Category: Food and Drink

How to cook with Indian spices

by  Tyler Cowen in

Buy whole spices, not ground.  Get:

Cinnamon stick (not the Mexican kind)
Cumin
Coriander
Cloves
Cardamom, preferably both green and black
Black peppercorns

Red chilis, or red chili powder
Wet ginger paste (go to an Indian grocer’s), or fresh ginger, never ever ever powdered ginger
Garam masala, here a good powder from an Indian mart is OK though better to make it fresh
Turmeric, powder will do

For bases, draw upon:

1. Sauteed and pureed yellow onions
2. Plain yogurt, some will wish to add heavy cream as a thickener
3. Coconut milk

Now start your dish.  Create the chosen base.  Ghee (clarified butter) can be added to #1 or #2 for yummy richness but I usually don’t for health reasons.  Don’t mix #2 and #3.

Then take your preferred mix of spices.  Fry the hard ones for two to three minutes over medium heat (3.5 on an electric stove) and puree them.  Cinnamon stick should be left whole in the sauce to leach out its flavor.  Never are more than three cloves needed and they can be left whole too.  Cardamoms can be inserted whole and then removed, especially if large ones are smashed open a bit with a blunt edge.  Otherwise experiment with preferred combinations.

In a separate pan, quickly cook your preferred meat over high heat, just enough to make it a bit translucent or pink.  Insert the partially cooked stuff into the liquid base and turn to low heat until the dish is ready.

Vegetables can be substituted for meat.

You can introduce mace and mustard seeds, or tomato can be a base in sauces.

You now have a combinatorial knowledge of many many Indian recipes and you need not memorize anything.

By the way, if you must buy powdered curry, Golden Bell is by far the best.  It is packed with bay leaves and stays potent for months.  You can sautee some chopped yellow onions, toss in ground lamb, douse it in Golden Bell, cook over low heat until dry, and when on the plate, over rice, coat it in plain yogurt.

Should we ban trans-fats?

by  Tyler Cowen in

Gary Becker does a quick cost-benefit analysis in his head:

With a small taste benefit from the use of trans fats– the New England Medicine Journal article I cited earlier does admit positive effect of trans fats on
"palatability"– the total cost of the ban would equal or exceed total
benefits.  For example, suppose 1 million persons on average eat 200
meals per year in NYC restaurants with trans fats.  If they value the
taste of trans fats in their foods only by 35 cents per meal, the taste
cost to consumers of the ban would be $70 million per year.  Then the
total cost of the ban would equal the benefits from the ban.

If you click on the link, you’ll see some good arguments against paternalism as well.

The Economics of Chocolate

by  Alex Tabarrok in

"You

say that 400 florins a year as an assured salary are not to be despised,

and it would be true if in addition I could work myself into a good position

and could treat these 400 florins simply as extra money. But unfortunately,

that is not the case. I would have to consider the 400 florins as my chief

income and everything else I could earn as windfall, the amount of which

would be very uncertain and consequently in all probability very meager.

You can easily understand that one cannot act as independently towards

a pupil who is a princess as towards other ladies. If a princess does not

feel inclined to take a lesson, why, you have the honor of waiting until

she does. She is living out with the Salesians, so that if you do not care

to walk, you have the honor of paying at least 20 kreuzer to drive there

and back. Thus of my pay only 304 florins would remain–that is, if I only

gave three lessons a week. And if I were obliged to wait, I would in the

meantime be neglecting my other pupils or other work (by which I could

easily make more than 400 florins). If I wanted to come into Vienna I would

have to pay double, since I would be obliged to drive out again. If I stayed

out there and were giving my lesson in the morning, as I no doubt would

be doing, I would have to go at lunchtime to some inn, take a wretched

meal and pay extravagantly for it. Moreover, by neglecting my other pupils

I might lose them altogether–for everyone considers his money as good

as that of a princess. At the same time, I would lose the time and inclination

to earn more money by composition. To serve a great lord (in whatever office)

a man should be paid a sufficient income to enable him to to serve his

patron alone, without being obliged to seek additional earnings to

avoid penury. A man must provide against want."

Against organic farming

by  Tyler Cowen in

Perhaps the most eminent critic of organic farming is Norman Borlaug,
the father of the “green revolution”, winner of the Nobel peace prize
and an outspoken advocate of the use of synthetic fertilisers to
increase crop yields.  He claims the idea that organic farming is better
for the environment is “ridiculous” because organic farming produces
lower yields and therefore requires more land under cultivation to
produce the same amount of food.  Thanks to synthetic fertilisers, Mr
Borlaug points out, global cereal production tripled between 1950 and
2000, but the amount of land used increased by only 10%.  Using
traditional techniques such as crop rotation, compost and manure to
supply the soil with nitrogen and other minerals would have required a
tripling of the area under cultivation.  The more intensively you farm,
Mr Borlaug contends, the more room you have left for rainforest.

Read more here.

Addendum: Speaking of The Economist, here are their book recommendations for the year.

Thanksgiving dinner

by  Tyler Cowen in

For a variety of logistical reasons, we are doing it today.  I will sizzle fry some bacon strips in peanut oil, then tossing in garlic and small cauliflower florets.  One cup of very fresh chicken stock, simmer until ready, and salt and white pepper to taste.  Sichuan style, very yummy, and that is just the start of the meal…

How to get your kids to eat their vegetables

by  Tyler Cowen in

Incentives are useful everywhere, but sometimes the correct application is counterintuitive.  Yesterday’s Wall Street Journal offered the following tips from the experts:

1. Try many times — fifteen or more — to get your kids to eat their vegetables.  Most parents give up too soon.

2. Bribing, punishing, and celebrating when the kid eats the vegetables are all counterproductive.

3. "Use tasty toppings."

4. If the kid doesn’t eat the vegetables, grab them from his plate and gobble them up yourself.

5. Eat your own vegetables in great quantity and with great delight.

What is the fuel cost of grapes from Chile?

by  Tyler Cowen in

Tim Harford writes to me:

Polluters in Europe currently have to pay about euros10 per tonne of carbon dioxide as part of Europe’s efforts to meet its obligations under the Kyoto agreement.  That is less than one penny per kg of carbon dioxide.  Perhaps that price, in a volatile market, is too low.  A Government Economic Service paper on the social cost of carbon emissions recommends a cost closer to euros25 a tonne of carbon dioxide.  Even that is less than 10p for a kilogram of mange-tout, or a penny for a 100g packet.  If consumers were forced to meet those costs – as in principle they should be – the sum would barely register.  There are good environmental reasons to tax airline fuel, but such taxes are not likely to make food imports substantially more expensive.

Here is the link, and Tim notes there are typos in the article, the text is correct as above.  When it comes to the social cost of food, one estimate is that congestion and accidents account for two-thirds of that sum.  So maybe you should walk or bike more, but eat what you want, from where you want.  Here is, again, my review of Michael Pollan’s The Omnivore’s Dilemma.

By the way, for a more skeptical view of a carbon tax, here is Robert Samuelson’s piece from today’s WP.

Addendum: The Economist (MMM?) refers me to a new "AntiPigou" and "Anti-Mankiw" blog, which I have yet to read.

Gas Guzzling Grapes?

by  Alex Tabarrok in

It may look like we are eating Chilean grapes, he [Pollan] argues, but in fact, once we
consider transportation costs, we are guzzling petroleum. Economics offers a
clearer view of what is going on. We do need to save energy, but it is difficult
for a central planner (or for that matter a food commentator) to identify what
is waste, relative to the costs of eliminating it….If fuel becomes more expensive, we’ll likely adopt peak-load
energy pricing, and drivers may scrap their SUVs for hybrids. But we probably
won’t plant grapes in our backyards. While we must conserve energy, we cut back
where it makes the most sense; grape-shipping is not the place to start. Global
trade does involve transportation costs, but it also puts food production where
it is cheapest, again saving energy by economizing on costs of labor,
irrigation, and fertilization, relative to the alternatives.

That’s the ever-wise Tyler reviewing the Omnivore’s Dilemma in Slate.

Save us from vegemite

by  Tyler Cowen in

The US has banned Vegemite, even to the point of searching Australians for jars of the spread when they enter the country.

The bizarre crackdown was prompted because Vegemite has been deemed illegal under US food laws.

The
great Aussie icon – faithfully carried around the world by travellers
from downunder – contains folate, which under a technicality, America
allows to be added only to breads and cereals.

Australian expatriates in the US said enforcement of the ban had
been gradually stepped up and was now ruining lifelong traditions of
Vegemite on toast for breakfast.

Here is the full story.

Why no patent or copyright for new food recipes?

by  Tyler Cowen in

A loyal MR reader writes in:

Why do we have IPRs for literature, the arts and music but not for food dishes?  Of course, I’m not talking about a copyright on the Ham & Cheese sandwich, I’m talking about innovative new dishes…I’m not arguing that we SHOULD have IPRs for food, just wondering what the big difference is (if any) between the culinary arts and other arts…I realize it would be difficult to enforce such rights at mom & pop type places…but it would be possible to enforce those rights at big name places and large chains.

Food relies so much on execution, or at the national chain level on marketing, that the mere circulation of a recipe does not much diminish the competitive advantage of the creative chef.  Try buying a fancy cookbook by a celebrity chef and see how well the food turns out.  (In contrast, an MP3 file is a pretty good substitute for a CD.)  Most chefs view their cookbooks as augmenting the value of the "restaurant experience" they provide, not diminishing it.  Furthermore industry norms, and the work of food critics, will give innovating chefs the proper reputational credit.  It is not worth the litigation and vagueness of standards that recipe patents would involve.

Here is a recent article on recipe copyright. 

Here is an academic paper on how norm-based copyright governs the current use of recipes.  French chefs will ostracize "club members" who copy innovative recipes outright.  Now the fashion industry wants IP protection as well.