Readers on food inequality in eastern Europe(theguardian.com)
theguardian.com
Readers on food inequality in eastern Europe
https://www.theguardian.com/inequality/2017/sep/21/in-eastern-europe-we-dont-prefer-to-eat-garbage-readers-on-food-inequality?CMP=fb_gu
130 comments
> Toilet paper is rough, flimsy and will actually give you paper cuts.
Toilet paper is used in a location where I do NOT want to have a paper cut!
Toilet paper is used in a location where I do NOT want to have a paper cut!
A very good example of information and power assymetry in consumer vs corporation relations.
Why can’t anyone open their own stores in Romania, and just sell quality food at reasonable prices?
In the Czech Republic, there are Vietnamese people who make their living buying food in Germany and selling it here. Doing so is illegal. I'm not sure why.
Find out why it’s illegal and you’ve likely pinpointed the real cause of the problem.
Its probably not illegal necessarily, you can certainly sell imported food. The way they are doing it is probably illegal (loading up a van with food and driving it across the border without declaring it/having it inspected/having permits/etc).
It should be possible to sell the same goods for roughly the same prices anywhere in the EU. My guess is the problem here is a lack of a demand for higher quality foodstuffs.
But if the Vietnamese can make money selling German food for more than German prices (they have to make a profit ;) ) in the Czech Republic, then obviously demand exists.
There is a lot of regulation on food exports and imports in the world, which limits availability and global competition, making it very hard to open their own stores with better food.
The whole idea of the EU was you could import the same things under the same terms in every EU country. Why is that not happening here?
Are you saying that the local supermarkets are oblivious to the quality of the goods on their shelves, or that the local supermarket is also colluding (presumably in an anti-competitive conspiracy) to force lower quality products on local consumers?
i don't have proof for the second so won't make a statement like that, but i do live in eastern europe and the difference after a few hours drive west is noticeable. less/none palm oil in food, more detergent per unit of mass in washing powder, etc. - that's just reading the labels of otherwise same brand names.
On the other hand they are in a unified market with fixed fees, are limited in their ability to import outside of the EU, have little to no direct control over subsidies and will not be able to afford the same food prices that the richer countries pay nor do they have the ability to economically grow some many of the food items in question like the Mediterranean basin European countries do.
The sad truth is when you are the poor fellow and had given up sovereignty over the many of the economic tools available to sovereign nation states you'll get shafted no matter what.
The sad truth is when you are the poor fellow and had given up sovereignty over the many of the economic tools available to sovereign nation states you'll get shafted no matter what.
I'm 43 years old Pole who has seen commie land times and witnessed progress we made after joining EU. Without EU we would still be 30yrs behind (see Ukraine - no offence but they are way behind).
Not saying EU is perfect, just the net effect of EU is progress.
Not saying EU is perfect, just the net effect of EU is progress.
Maybe you forgot the part where they can export to other EU countries without any fees and barriers, and this has increased the GDP much faster than their neighbors outside of the EU (like eg Ukraine, even before the Crimea affair).
I didn't forget in fact I've specifically mentioned that EU members do not have full control over their trade policies or tariffs.
This isn't an argument against the EU as a whole it's the reality of the circumstances.
When both rich and poor countries are forced to import from the same sources at the same rates which are designed to protect the producers rather then the consumers the prices rise and they are forced to compete at the price per unit which also directly translates to the final consumer price.
Bulgaria, Romania or Denmark can't reduce their import tarrifs on tomatoes from a specific EU country, they can't even control the import tariffs from non EU countries.
This isn't an argument against the EU as a whole it's the reality of the circumstances.
When both rich and poor countries are forced to import from the same sources at the same rates which are designed to protect the producers rather then the consumers the prices rise and they are forced to compete at the price per unit which also directly translates to the final consumer price.
Bulgaria, Romania or Denmark can't reduce their import tarrifs on tomatoes from a specific EU country, they can't even control the import tariffs from non EU countries.
Bulgaria, Romania or Denmark can't reduce their import tariffs on tomatoes from a specific EU country... because tariffs between EU countries are already 0. Moreover, only Eurozone countries have fixed exchange rates, the other ones - which include almost all former Soviet block members - can still change those rates.
Having tarrifs at zero is a problem.
You assume that Denmark would enforce the same or lower tarrifs than a poorer nation on some basic goods.
Smaller nations also can have negative import tarrifs on some goods in order to allow thier importers to compete with bigger consumers. Which you cannot do in the EU.
The EU as a whole also has trade agreements with many of the regional non EU members.
These argeemnts also enforce protective tariffs to reduce the competitiveness of non EU imports. The EU also requires its trade partners to meet EU regulations which increase the prices of exports to begin with.
You assume that Denmark would enforce the same or lower tarrifs than a poorer nation on some basic goods.
Smaller nations also can have negative import tarrifs on some goods in order to allow thier importers to compete with bigger consumers. Which you cannot do in the EU.
The EU as a whole also has trade agreements with many of the regional non EU members.
These argeemnts also enforce protective tariffs to reduce the competitiveness of non EU imports. The EU also requires its trade partners to meet EU regulations which increase the prices of exports to begin with.
[deleted]
Dogma is a very suitable username here.
The whole point of the EEC then EU is no tariffs inter nation.
You are criticizing something you have either invented or severely misunderstood.
Or it’s just copy paste talking point.
The whole point of the EEC then EU is no tariffs inter nation.
You are criticizing something you have either invented or severely misunderstood.
Or it’s just copy paste talking point.
So when I mentioned that the internal tariffs are zero (which also prevents negative tariffs) and that external tariffs with non-EU nations that have existing trade agreements with the EU are both fixed and protective you infer from that that I don't know and don't understand this fact?
I think you missed the part which talks about people actually crossing borders to shop the more expensive versions of products.
I remember this happening regularly in the 1990s when people from ex-Yugoslavia drove over to Italy/Austria to shop for better quality (although more expensive) products.
I remember this happening regularly in the 1990s when people from ex-Yugoslavia drove over to Italy/Austria to shop for better quality (although more expensive) products.
Some wealthy people cross the border.
The net annual disposable household income in Hungary is $15,000 in Italy it's 25,000, in France it's 30,000.
This isn't an argument against the EU, it's the reality of a highly regulatory market with a plethora of constraints but with the general premise of a free market economy in which the highest bidder wins.
This isn't an argument against the EU, it's the reality of a highly regulatory market with a plethora of constraints but with the general premise of a free market economy in which the highest bidder wins.
Hmm, I wouldn't call families that do that wealthy by any account. (At times my family did that the average salary in the country was about $8,000 - in 1995).
I don't think you'll find many Romanians that'd like to leave the EU. Even simply due to the net money flow from the EU into Romania.
I didn't say they should leave the EU but they also can't really win in a fight against the purchasing power of wealthier countries in a single market when they can't import out of it other than via the existing EU channels.
Denmark imports tomatoes from Italy at the same duty rates as Bulgaria which are zero. Denmark has more money, normally countries would enforce both import and export duties since there are no duties effectively Bulgaria and Denmark and Bulgaria can only compete on price per unit and neither country can use any other tool to control the price.
If Bulgaria wants to import Tomatoes from say Turkey or Israel they also have to go through the EU red tape and effectively pay a "fixed" price which is more or less set to protect EU tomatoes growers.
Bulgria also cannot subsidize Tomatoes for the most part without violating EU regulations.
Now Bulgria gains a lot form being an EU nation, having lesser tomatoes is the price they pay.
Denmark imports tomatoes from Italy at the same duty rates as Bulgaria which are zero. Denmark has more money, normally countries would enforce both import and export duties since there are no duties effectively Bulgaria and Denmark and Bulgaria can only compete on price per unit and neither country can use any other tool to control the price.
If Bulgaria wants to import Tomatoes from say Turkey or Israel they also have to go through the EU red tape and effectively pay a "fixed" price which is more or less set to protect EU tomatoes growers.
Bulgria also cannot subsidize Tomatoes for the most part without violating EU regulations.
Now Bulgria gains a lot form being an EU nation, having lesser tomatoes is the price they pay.
What tools do “sovereign” nations have that could solve this problem? Can’t be tariffs, which are a tool to enrich the few while making the rest poorer.
Maybe poorer people can’t afford the same levels of food quality as richer peoples, and the only solution is to grow your GDP faster, which membership in EU seems to enable.
Maybe poorer people can’t afford the same levels of food quality as richer peoples, and the only solution is to grow your GDP faster, which membership in EU seems to enable.
Stronger regulation and enforcement of regulations.
you can’t regulate your way to prosperity, regulations are costs, not benefits.
There is a very simple question here. How much cheaper is this lower quality food?
I think no-one disputes that the food is lower quality. The question is how much of a discount this gets, and why stores haven't created more expensive better quality options.
I recall an item on Dutch news that seemed to state that Romanians wanted the same products as Austria at a lower price. This is unlikely to be accurate reporting, because that stance is obviously unreasonable. That is presuming the desired price differential isn't just reflective of the cost savings by potentially having lower payed employees.
I think no-one disputes that the food is lower quality. The question is how much of a discount this gets, and why stores haven't created more expensive better quality options.
I recall an item on Dutch news that seemed to state that Romanians wanted the same products as Austria at a lower price. This is unlikely to be accurate reporting, because that stance is obviously unreasonable. That is presuming the desired price differential isn't just reflective of the cost savings by potentially having lower payed employees.
> There is a very simple question here. How much cheaper is this lower quality food?
The article states that at least in some cases the inferior food is _more expensive_.
From the article: Nobody has an appetite for inferior food – and the solution is, most of the time, “add more sugar”. If you add to this the fact that food is generally more expensive in Romania [...]
The article states that at least in some cases the inferior food is _more expensive_.
From the article: Nobody has an appetite for inferior food – and the solution is, most of the time, “add more sugar”. If you add to this the fact that food is generally more expensive in Romania [...]
I think the more problematic thing is that the corporations effectively lie - Milka, Nutella, etc. will have the exact same packaging but notably different contents. I doubt it would be such a huge issue if the brands would differ, but effectively saying "eh, those eastern europeans don't deserve the same amount of chocolate in their Milka!" doesn't stand well with a lot of people.
"eh, those eastern europeans don't deserve the same amount of chocolate in their Milka!"
I can't imagine any executive saying that. That makes no sense. Why would they?
My best guess is that either people are unwilling (or unable) to pay the same price as their Austrian / Belgian / French counterparts for the same product, or the cost of selling the same product and doing business in EE is somehow higher (e.g. due to required kickbacks and high level political corruption) meaning these companies end up with less profits operating in these countries and end up taking a shortcut to maintain their profit margins.
Or they actually make more from operating in EE, ending up with higher margins just because they can. That's also a possibility.
I can't imagine any executive saying that. That makes no sense. Why would they?
My best guess is that either people are unwilling (or unable) to pay the same price as their Austrian / Belgian / French counterparts for the same product, or the cost of selling the same product and doing business in EE is somehow higher (e.g. due to required kickbacks and high level political corruption) meaning these companies end up with less profits operating in these countries and end up taking a shortcut to maintain their profit margins.
Or they actually make more from operating in EE, ending up with higher margins just because they can. That's also a possibility.
OMG, high level of political corruption while selling chocolate to end customers via (ofter foreign company owned) private retail chains. That is quite a stereotype at work here.
What I usually see in Vienna is Milka at 0.99Eur price for 100g package. Slovak price tend to be bit higher at around 1.19Eur for 100g, with 0.99Eur used as promo price. I never actually bothered to compare ingredients.
Please consider that selling to end customers is selling to certains price points, regardless the costs to a large degree. Milka is sold as premium chocolate bar with given price point. There’s plenty of competition both cheaper and more expensive. This is all about marketing and until recently, people were not really sensitive to ingredients, so they went with whatever is cheapest to produce within some margins of customer satisfaction.
So, I think your last statement is what is considered around here to be true.
What I usually see in Vienna is Milka at 0.99Eur price for 100g package. Slovak price tend to be bit higher at around 1.19Eur for 100g, with 0.99Eur used as promo price. I never actually bothered to compare ingredients.
Please consider that selling to end customers is selling to certains price points, regardless the costs to a large degree. Milka is sold as premium chocolate bar with given price point. There’s plenty of competition both cheaper and more expensive. This is all about marketing and until recently, people were not really sensitive to ingredients, so they went with whatever is cheapest to produce within some margins of customer satisfaction.
So, I think your last statement is what is considered around here to be true.
Obviously, corruption depends on the country -- Slovakia is not Romania, and is not Ukraine. Political corruption lives in most western countries as well, by the way, even if you don't notice it.
But as it happens, I know quite a wealthy family who got scammed for millions (through a corrupt notary) on a property deal in an EE country. It wasn't even a business dispute, just a scam.
When they took the matter to court, which should have been a clear "win" case, the judge(s) (even on appeal) ruled against them, so they had no way to recover their money. From that point of view, it is not unreasonable for me to assume corruption can (potentially) play a part of it. :)
But as it happens, I know quite a wealthy family who got scammed for millions (through a corrupt notary) on a property deal in an EE country. It wasn't even a business dispute, just a scam.
When they took the matter to court, which should have been a clear "win" case, the judge(s) (even on appeal) ruled against them, so they had no way to recover their money. From that point of view, it is not unreasonable for me to assume corruption can (potentially) play a part of it. :)
I’d write something long about corruption in Slovakia, but why should I try. It is obvious that corruption exists and must be improved, but I’d bet that this is not the root cause of different ingredients in Milka chocolate. Since we’re part of EU, there is very little (if anything) that needs to be done officially to sell food produced in other EU country, so I can hardly imagine any good reason for rampant corruption. Nobody is even arguing that food that is sold in EE is non-conforming to health codes (another possible reason for corruption). People complain that they get treated differently.
Personal anecdote - I visit Austria almost weekly due to business matters and never bothered to buy anything there just because I would consider it of better quality. I always assigned any perceived differences to placebo. I argued that detergent itself, once found and tested, is cheap enough to produce and most of the cost is marketing, packaging, shipping and profit. So why on earth would anyone cheat on detergent content. At most, maybe parfumes would be different due to local preferences etc. But few weeks ago, producers of laundry detergents reacted to public outcry due to these differences with answer that in western europe, people tend to wash clothes on 30C, so they put there much more enzymes (or what) than in EE, where people tend to wash on 40C. Sure they do, when you need to add much more detergent to clean anything on 30C... So go, figure.
Personal anecdote - I visit Austria almost weekly due to business matters and never bothered to buy anything there just because I would consider it of better quality. I always assigned any perceived differences to placebo. I argued that detergent itself, once found and tested, is cheap enough to produce and most of the cost is marketing, packaging, shipping and profit. So why on earth would anyone cheat on detergent content. At most, maybe parfumes would be different due to local preferences etc. But few weeks ago, producers of laundry detergents reacted to public outcry due to these differences with answer that in western europe, people tend to wash clothes on 30C, so they put there much more enzymes (or what) than in EE, where people tend to wash on 40C. Sure they do, when you need to add much more detergent to clean anything on 30C... So go, figure.
It's hard to define when this is problematic though. Coca Cola uses different recipes in the U.S. and in Mexico. A "Milky Way" is a completely different candy in America and in Europe, but sold in the same wrapper. The complaint here is that the Eastern European versions are worse, not just different, but it seems hard to legislate that.
> There is a very simple question here. How much cheaper is this lower quality food?
That's the kicker -- it isn't. Some stuff is more expensive.
E.g., Milka chocolate - 1 EUR in Germany is also 1 EUR in Bulgaria. But in Germany it's good and in Bulgaria, it's shit.
So, the question should be: How much higher are the profit margins in Eastern Europe?
That's the kicker -- it isn't. Some stuff is more expensive.
E.g., Milka chocolate - 1 EUR in Germany is also 1 EUR in Bulgaria. But in Germany it's good and in Bulgaria, it's shit.
So, the question should be: How much higher are the profit margins in Eastern Europe?
>I think no-one disputes that the food is lower quality
Most local raw produce is better. The packaged stuff is worse.
Most local raw produce is better. The packaged stuff is worse.
I kinda laughed at the "Capitalism hasn't delivered" line. Yes it has, the companies are selling food with the lowest cost to produce that they can legally sell and using collusion and marketing to avoid a quality arms race with competitors. I think they were just confused about what was promised.
> I think they were just confused about what was promised.
What, exactly, was promised to population when Romania (for example) switched to capitalism and opened its borders?
What, exactly, was promised to population when Romania (for example) switched to capitalism and opened its borders?
No doubt they were expecting meaningful economic growth. They got it.
Their economy has increased in size by roughly five fold since they switched to Capitalism, with zero population growth. They've gone from a GDP per capita of sub $2,000 to nearly $10,000 in that time. And it appears likely set to continue growing nicely in the coming decade. I'd be willing to bet that in another ~15 years they'll get to near $20,000 per capita, generally something closer to where Slovenia, Slovakia and Czech are today.
Their economy has increased in size by roughly five fold since they switched to Capitalism, with zero population growth. They've gone from a GDP per capita of sub $2,000 to nearly $10,000 in that time. And it appears likely set to continue growing nicely in the coming decade. I'd be willing to bet that in another ~15 years they'll get to near $20,000 per capita, generally something closer to where Slovenia, Slovakia and Czech are today.
AFAIK the same living standards the most advanced 2nd world countries (SI, CZ, SK, DDR) had in 1989 they reached at around 2005, so it's like almost 20 years wasted on reaching the same quality of life, and that only on average. Before those societies were much more equal, e.g. income difference was around 5x from highest level to lowest level, nowadays it's 1000000x (fueled often by corruption and dysfunctional Rechtstaat), so on average majority of the population likely had their living standards decline (in terms of debt, mortgages that didn't exist before etc.). So just looking at GDP and nominal value might not tell the whole story as inflation was about the same. It's probably like laughing at Russia and how much do they spend on army, but ignoring the costs might be 10x lower than in the US. We in Western Europe tend to have pretty biased optics when ignoring local realities.
Not much. They got to execute Ceaușescu, film it, and show it as a video at Xmas for at least a few years. The whole capitalist part was a sort of added bonus.
Funny Ceaușescu was considered "too progressive" in Warsaw Pact and wasn't invited to all top-level meetings. I've read he even built a highway on top of mountains to have an escape road in case WP's armies invaded RO.
> Funny Ceaușescu was considered "too progressive" in Warsaw Pact and wasn't invited to all top-level meetings.
Don't have actual insight here, but 'progressive' to a soviet bloc communist would likely mean 'ultra communist' e.g. hard line stalinist..
Don't have actual insight here, but 'progressive' to a soviet bloc communist would likely mean 'ultra communist' e.g. hard line stalinist..
Alright, then "dangerously regressive" would be a better term ;-)
He was kind of black sheep. In 1968, he refused to take part in the invasion of Czechoslovakia.
It's easy to pick on Capitalism, but I'd rather have cheap but low quality food on my table than no food at all[1].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980s_austerity_policy_in_Roma...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980s_austerity_policy_in_Roma...
Laughed as well. Maybe Capitalism will fix it if they boycott inferior goods. I’m assuming they probably don’t have a choice.
One choice is to make use of the plentiful local produce markets.
The problem there is that the best produce gets exported. I've seen garlic from China in supermarkets for example.
Ah yes... the infamous garlic from China in my local supermarket.
https://www.google.ca/search?q=chinese+garlic
Personally, I avoid it.
https://www.google.ca/search?q=chinese+garlic
Personally, I avoid it.
The google link you provided returns a snopes article about garlic roots, a blog post from McGill saying theres no problems with using human feces as fertilizer, and a bunch of natural/health food sites claiming Chinese garlic is filled with toxic chemicals. Is there any reputable source that says Chinese garlic is bad?
Why do you need a reputable source for that? Why not just taste it? That enough of reason to avoid chinese garlic.
Had no clue this was "a thing". I didn't buy it because "I can't believe we're importing garlic bla bla bla...".
Perhaps also the fact that food is costing 1/5th over there in Romania has something to do with it, for the multinationals.
There just isn't the same base profit to make there compared to, say France.
And I hate to say it, but it's perhaps it's safe to assume, that the French have a higher culinary tradition then any of the ex Soviet countries, where people's cuisine was very rudimentary.
Sure there are people shopping abroad, but it's a minority.
The average income in Romania is <$500 (1), so if you want to cater to people that have little money who want to buy branded products, something's gotta give.
-
1- https://www.romaniaexperience.com/what-is-the-minimum-and-av...
There just isn't the same base profit to make there compared to, say France.
And I hate to say it, but it's perhaps it's safe to assume, that the French have a higher culinary tradition then any of the ex Soviet countries, where people's cuisine was very rudimentary.
Sure there are people shopping abroad, but it's a minority.
The average income in Romania is <$500 (1), so if you want to cater to people that have little money who want to buy branded products, something's gotta give.
-
1- https://www.romaniaexperience.com/what-is-the-minimum-and-av...
> the French have a higher culinary tradition then any of the ex Soviet countries
None of the Eastern European countries now in the EU were ever "Soviet", with the exception of the Baltic countries that were occupied by USSR.
None of the Eastern European countries now in the EU were ever "Soviet", with the exception of the Baltic countries that were occupied by USSR.
Probably meant 'Soviet-bloc'.. but anyway.
The statement still presumes that culinary culture essentially didn't exist before communist times..
I would wager that pre-wwII food quality in France vs Romania was probably fairly similar..
The statement still presumes that culinary culture essentially didn't exist before communist times..
I would wager that pre-wwII food quality in France vs Romania was probably fairly similar..
As someone from Romania, I see this as a distribution problem and a consequence of consumer apathy. If you live in a few major urban centers, you can buy high-quality food, often the same products as in Western Europe, and the prices are within reach of the average city-dweller. The problem is that in smaller towns, the sole supermarket or two might source only lower-quality products, so you cannot buy better things no matter how much you want to or how much money you are willing to spend.
Wanting a quieter working environment, I recently moved from a big city to a village. The biggest shock for me is how bad the food that is sold here is. Village shops typically buy all their products from a wholesale store like Macro, sometimes the inferior versions of Western European brands, or often the generic brand. The tomato sauce is mostly sugar and food colouring, the chocolate has no actual chocolate in it, and these products are sold at the same prices as the high-quality food in the cities, so it is not a simple matter of rural people not being able to afford better. The people just accept what they get, and none of my new neighbours understands why I would complain.
So, while it may seem unfair to blame the bad food on the people who are the victims of it, if there were more concern from the rural/small-town Romanian public about their food, there might be room for competition and distributors would change to serve them.
Wanting a quieter working environment, I recently moved from a big city to a village. The biggest shock for me is how bad the food that is sold here is. Village shops typically buy all their products from a wholesale store like Macro, sometimes the inferior versions of Western European brands, or often the generic brand. The tomato sauce is mostly sugar and food colouring, the chocolate has no actual chocolate in it, and these products are sold at the same prices as the high-quality food in the cities, so it is not a simple matter of rural people not being able to afford better. The people just accept what they get, and none of my new neighbours understands why I would complain.
So, while it may seem unfair to blame the bad food on the people who are the victims of it, if there were more concern from the rural/small-town Romanian public about their food, there might be room for competition and distributors would change to serve them.
You are wrong. In the few major urban centers, you can buy the most expensive and supposedly high-quality food, but that food is still MUCH LOWER QUALITY than the one sold in Western Europe. And we're talking international brand names here too. E.g., for example, soft drinks and candy bars would be sold with HFCS instead of sugar, chocolate will have lower % cocoa. You will find artificial colorings, preservatives and, generally, all kinds of artificial flavor improvers over healthier, more natural ingredients that are found in the Western versions of the same products of the same brand names. And don't get me started on the quality of meat...
If you haven't noticed that, it is possible you just haven't travelled enough. I've lived for years in both Western and Eastern Europe, so I can tell you -- the differences are very stark and, IMHO, should be illegal.
If you haven't noticed that, it is possible you just haven't travelled enough. I've lived for years in both Western and Eastern Europe, so I can tell you -- the differences are very stark and, IMHO, should be illegal.
> for example, soft drinks and candy bars would be sold with HFCS instead of sugar, chocolate will have lower % cocoa. You will find artificial colorings, preservatives and, generally, all kinds of artificial flavor improvers over healthier, more natural ingredients that are found in the Western versions of the same products of the same brand names.
Are you talking about USA?
Are you talking about USA?
Nope, but it is generally well known to us, Europeans, that a lot of the food sold in the US is of lower quality, which is contributing to the US obesity epidemic, cancer rates, heart issues... This is starting to become a problem here too.
When I returned to the US after living in Western Europe, the hardest thing to adapt to was the quality of food in the supermarkets. I left the first two grocery stores empty-handed because nothing looked like food to me. It was all cardboard and plastic and sugar in all its various forms.
However, high quality food is available, but it requires time (to go where it is, since it isn't always distributed like the plastic-wrapped sugar stuff) and money, though not always more than the stores charge for mass-produced things.
However, high quality food is available, but it requires time (to go where it is, since it isn't always distributed like the plastic-wrapped sugar stuff) and money, though not always more than the stores charge for mass-produced things.
In the US, unlike most cities in Eastern Europe, you at least have the option to pay a premium and get high quality food.
> that food is still MUCH LOWER QUALITY than the one sold in Western Europe
It depends where you shop. A Profi will sell low-quality products regardless of whether it is in a big city or a small town. On the other hand, only in the big city can you shop at Mega Image, which sells a lot of products identical to their Western European versions. Its distribution network is much better than any of the competition. Carrefour and Auchan's more expensive generic brands are identical to that sold in the West (their cheaper generic brands, however, are such crap I don’t even know who would buy it). Meat, I don’t know because I don’t eat it.
It depends where you shop. A Profi will sell low-quality products regardless of whether it is in a big city or a small town. On the other hand, only in the big city can you shop at Mega Image, which sells a lot of products identical to their Western European versions. Its distribution network is much better than any of the competition. Carrefour and Auchan's more expensive generic brands are identical to that sold in the West (their cheaper generic brands, however, are such crap I don’t even know who would buy it). Meat, I don’t know because I don’t eat it.
> It depends where you shop
It does not.
You're not getting my point. You go to a Profi or Mega Image and you buy a Milka chocolate, it is the same Milka chocolate because there is only 1 distributor and this is the version of Milka chocolate that gets manufactured for Romania, Bulgaria, etc. And it's shit - it has less cocoa, it is 90g instead of 100g, it is filled with sugar substitutes.
You go to Germany, to an EDEKA or a REWE, and you buy the same Milk chocolate - it has higher % cocoa, it is 100g, it contains milk, cocoa and sugar, no chemical substitutes.
I can make the exact same point for soft drinks and pretty much all packaged goods. Hell, even things like laundry detergents are diluted compared to their western counterparts.
It does not.
You're not getting my point. You go to a Profi or Mega Image and you buy a Milka chocolate, it is the same Milka chocolate because there is only 1 distributor and this is the version of Milka chocolate that gets manufactured for Romania, Bulgaria, etc. And it's shit - it has less cocoa, it is 90g instead of 100g, it is filled with sugar substitutes.
You go to Germany, to an EDEKA or a REWE, and you buy the same Milk chocolate - it has higher % cocoa, it is 100g, it contains milk, cocoa and sugar, no chemical substitutes.
I can make the exact same point for soft drinks and pretty much all packaged goods. Hell, even things like laundry detergents are diluted compared to their western counterparts.
The whole point of going to a Mega Image is that you don’t have to buy a Milka. Instead, you can buy a Western European chocolate brand in its original Western European version, and for not significantly more money than that Milka would cost in a Profi or village shop.
Similarly, at a Carrefour or Auchan you could buy the generic-label chocolate, which is just the French version with a Romanian ingredients sticker pasted on it, for the same price as a Milka.
People in big cities have access to plenty of high-quality products if they just take advantage of that opportunity and ignore stuff like your Milka example. It is people in small towns and villages who are forced to buy shit food.
Similarly, at a Carrefour or Auchan you could buy the generic-label chocolate, which is just the French version with a Romanian ingredients sticker pasted on it, for the same price as a Milka.
People in big cities have access to plenty of high-quality products if they just take advantage of that opportunity and ignore stuff like your Milka example. It is people in small towns and villages who are forced to buy shit food.
Yeah and that is what people have been doing. But it's a pretty sad state of affairs when the best chocolate you can get is generic-label chocolate from Carrefour. Or, if you're lucky enough to live around one / can afford to shop at a place that imports foreign products from UK / Germany outside of the regular distributor network.
On the other hand, in Germany, you can buy a Milka pretty much anywhere and it is a good chocolate.
Also, this is not really about Milka, it is about thousands of products across dozens of categories, so we can't just ignore this as an isolated, one-off issue. That is why people are pissed.
On the other hand, in Germany, you can buy a Milka pretty much anywhere and it is a good chocolate.
Also, this is not really about Milka, it is about thousands of products across dozens of categories, so we can't just ignore this as an isolated, one-off issue. That is why people are pissed.
I think you are over generalizing. Local brands in Eastern Europe sell pretty high-quality food, but they sell it cheaper and don't make as much profit on it, than in Western Europe. Non-local brands, on the other hand, sometimes substitute their products with lower quality crap.
> Local brands in Eastern Europe sell pretty high-quality food
any examples?
> Non-local brands, on the other hand, sometimes substitute their products with lower quality crap
change 'sometimes' to 'very frequently' and that would be correct
any examples?
> Non-local brands, on the other hand, sometimes substitute their products with lower quality crap
change 'sometimes' to 'very frequently' and that would be correct
How big is the village?
Here in the US, this county of ~30,000 has 3 large supermarkets and many smaller grocers. The 10-15 miles distance to the supermarket means that the smaller places can't get away with selling total crap (it's rather rural, so people mostly have cars). The supermarkets all have store brands with decent quality and several national brands for most items.
Here in the US, this county of ~30,000 has 3 large supermarkets and many smaller grocers. The 10-15 miles distance to the supermarket means that the smaller places can't get away with selling total crap (it's rather rural, so people mostly have cars). The supermarkets all have store brands with decent quality and several national brands for most items.
I couldn’t actually tell you how many people live in this village or the whole comună of which it is a part. However, even being 10–15 km away from the nearest two larger towns does not help, because those two towns have only supermarket chains that are known for lower-quality products and inferior versions of Western European brands. If you really want a large selection of high-quality food, you would have to travel 60 km to the nearest major city, and that is too far for anyone’s regular shopping.
Having been to the US and spent time in some rural areas (I did work-and-travel in Alabama years ago), I would not be so quick to claim that your supermarkets have "decent quality". Most supermarket food in the US is much closer to the bad stuff I find in my village shop than the higher quality food you would find in Western Europe or the largest Romanian cities. But perhaps that is a topic for another thread.
Having been to the US and spent time in some rural areas (I did work-and-travel in Alabama years ago), I would not be so quick to claim that your supermarkets have "decent quality". Most supermarket food in the US is much closer to the bad stuff I find in my village shop than the higher quality food you would find in Western Europe or the largest Romanian cities. But perhaps that is a topic for another thread.
There's no fake chocolate being sold as chocolate or tomato sauce with food coloring in it. Perhaps I read too far into hyperbole?
> fake chocolate being sold as chocolate
A bunch of candy products have switched to being "chocolate flavored candy". Most candy in the US is total crap, because they've cut out all the parts that make it good to save money.
A bunch of candy products have switched to being "chocolate flavored candy". Most candy in the US is total crap, because they've cut out all the parts that make it good to save money.
Sure, despite having a sweet tooth I don't enjoy the majority of candy available here. But my phrasing holds up, even in Walmart you can read the packaging and find real dark chocolate (they stock https://www.ghirardelli.com/dark-chocolate-86-cacao-bar-(317... ).
> Most candy in the US is total crap, because they've cut out all the parts that make it good to save money.
That's almost entirely a myth. Along with the myth that most of the cheese sold in the US is "American Cheese" or "cheese product." These are fantasy lines of attack on the US for people looking for an excuse to bash.
Here are two more of those myths: the US only sells mediocre, watered down beer (that one has long since been destroyed, it rarely gets used now); and the US doesn't make any good domestic wine that is competitive with eg French wine.
The average Walmart (a mid to lower tier grocery) has a large, normal selection for real chocolate of all varieties (including European). Typically they will have a large half aisle filled with real chocolate candy products to choose from.
The US is the world's largest market for real chocolate.
That's almost entirely a myth. Along with the myth that most of the cheese sold in the US is "American Cheese" or "cheese product." These are fantasy lines of attack on the US for people looking for an excuse to bash.
Here are two more of those myths: the US only sells mediocre, watered down beer (that one has long since been destroyed, it rarely gets used now); and the US doesn't make any good domestic wine that is competitive with eg French wine.
The average Walmart (a mid to lower tier grocery) has a large, normal selection for real chocolate of all varieties (including European). Typically they will have a large half aisle filled with real chocolate candy products to choose from.
The US is the world's largest market for real chocolate.
> the US only sells mediocre, watered down beer (that one has long since been destroyed, it rarely gets used now)
I think that one isn't used so much because people hear that many American regions now have interesting microbrewery scenes. However, the major national brands are mediocre and watered down compared to many national German or Czech brands (that is the whole reason American regional microbreweries have been able to compete).
> a large, normal selection for real chocolate of all varieties (including European)
That European chocolate in American supermarkets is quite often the lowest-quality stuff from here. For example, Milka. My friends and I spent a lot of time laughing at what American supermarkets think is worth importing. You also see the same thing in India: the worst of European chocolate sold as some exotic, special product, but I would never touch that stuff at home.
I think that one isn't used so much because people hear that many American regions now have interesting microbrewery scenes. However, the major national brands are mediocre and watered down compared to many national German or Czech brands (that is the whole reason American regional microbreweries have been able to compete).
> a large, normal selection for real chocolate of all varieties (including European)
That European chocolate in American supermarkets is quite often the lowest-quality stuff from here. For example, Milka. My friends and I spent a lot of time laughing at what American supermarkets think is worth importing. You also see the same thing in India: the worst of European chocolate sold as some exotic, special product, but I would never touch that stuff at home.
>That European chocolate in American supermarkets is quite often the lowest-quality stuff from here.
I guess this is somewhat universal: the only Brazilian cachaças available here in Germany are the worst ones in Brazil, but they have insane prices (e.g. 12€ for one that isn't worth the 2€ it costs in Brazil).
I guess this is somewhat universal: the only Brazilian cachaças available here in Germany are the worst ones in Brazil, but they have insane prices (e.g. 12€ for one that isn't worth the 2€ it costs in Brazil).
I think it's actually extremely universal -- most of the US brands available in Thailand were the more national/mediocre brands.
Which makes sense when you think who is prepared to export levels of product sufficient to supply a nation, but it's amusing that all we really see is the mediocre versions of other nations imported.
Which makes sense when you think who is prepared to export levels of product sufficient to supply a nation, but it's amusing that all we really see is the mediocre versions of other nations imported.
You get plenty of Lindt in the US. Can't get much better than that...
Wal-Mart is pretty crap on produce and meat, but they’re good at shelf stable stuff like chocolate. The one near me has, as you say, half an aisle of chocolate product of all kinds.
I suspect this is true in any rural area. Alabama is our version of rural Romania. The population density doesn't support the economy of scale required to make daily fresh produce profitable. So you get frozen/canned/otherwise preserved products. If it were profitable, someone would do it.
You go to a more populated area in the US (basically any major metro), you can get the good stuff fairly easily.
We also have 'food deserts' in poorer urban centers (certain cities in Alabama could qualify). I don't have an explanation for those, I think it has to do with poverty.
You go to a more populated area in the US (basically any major metro), you can get the good stuff fairly easily.
We also have 'food deserts' in poorer urban centers (certain cities in Alabama could qualify). I don't have an explanation for those, I think it has to do with poverty.
> The population density doesn't support the economy of scale required to make daily fresh produce profitable.
Yet strangely, before mass-market supermarkets existed, people in rural areas ate fresh produce directly from farmers without having such 'economy of scale'.. and the people in the city had trouble accessing them..
when the 'economy of scale' is devoured by the middlemen creating it, it is neither economical nor scalable..
Yet strangely, before mass-market supermarkets existed, people in rural areas ate fresh produce directly from farmers without having such 'economy of scale'.. and the people in the city had trouble accessing them..
when the 'economy of scale' is devoured by the middlemen creating it, it is neither economical nor scalable..
> Yet strangely, before mass-market supermarkets existed, people in rural areas ate fresh produce directly from farmers
Before mass-market supermarkets existed, rural people ate fresh produce often only because they grew it themselves, not because they were able to buy it direct from a farmer. To buy from a farmer, you need cash, and a lot of rural families were cash-poor. Instead, people in the countryside maintained their own gardens and they made a lot of pickled foods for the winter. However, that is all a lot of work, and in fact historically a lot of rural families had poor nutrition in terms of fresh vegetables in spite of living in the regions that these vegetables came from.
Before mass-market supermarkets existed, rural people ate fresh produce often only because they grew it themselves, not because they were able to buy it direct from a farmer. To buy from a farmer, you need cash, and a lot of rural families were cash-poor. Instead, people in the countryside maintained their own gardens and they made a lot of pickled foods for the winter. However, that is all a lot of work, and in fact historically a lot of rural families had poor nutrition in terms of fresh vegetables in spite of living in the regions that these vegetables came from.
Food deserts are places where people mostly have cars and drive to the store.
It's a bad situation for people that don't have cars, but for people with cars, 2 or 3 miles to a grocer is irrelevant.
In Detroit, roughly 90% of households have at least 1 vehicle:
https://datausa.io/profile/geo/detroit-mi/#category_transpor...
It's a bad situation for people that don't have cars, but for people with cars, 2 or 3 miles to a grocer is irrelevant.
In Detroit, roughly 90% of households have at least 1 vehicle:
https://datausa.io/profile/geo/detroit-mi/#category_transpor...
Even in metro areas the major chains are terrible. But we’re also less willing to pay more for food compared to Western Europe.
Probably much much less.
My municipality (in Belgium) is not considered small in any aspect, and yet it actually consists of three historical villages.
My grandparents have a house in the southern of France, and that village/municipality has ~320 residents.
My municipality (in Belgium) is not considered small in any aspect, and yet it actually consists of three historical villages.
My grandparents have a house in the southern of France, and that village/municipality has ~320 residents.
> If you live in a few major urban centers, you can buy high-quality food, often the same products as in Western Europe
Don't take that for granted. Some of the Italian pasta sold in Romania would not be eaten in Italy: http://stirileprotv.ro/standard-pentru-est/marea-diferenta-d...
In Italy, pasta is made from durum wheat, water and - for some northern pasta types - eggs. Nothing else. Not cheaper common wheat like in Romania, not extra vitamins, minerals or even precooking like in US.
Don't take that for granted. Some of the Italian pasta sold in Romania would not be eaten in Italy: http://stirileprotv.ro/standard-pentru-est/marea-diferenta-d...
In Italy, pasta is made from durum wheat, water and - for some northern pasta types - eggs. Nothing else. Not cheaper common wheat like in Romania, not extra vitamins, minerals or even precooking like in US.
This issue is known for years - similar article from 2016 - http://www.politico.eu/article/a-snack-by-any-other-name-var...
This is article in Czech - https://www.dtest.cz/clanek-5156/rozdilna-kvalita-potravin-v... - but if you scroll down there is table showing products and you can see that the worst quality products are sometimes more expensive.
This is article in Czech - https://www.dtest.cz/clanek-5156/rozdilna-kvalita-potravin-v... - but if you scroll down there is table showing products and you can see that the worst quality products are sometimes more expensive.
This is not Hacker News material.
My understanding was we're still in the "is there any evidence phase?" and that this is much a thing as Korean Fan Death: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fan_death
Any evidence?
Any evidence?
If I recall correctly, the Romanian food quality authority researched and published these claims.
My brother lives in a town of 8500 in Hungary. That you can't buy food there is less of an issue but even at Budapest it is such a challenge that he visits Austria about every three weeks for a large amount of great but affordable foodstuff. Capitalism did deliver, however: Hungarian people will choose the cheapest crap too often as they earn a lot less than Western Europeans and so that's what you can get.
I don't really shop at supermarkets in Budapest, but I have friends who do and who also regularly go to Austria. They swear the better-quality Hungarian produce is sold in the Austrian supermarkets and often for less than the lower-quality stuff costs in BP.
We know of a Hungarian sheepherder who sells his lamb meat rather to Austria and Italy than Hungary. The "for less" is not true, the very reason he sells it abroad is because no one in Hungary would pay the price he asks for quality meat.
by "you can't buy food there" I (obviously?) mean passable quality food. There are supermarkets etc. You just don't want to go there. There is a good bakery tho.
From the first snippet:
> It’s scary when even the fruit available is obviously full of hormones. We had a grapefruit for a while and it became an experiment to see if it would ever go bad. After four months we gave up and threw it away – but it still looked fresh.
"Full of hormones" is scary language. Plant hormones exist, but they are very different from animal hormones (which is what prefixless hormones normally refer to). They are indeed used in commercial farming to e.g. help cuttings grow new roots faster, or accelerate fruit ripening (e.g. ethylene is commonly used to ripen bananas). Ripeners are almost the opposite of preservatives, and plant hormones certainly don't explain a 4 month old fresh-looking grapefruit. Neither translates to "fruit full of hormones" in any meaningful sense and it certainly doesn't translate to anything negative. Animals are full of hormones all of the time: if you don't have hormones you die in pretty short order. Plants sans hormones doesn't fare much better.
I'm sorry that their agriculture products suck, but perhaps one can say that without making vague scientific-sounding scaremongering statements.
> It’s scary when even the fruit available is obviously full of hormones. We had a grapefruit for a while and it became an experiment to see if it would ever go bad. After four months we gave up and threw it away – but it still looked fresh.
"Full of hormones" is scary language. Plant hormones exist, but they are very different from animal hormones (which is what prefixless hormones normally refer to). They are indeed used in commercial farming to e.g. help cuttings grow new roots faster, or accelerate fruit ripening (e.g. ethylene is commonly used to ripen bananas). Ripeners are almost the opposite of preservatives, and plant hormones certainly don't explain a 4 month old fresh-looking grapefruit. Neither translates to "fruit full of hormones" in any meaningful sense and it certainly doesn't translate to anything negative. Animals are full of hormones all of the time: if you don't have hormones you die in pretty short order. Plants sans hormones doesn't fare much better.
I'm sorry that their agriculture products suck, but perhaps one can say that without making vague scientific-sounding scaremongering statements.
This is The Guardian quoting a reader, not The Guardian's original writing.
Well yes, the whole problem here is that we're discussing a Guardian 'article' as something that should somehow be taken serious. I mean, let's face it, The Guardian is like Breitbart, except from another corner on the ideological n-dimensional plane.
I understand that, but I don’t see how it impacts my point.
This doesn’t make any sense. How do companies get away with shipping lower quality products to Romania unless Romanians are less quality conscious? If they weren’t less quality conscious, then companies would be able to do the same thing in Western Europe.
Because the consumer doesn’t matter? What exactly are their alternative options if the only game(s) in town decide to only sell a particular level of product quality?
Not asking rhetorically. What exactly is it you’re suggesting these “quality conscious” consumers do?
Markets and naked capitalism as solutions go these issues have proven ineffective. This article is evidence of it. And all you suggest is some naive, Econ 101 platitudes.
Not asking rhetorically. What exactly is it you’re suggesting these “quality conscious” consumers do?
Markets and naked capitalism as solutions go these issues have proven ineffective. This article is evidence of it. And all you suggest is some naive, Econ 101 platitudes.
Let's say there really is a consumer preference for the 'better', Western-style goods. Why wouldn't there be someone who would drive a truck across the border a few times a week, marking up his products say 5% (which would be more than the profits supermarkets make - retail grocers are one 2-3% margins)? I mean, if people are so desperate, they'd buy his stuff right out of the back of his truck, right?
The reality is much more nuanced than what you're suggesting. The reality is that people don't care as much, and that producers aren't as stupid/greedy as you make them out to be. Their buying patterns are what economists call a revealed preference. Sure, if you ask them, people will all say that they want the best-quality products. Turns out though (and not just there, but everywhere) that in reality people want a mix between quality, affordability, perception, and other things.
(oh, and suggesting that an article in the Guardian of all places is "evidence" of anything is laughable)
The reality is much more nuanced than what you're suggesting. The reality is that people don't care as much, and that producers aren't as stupid/greedy as you make them out to be. Their buying patterns are what economists call a revealed preference. Sure, if you ask them, people will all say that they want the best-quality products. Turns out though (and not just there, but everywhere) that in reality people want a mix between quality, affordability, perception, and other things.
(oh, and suggesting that an article in the Guardian of all places is "evidence" of anything is laughable)
> Why wouldn't there be someone who would drive a truck across the border a few times a week, marking up his products say 5%
Because that's illegal?
Because that's illegal?
> Why wouldn't there be someone who would drive a truck across the border a few times a week, marking up his products say 5% (which would be more than the profits supermarkets make - retail grocers are one 2-3% margins)? I mean, if people are so desperate, they'd buy his stuff right out of the back of his truck, right?
there are shops in my city that do exactly that, but the markup is more like 105%.
there are shops in my city that do exactly that, but the markup is more like 105%.
>Markets and naked capitalism as solutions go these issues have proven ineffective.
On the contrary. You're mostly making up that there actually is a huge demand for higher priced, higher quality products there, while the fact that no one has gone for that supposed huge and very available market speaks against that being true. That wishes of a small minority are not being catered for doesn't prove anything.
On the contrary. You're mostly making up that there actually is a huge demand for higher priced, higher quality products there, while the fact that no one has gone for that supposed huge and very available market speaks against that being true. That wishes of a small minority are not being catered for doesn't prove anything.
Romania is part of the EU. If there was really a demand, companies would move in. That’s not a platitude, it’s how things work. Just like saying that balls fall back to the ground when you throw them up.
Articles that don’t cite statistical data but rather anecdotes aren’t “evidence” of anything. That’s not what evidence is. What they really reflect is minorities projecting their views onto the majority. For example, I personally find web business models perplexing. Why would you want to watch advertising and data mining when you could just pay $50 a month or whatever for content? But I resign myself to the fact that I’m a minority and people really do prefer that insanity to honest monetary transactions.
Articles that don’t cite statistical data but rather anecdotes aren’t “evidence” of anything. That’s not what evidence is. What they really reflect is minorities projecting their views onto the majority. For example, I personally find web business models perplexing. Why would you want to watch advertising and data mining when you could just pay $50 a month or whatever for content? But I resign myself to the fact that I’m a minority and people really do prefer that insanity to honest monetary transactions.
It's not only Hungary that has yoghurt with flour in it, there are several brands in the US that bulk the product up with corn starch with the inevitable and negative effect on the taste and texture. When flying SAS from Norway/Denmark to Newark I will eat yoghurt on the way to the US but not on the way back because then they have been supplied with the US version. It's not that there is no good yoghurt in the US of course it's just that it seems to be allowed to put stuff in it that doesn't belong so some manufacturers do.
Most yogurt in the US -- all the major brands except Dannon (IIRC) -- are full of pectin, which makes the yogurt thicker. This is not too bad for eating (but I avoid it) but it messes up the cooking characteristics of yogurt as an ingredient in dishes like tave kosi and sauces. Some versions of Greek yogurt don't have pectin (Chobani) but that doesn't help me
It's so easy to make yoghurt, I wonder why most people don't do it. Add jelly, honey, or whatever you like, and you get something that's better than even the most fancy brands.
It's easy to make something that looks like yogurt with some milk and yeasts, but consistently making something that is convenient and tastes as good (including texture and potential intestinal effects on people sensitive to it) is far from easy.
Try to buy 10 different yogurts (from a variety of supermarkets and specialty shops) and do a comparison on taste, texture, propensity to de-emulsify, etc. You'll find that there is a very wide range.
And try to reproduce that one great yogurt you had somewhere at home. I mean, I've done the whole comparison above (and many more than 10) in a quest to replicate the yogurt from The Yogurt Shop in Adelaide's (AU) Central Market (which, from what I've been able to find, is the way it is because of a combination of two different yeast strands as well as a specific straining method they use), and I've tried many, many different ways of making yogurt - and still fail to make something like it. I mean, I won't call myself an expert because I don't even have a degree in anything biology or food production related, but I do have enough experience to say that making (good) yogurt is not 'easy' - at least not in the way that it would make sense for people to do it themselves as anything else than a novelty.
Try to buy 10 different yogurts (from a variety of supermarkets and specialty shops) and do a comparison on taste, texture, propensity to de-emulsify, etc. You'll find that there is a very wide range.
And try to reproduce that one great yogurt you had somewhere at home. I mean, I've done the whole comparison above (and many more than 10) in a quest to replicate the yogurt from The Yogurt Shop in Adelaide's (AU) Central Market (which, from what I've been able to find, is the way it is because of a combination of two different yeast strands as well as a specific straining method they use), and I've tried many, many different ways of making yogurt - and still fail to make something like it. I mean, I won't call myself an expert because I don't even have a degree in anything biology or food production related, but I do have enough experience to say that making (good) yogurt is not 'easy' - at least not in the way that it would make sense for people to do it themselves as anything else than a novelty.
All that is true but I think the OP's point was that it is easy to make yoghurt, not that it is easy to make some specific type. And it is easy if you can get hold of a pot of live yoghurt, then all you need to add is warm milk and patience and you will have something just as good as a lot of the ordinary supermarket stuff. Of course, yes, it is a bit of a novelty because it isn't cheaper by a wide enough margin to make the effort worthwhile.
I believe root cause at this was (and still is, but reducing) information asymmetry. Before, it was much harder to have customer data (abstracted as nodes of graph) to exchange information.
Changes in that information system now manifests in surprise over information that, previously thought identical products, are not identical by region.
Changes in that information system now manifests in surprise over information that, previously thought identical products, are not identical by region.
> ‘Salmon is a disgrace’
> One of the biggest culprits is fish - salmon is a disgrace in the Czech Republic. It is usually cooled to a point before it freezes, then thawed before being passed off as fresh salmon. The cooling data and thawing is written on the side of boxes – but the retailers take advantage of the fact consumers cannot generally read English-language storage instructions. Savvy buyers know to buy goods where labels on products have Czech language labels stuck over the original text. This means the product that is sold in western markets is identical to the Czech market product.
A lot of the salmon industry is dealing with frozen fish. Some may even argue frozen fish is safer.
Salmon at the moment has a pest problem so prices go up and customers in general are feeling they are getting a bad deal.
And then there is the well known fraud passing one fish of as another. This business is fishy, pun intended and that has nothing to do with being in Czech when shopping.
Having people who can be quoted with their opinions does not absolve journalists from providing some perspective. The Guardian should know better.
> One of the biggest culprits is fish - salmon is a disgrace in the Czech Republic. It is usually cooled to a point before it freezes, then thawed before being passed off as fresh salmon. The cooling data and thawing is written on the side of boxes – but the retailers take advantage of the fact consumers cannot generally read English-language storage instructions. Savvy buyers know to buy goods where labels on products have Czech language labels stuck over the original text. This means the product that is sold in western markets is identical to the Czech market product.
A lot of the salmon industry is dealing with frozen fish. Some may even argue frozen fish is safer.
Salmon at the moment has a pest problem so prices go up and customers in general are feeling they are getting a bad deal.
And then there is the well known fraud passing one fish of as another. This business is fishy, pun intended and that has nothing to do with being in Czech when shopping.
Having people who can be quoted with their opinions does not absolve journalists from providing some perspective. The Guardian should know better.
I have lived at various points in my life in Slovakia, Czech Republic, Denmark and Germany. This issue has been discussed at least since 2006, but I have never observed a drastic difference between the quality of food, except maybe things like Salmon, but that seems very clear to me that there is no way salmon bought in Slovakia is going to be fresh in any sense of the word
On one hand, products are measurably different, yet they are “good enough” so people did not notice/care about it long time. Now when it hit headlines and people feel cheated.
The multional's products sold in western Europe I wouldn't call good quality food, I think the bigger issue is the produce and fresh goods are not very good. And honestly the produce isn't that great in Austria either.
I visited Prague at the beginning of the year; after a week I had stomach issues from the food I bought at their "Albert" supermarket. It was not as bad as when I visited Rio de Janeiro, but definitely put a question mark on what people there have to eat. And the prices were more-less same as in Germany.
I visited Germany a week ago and had the chance to compare German foods with what's offered in Eastern Europe. The prices were about the same, some things (like chocolate and candy) were cheaper. Overall, the quality of food was of much higher standard.
When you visited, did you notice that the Milka you said is 100g here, isn't anymore?
They even put it into the slogan: "Milka Alpenmilch. Für Mich – Für Dich 80g"
This whole thing to me sounds like the "chemtrail" conspiracy.
http://www.wz.de/home/wirtschaft/schokolade-100-gramm-tafel-... https://www.milka.de//Produkte/milka-tafeln-100g?categoryId=...
They even put it into the slogan: "Milka Alpenmilch. Für Mich – Für Dich 80g"
This whole thing to me sounds like the "chemtrail" conspiracy.
http://www.wz.de/home/wirtschaft/schokolade-100-gramm-tafel-... https://www.milka.de//Produkte/milka-tafeln-100g?categoryId=...
You are all missing a key point: food additives and misleading advertising.
Here in Canada:
Carrots can have added orange paint, legally disclosed on the packaging.
Yogurt can be from other stuff that milk.
Bread has to be labeled as 'whole granins' if entirely from grains, otherwise it's still sold as bread.
McDonald's fishburger, isn't made from what is technically a fish.
Bacon bits can be from other things than pork.
Coffee, doesn't have to be from coffee beans.
Things can have taste enhancers, color enhancers, odor enhancers.
They can be sold unripened as ripe.
Etc etc. I can count all day.
When you compare food between continents, you can't ignore the above.
The almighty quest for profit will cost you health.
Here in Canada:
Carrots can have added orange paint, legally disclosed on the packaging.
Yogurt can be from other stuff that milk.
Bread has to be labeled as 'whole granins' if entirely from grains, otherwise it's still sold as bread.
McDonald's fishburger, isn't made from what is technically a fish.
Bacon bits can be from other things than pork.
Coffee, doesn't have to be from coffee beans.
Things can have taste enhancers, color enhancers, odor enhancers.
They can be sold unripened as ripe.
Etc etc. I can count all day.
When you compare food between continents, you can't ignore the above.
The almighty quest for profit will cost you health.
Here, the food quality is awesome.
Imported stuff is the same as in Western Europe. Because local market’s small, manufacturers don’t bother localizing properly, i.e. you remove a Montenegrin-language sticker required by law, you’ll likely find “Hergestellt in Deutschland” underneath.
The large part of groceries are local. Some of them are from Montenegro: fish (except salmon and a couple other spices not found in Adriatic & not farmed locally; but freshly caught tuna is IMO better than frozen Norwegian salmon), wine, seasonal fruits & vegetables. Some is imported from neighbor countries, of that most is from Serbia (majority of meat and dairy products), some from Croatia, Macedonia, Italy, Greece or Spain.