by tafda on 5/12/23, 2:24 AM with 29 comments
by smt88 on 5/12/23, 3:16 AM
2. If this is the worst thing we can find about the ban (a wealthy celebrity chef deciding not to open a chain restaurant in a shopping center) then it has no bearing on my opinion of the ban. We don't complain about bank regulations because they're forced to deny loans to people like this, do we?
by Kim_Bruning on 5/12/23, 8:18 AM
In Europe we've been having this gas issue due to the Ukraine war and associated sanctions over and back. Gas went really expensive. A lot of people were wearing extra sweaters and using extra blankets this winter to save money.
From this we've learned that being reliant on Things That Run Out is not a good idea at all.
For all that, it seems like the lesson was only local. I guess people really don't learn lessons vicariously. :-/
by knewter on 5/12/23, 3:53 PM
by rhaway84773 on 5/12/23, 11:58 AM
You can still buy and use a gas stove. You just have to get a cylinder to drive it. You don’t get to freeload off expensive infrastructure that the city and other residents pay for.
by sfmike on 5/12/23, 5:46 AM
by aaron695 on 5/12/23, 5:14 AM
All such cooking puts out harmful air particles. Gas is a fraction more. You need good rangehoods and ventilation to solve this problem. Ventilation should be happening for disease control anyway.
In a world were we showed there are no big plans for big issues, having restaurants being able to serve food in blackouts matter.
To the article, any good chef will adapt, sadly schadenfreude rarely happens.
If there's a big event California won't reap what they sow and everyone dies, Texas will help them out. It's more about death by a thousand cuts to everyone around them.
Wealth that could have been created to solve real problems, including in the poorer states won't happen, ventilation will stay an issue and Bay Area restaurants will keep the hipsters happy for decades to come.
by midoridensha on 5/12/23, 2:58 AM