Just before 2 pm EDT, the New York City Police Department called via Twitter for photos of citizens with its officers. Almost immediately the campaign #myNYPD seemed to backfire, as users flooded the hashtag with photos decrying alleged police brutality.
My Dad asked me last night why I carry my 1911 in the house, what am I afraid of? I looked him straight in the eye and said, “The Goddamn Decepticons.” He laughed, I laughed, the toaster laughed, I shot the toaster. It was a good time.
California requires all chefs and bartender to use gloves…in the name of cleanliness.
"One by one, we’ll take away all your freedom through regulation." - Progressives
Idk about bartenders and waitresses… But anyone preparing food needs gloves.
Rubber gloves are an insult to culinary chefs who have been preparing food for generations without them.
I’m not saying it’s not insulting, it’s a change that they may have to accept as food safety continues to develop and improve. My family runs a restaurant and it’s not to be insulting to anyone, but it’s for customer safety. Everything you do as a restaurant is for the customer. It would be however unreasonable to ask a hooters waitress or a night club bartender to wear gloves. It’s more about the experience and presentation at that point of the food preparation.
Maybe you think it’s unreasonable to ask a waitress or bartender to wear gloves, but obviously someone else thinks otherwise in California. However, I think it’s unreasonable to ask a chef with years of experience and an impeccable food safety record to have to wear gloves just because you think it’s unsafe.
So, who’s right? Here’s a thought: how about you worry about your restaurant, let that chef worry about his/her restaurant, and let that bartender decide if they want to use gloves like a tool or not? Everyone wins or loses based on their decision. That’s freedom. Forcing everyone to wear gloves based on one person’s decision, from possibly a thousand miles away from your business, is not freedom.
Well. As a customer, I would rather eat at a restaurant where the chef wears gloves. It makes me feel that the food is safer. This isn’t the past where honor based on the people of the past is more important than safety and technology are seen as insult to skilled people.
The concept is to use a tool to improve the quality of the product (In this case, hygiene). This concept is applicable to other things, such as me shifting from a mouse to a tablet, in terms of drawing tools. I had years of history of drawing with a mouse. I can say that I have a history of being able to draw well without it and I can be all prideful and refuse my chance of getting my tablet. But in the end, my tablet drawings are better than my mouse drawings. It’s also applicable to this one. Another point is that there are gross bacteria behind our fingernails. You know that as your fingernail grows, you’d notice some sort of black-ish thing appearing that you can scrape out with either a nail clipper or your other finger? We accumulate dirt in that area as we use our fingers. And that includes preparing food.Also, it’ll help the chef. Some people don’t like getting their hands dirty. And getting your hands dirty while preparing food is almost inevitable. The gloves can help the chef feel more comfortable.
However, these kinds of gloves can cause cross contamination, are less likely to be clean regularly, they will also cost more. Most food places in the States, not sure about any where else, already required the employees to keep their hands clean, and fingernails short.
And I have cooked in these type gloves, and its not very practical as the food was slippery. This shouldn’t have been a mandatory thing.
In which case the gloves should be improved too, if the gloves create new problems.
You just captured the progressive mindset so well. Just keep changing things over and over despite never really tackling the original problem. Again, if rubber gloves worked so well…everyone would naturally be using them over time.
"If progress were useful, it would be tradition"?
"If a solution to a barely nonexistent problem causes problem we need to put more problems in the problem to fix the problem we created to fix an imaginary problem"
"Well. As a customer, I would rather eat at a restaurant where the chef wears gloves." Then go there, simple. If you’re really that bothered by it when you enter a restaurant ask to go and have a look at the kitchen (they have to show you and if they dont, leave). If it meets your standards, eat, if not go elsewhere. Simple.
No need for government intervention to solve a total non-issue in the first place.
^ Thank you, that is what I was going to point out. I couldn’t believe that was overlooked in the original argument.
(Besides that, is there any science to back gloves being more cleanly, or is this legislation based simply on *intention* to make things more sanitary?)
I had to read it a few times to make sure nobody else pointed that out. lol. It was as if christmas had come to allow me to point out something so simple and obvious when I had only just got up and my mind wasn’t functioning properly. haha.
If there was actual science to back it up insurance companies would have given restaurant owners a notice in some form long before the government got ahold of it. If there was evidence there would have been some form of public health campaign long before the insurance companies even got onto it.
There are only two ways government can react. A. Slowly. B. Over nothing. This seems to be the latter
That’s clever, I like that, “there are two ways government can react” thing. Mind if I borrow it in future?
The default autocomplete on my phone contains the entire phrase:
"… the most important thing is that the government doesn’t use its legal monopoly on the use of force to…"
And that’s pretty much all you need to know about my political philosophy.