-
A hot sandwich to go would be taxable, while a prepackaged, cold one would not — but a cold sandwich becomes taxable if it has hot gravy poured onto it. Cold foods to go are generally not taxable — but hot foods that have cooled are taxable (meaning a cold sandwich slathered in “hot” gravy that has cooled to room temperature is taxable). Cold, non-carbonated, non-alcoholic beverages to go aren’t taxable. Hot beverages to go are, but coffee and tea are specifically exempted from taxation. Soup, however, is taxable. Hot soup that has cooled? Still taxable. But, the BOE specifically informs SF Weekly, cold soups such as gazpacho are exempt.
Why Is Split-Pea Soup Taxable and Gazpacho Isn’t? - San Francisco Restaurants and Dining - SFoodie
Srsly, who wants hot gravy on a cold sandwich? Tax the shit out of them!
-
This is McDonald’s top-secret Innovation Center, a cacophonous test bed capable of modeling the interior kitchen and dining rooms of three restaurants at the same time. It’s hidden in plain sight, nestled amid other warehouses and homogenous strip malls in the south Chicago suburb of Romeoville. Code name: Switzerland, but that’s not because Weil was born in Zurich. It’s a neutral design zone open to all of McDonald’s partners to try their own simulations. The hope is that data sharing can help everyone profit.
How McDonald’s has tried to retain and grow its billions served, from large-scale improvements like total exterior/interior redesign to behavioral details like stirring oatmeal at least 12 times so it “signal homemade goodness” to the customer. Not only does the company have to generate ideas, it needs to convince its franchisees—81% of the 30,000 storefronts world wide are franchisee-owned—across cultural and GDP-lines that these changes will mean profit in their particular situation.
So, if McDonalds can somehow continue to generate ideas, implement them, and post major growth on revamped location while appeasing franchisees from around the world, what’s keeping our government from doing the same?
Source:
-
This is the Pentagon’s solution to a book on Afghanistan that contains around 200 passages with sensitive military information. I’ve written about the Department of Defense’s Plan A, which was to buy up all existing sale copies (with taxpayer money). Their Plan B is to have a second printing with the passages redacted as above. The problem is that there were 100 review copies that were mailed out before the first printing.
Now, not only are there copies of the book with military intelligence floating around in the used book market, the Pentagon highlighted exactly which parts were sensitive by redacting the passages. This is the dumbest shit ever.
If this were my book, I would be working on a First Amendment case. The galley proof was approved by the Army; whether that was due to an oversight or not, it seems pretty easy to argue that the subsequent handling of the issue by the DoD impinges on the author’s first amendment rights.
(Image via NY Times)
I was laid off 2 days before my birthday in 2009, a dismal blessing. I miss health insurance and payroll, but I haven't bought bread since the pink slip because I have time to bake.
Sometimes I'm a serious job hunter, sometimes a serious slacker, but mostly, I'm an underemployed, freelance Jaqueline of many trades including writing and dogsitting. Either way, I scrapbook my finds and activities here for your benefit and amusement.
Follow me on Twitter if tv/movie/pro-cycling spoilers and unplanned live tweets won't hail on your parade. And yes, I do work blue so don't be huffy with me if you don't like cursing or merciless roasting of public figures.
You can look at my other blog Fashion Corpuscle if you like fashion. The ruins of my crumbling Tumblr blog empire awaits internet archaeologists.
Gainful Unemployment is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
