows what he's doing with food. That has only failed me once so far (and that was bloody sad).
The other spoiling bit is money. I see $50 for a dinner and my reaction is "hey, that's the same as going to a random restaurant in Norway and ordering meat". To put things into perspective, a hamburger at Friday's[1] is about $30. A glass of "house red" will set you back $10-15 most places. Then again, minimum wage is around $15, someone sitting and beeping your groceries is probably making $20 an hour or so.
This makes visiting wife's family in the US quite fun. Unless you do what I did, and think "how bad can this place be?" Truth is, in certain places, it can be *BAD*. Spoiled I be. :-/
[1] Friday's in Norway is pretty good actually, we had a waiter from Washington DC who said she'd never eat at one in the US, and was shocked when she got to Oslo and friends took her to eat at one. She ended up getting a job there.
I've been known to order it "still mooing" from pretty decent places, but if you've got a star in the guide, I pretty much just assume the chef knows what he's doing with food. That has only failed me once so far (and that was bloody sad).
The other spoiling bit is money. I see $50 for a dinner and my reaction is "hey, that's the same as going to a random restaurant in Norway and ordering meat". To put things into perspective, a hamburger at Friday's[1] is about $30. A glass of "house red" will set you back $10-15 most places. Then again, minimum wage is around $15, someone sitting and beeping your groceries is probably making $20 an hour or so.
This makes visiting wife's family in the US quite fun. Unless you do what I did, and think "how bad can this place be?" Truth is, in certain places, it can be *BAD*. Spoiled I be. :-/
[1] Friday's in Norway is pretty good actually, we had a waiter from Washington DC who said she'd never eat at one in the US, and was shocked when she got to Oslo and friends took her to eat at one. She ended up getting a job there.
Heyas Al!
And - Holy Crap $20 an hour? I'm moving to Norway and leaving my family here, I'll live on minimal diet and send money back to my family in the States.
And - Holy Crap $20 an hour? I'm moving to Norway and leaving my family here, I'll live on minimal diet and send money back to my family in the States.
It's all relative, as terjekv points out. I make a lot of money by most standards, but I also live in one of the most expensive places - so it's kind of a wash. If I could be paid my current salary but conveniently live in a cheaper area, that would be sweet.
House red usually goes for about $6 around here though, and $10-15 would get you a phenomenally good glass of wine - assuming such a wine would be sold by the glass.
House red usually goes for about $6 around here though, and $10-15 would get you a phenomenally good glass of wine - assuming such a wine would be sold by the glass.
I'm moving to Norway and leaving my family here, I'll live on minimal diet and send money back to my family in the States.
Why not? It works for a large portion of Mexico's population.
I make a lot of money by most standards, but I also live in one of the most expensive places - so it's kind of a wash.
Well, there's one place it's not a wash: the IRS. Make $100k working 40 hours a week in a rural area with low cost of living? Scraping by on $100k working 80 hours a week in a city with the highest cost of living in the entire country? You pay the same, because that's progressive!
Why not? It works for a large portion of Mexico's population.
I make a lot of money by most standards, but I also live in one of the most expensive places - so it's kind of a wash.
Well, there's one place it's not a wash: the IRS. Make $100k working 40 hours a week in a rural area with low cost of living? Scraping by on $100k working 80 hours a week in a city with the highest cost of living in the entire country? You pay the same, because that's progressive!
Make $100k working 40 hours a week in a rural area with low cost of living? Scraping by on $100k working 80 hours a week in a city with the highest cost of living in the entire country? You pay the same, because that's progressive!
Oversimplifying an issue to skew an argument ftw!
And - Holy Crap $20 an hour? I'm moving to Norway and leaving my family here, I'll live on minimal diet and send money back to my family in the States.
I have an amigo who got a gig in London making twice what he made at home who had the exact same idea as you Leebs. He quickly found out that the cost of living was more than twice as much as of home, and had essentially taken a paycut :P
Oversimplifying an issue to skew an argument ftw!
And - Holy Crap $20 an hour? I'm moving to Norway and leaving my family here, I'll live on minimal diet and send money back to my family in the States.
I have an amigo who got a gig in London making twice what he made at home who had the exact same idea as you Leebs. He quickly found out that the cost of living was more than twice as much as of home, and had essentially taken a paycut :P
Come to Switzerland! We pay a lot, ask for a lot, but less than London, plus you can save taxes by moving just a few kilometers (I'm not kidding! If you think the US tax system is complicated or idiotic, come look at ours. Or the Germans').
Oversimplifying an issue to skew an argument ftw!
Um, no, Gav. My whole point was that the US tax code is the oversimplification. The idea that two individuals earning the same amount of money should, no matter what, pay the same federal income tax rate is blindingly stupid--and is, in fact, the opposite of "progressivity" in a tax code.
The two easiest things to take into account would be variations in cost of living where the taxpayer is domiciled, and the hours worked during the taxable year. Tweaking to take account of the fact that $100k in NYC and $100k in Richmond, Virginia are two very different levels of income, and that the guy who works 80-100 hour weeks for his $100k is not getting paid at the same rate as the guy who gets his $100k for 40 hours a week, would go a looooong way towards making the current system much more progressive.
But feel free to actually argue a point, if you happen to have one.
Um, no, Gav. My whole point was that the US tax code is the oversimplification. The idea that two individuals earning the same amount of money should, no matter what, pay the same federal income tax rate is blindingly stupid--and is, in fact, the opposite of "progressivity" in a tax code.
The two easiest things to take into account would be variations in cost of living where the taxpayer is domiciled, and the hours worked during the taxable year. Tweaking to take account of the fact that $100k in NYC and $100k in Richmond, Virginia are two very different levels of income, and that the guy who works 80-100 hour weeks for his $100k is not getting paid at the same rate as the guy who gets his $100k for 40 hours a week, would go a looooong way towards making the current system much more progressive.
But feel free to actually argue a point, if you happen to have one.
So you want an overly complicated, bureaucratic nightmare of a tax system that essentially taxes leisure time? How very Socialist of you Lecter. I'm impressed.
local governments would be totally fucked if we taxed people based on cost of living. essencialy people would be moving around all the fucking time.
and this is why i'd support a flat tax, dunno what % it'd have to be at, but it'd be alot simpler. granted id really much more support a complete abolition of the income tax system, in favor of a national sales tax, simply because i don't like the idea taxing the generation of wealth. but that aint going to happen in my lifetime
Heya Lebs. :-)
And yeah, it's expensive here, but I'm very happy to live here. I've had job offers from two places in the US, one in Austria and a few other places, and I'm quite content by being where I am.
Besides, 36 hour workweeks for the big win as a sysadmin.
And yeah, it's expensive here, but I'm very happy to live here. I've had job offers from two places in the US, one in Austria and a few other places, and I'm quite content by being where I am.
Besides, 36 hour workweeks for the big win as a sysadmin.
an overly complicated, bureaucratic nightmare of a tax system that essentially taxes leisure time
Complication and bureaucracy have never once stood in the way of taxation before, Gav, at least not here in the U.S. Would I prefer a relatively low flat tax on income, maybe trifurcated at some fairly broad levels (i.e., 10% of all income up to and including $50,000, 15% of all income over $50,000 and up to and including $1,000,000, and 35% of all income over $1,000,000), with shortfalls from current tax reciepts (already too large a percentage of GDP, but we'll pretend a functional U.S. federal government needs that much funding) being collected through a VAT? Probably, though the failure to tax the choice to engage in excessive leisure time still strikes me as fundamentally unfair and, more importantly, economically perverse.
peypey apparently doesn't move very much, or understand just how infrequently the government has to recalibrate the metrics on which it bases its taxation fiats. Own property in the US with a currently assessed value that's less than half of what it was assessed at back in 2007? Guess what, you're paying property tax on that 2007 value until and unless the state decides to reassess the property--something they have this marked disinclination to do when property values drop.
Complication and bureaucracy have never once stood in the way of taxation before, Gav, at least not here in the U.S. Would I prefer a relatively low flat tax on income, maybe trifurcated at some fairly broad levels (i.e., 10% of all income up to and including $50,000, 15% of all income over $50,000 and up to and including $1,000,000, and 35% of all income over $1,000,000), with shortfalls from current tax reciepts (already too large a percentage of GDP, but we'll pretend a functional U.S. federal government needs that much funding) being collected through a VAT? Probably, though the failure to tax the choice to engage in excessive leisure time still strikes me as fundamentally unfair and, more importantly, economically perverse.
peypey apparently doesn't move very much, or understand just how infrequently the government has to recalibrate the metrics on which it bases its taxation fiats. Own property in the US with a currently assessed value that's less than half of what it was assessed at back in 2007? Guess what, you're paying property tax on that 2007 value until and unless the state decides to reassess the property--something they have this marked disinclination to do when property values drop.
readjusting a property tax is much different then adjusting an income tax based on standard of living. while property is a physical thing the cost of living can vary from person to person
Nobody's suggesting that the actual cost of living be determined for a given tax payer, asshat. Broad regional divisions aren't that hard to draw and they really don't shift that much. Fixing a line is ultimately far more important than drawing one with perfect accuracy.
Moreover, it's not something that has to be tied to actual cost (unlike property tax). It merely needs to be relative to some hypothetical floor: i.e., $100k in D.C. is 15% less actual income than a $100k income earned in the hypothetical floor; $100k in bumfucknowhere is 1% less than, $100k in NYC is 30% less than, $100k in London is 35% less than, etc. Because the cost of living relative to the rest of the country doesn't vary that much (property values have crashed nationwide, but buying a condo in NYC is still ten times more expensive than buying one in Richmond, VA), this doesn't even need constant tweaking.
My point re: property taxes was just that, to the extent tweaking would be required, it hardly needs to be done in real time. That's apparently never a requirement for exercising the taxation power.
Moreover, it's not something that has to be tied to actual cost (unlike property tax). It merely needs to be relative to some hypothetical floor: i.e., $100k in D.C. is 15% less actual income than a $100k income earned in the hypothetical floor; $100k in bumfucknowhere is 1% less than, $100k in NYC is 30% less than, $100k in London is 35% less than, etc. Because the cost of living relative to the rest of the country doesn't vary that much (property values have crashed nationwide, but buying a condo in NYC is still ten times more expensive than buying one in Richmond, VA), this doesn't even need constant tweaking.
My point re: property taxes was just that, to the extent tweaking would be required, it hardly needs to be done in real time. That's apparently never a requirement for exercising the taxation power.