|
speed dating but your parents browse through the candidates first.
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 15:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 02:13 |
|
|
I live in an Indian neighborhood and at least some of the jewelry stores sell gold jewelry just by weight. You pick out a pile of stuff for a wedding and they put it on a scale.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 15:11
|
|
|
People who immigrate from India to USA are in top 5% wealth bracket to being with. It's very rare for a poor Indian to make it abroad, especially here. This is all according to my Indian associates in the US.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 15:20
|
|
|
Tired Moritz posted:speed dating but your parents browse through the candidates first. You know, when you put it like that, I'm not surprised that modern arranged marriages tend to do pretty well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 15:37
|
|
|
Nitrox posted:People who immigrate from India to USA are in top 5% wealth bracket to being with. It's very rare for a poor Indian to make it abroad, especially here. This is all according to my Indian associates in the US. It's almost like that was by design
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 16:28
|
|
|
Nitrox posted:People who immigrate from India to USA are in top 5% wealth bracket to being with. It's very rare for a poor Indian to make it abroad, especially here. This is all according to my Indian associates in the US. Yeah, the reason why Indians are ‘model minorities’ in the US is because most Indians who immigrate to the US are already pretty rich. edit: Milo and POTUS posted:It's almost like that was by design Of course this is because of US immigration policy. I don't think anyone was implying that it was due to some weird stroke of luck. silence_kit has a new favorite as of 03:07 on Jan 7, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 16:30
|
|
|
PubicMice posted:I don't know if it's been discussed, but I was talking to a friend about India, and I remembered this ad, which is just all kinds of https://twitter.com/dril/status/1214206295714103310
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 16:33
|
|
|
Cleretic posted:You know, when you put it like that, I'm not surprised that modern arranged marriages tend to do pretty well. Too lazy to look it up, but I think that on average they last longer than non-arranged marriages. (of course, there are oodles of other societal factors at play) I wonder how you market an offspring when they are clearly below average? 'Yeah, she's ugly, but she can cook and is very fertile' 'Give him 3 years and he'll be the manager of that comic book store, you'll see'
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 16:34
|
|
|
Large dowries.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 16:37
|
|
|
Memento posted:That's fake, right? Surely. Nobody’s been able to identify the company that ran the ad, so yeah.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 17:44
|
|
|
Pocket Billiards posted:I'm in Australia and haves friends from very large and wealthy Punjabi families my age that were born here. Their marriages were all 'arranged' but it was more like you date a shortlist of potential spouses your parents provide you and marry the one you hit it off with. There's some kind of network of wealthy Sikh parents spread across the Commonwealth countries that match their kids together from what I gather. All of my husband's cousins who had arranged marriages (except for one) did the thing where the suggested bride/groom would just happen to be the person they'd gone to college with or been "close friends" with or "lived next to" for the past few years. Even in my MIL's generation, it was "Do you have anyone in mind before we start asking around?" The one cousin who had a more traditional arranged marriage basically was ready to start a family but wasn't into anyone, so he did what you described and asked his parents to start looking. His wife is pretty kick-rear end, so it worked out well for him.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 19:07
|
|
|
Arranged marriages aren't specifically a rich thing in India, although upper-caste parents might be pickier. That's actually a closer description of Western culture, historically speaking. Whereas the nobility had arranged marriages, fixed at a very young age, most of the rest of society had a fairly unique demographic pattern with relative freedom in partner choice and a high average age at marriage (some proto-goons never got married at all).
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 19:10
|
|
|
ChickenOfTomorrow posted:i mean, gold jewelry is a good store of value and also looks pretty, might be a useful resource jusy in case you need to leave your new husband in a hurry Historically gold doesn't even keep pace with inflation, so it doesnt keep value it loses it. Gold and jewelry are basically quick sources of immediate cash for less then their scrap value.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 22:27
|
|
|
I would imagine the things that are beyond price are: booze, the workings to make booze, and the means to keep people from taking the above from you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 23:55
|
|
|
Pastry of the Year posted:I would imagine the things that are beyond price are: booze, the workings to make booze, and the means to keep people from taking the above from you. In medieval Europe grain and booze were basically currency. Everybody needed them wherever you went and most people were subsistence farmers so the main thing they had to sell was...grain and booze.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 03:23
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:In medieval Europe grain and booze were basically currency. Everybody needed them wherever you went and most people were subsistence farmers so the main thing they had to sell was...grain and booze. Same in colonial America. This is actually the real reason behind the Whiskey Rebellion! Grain is not a very dense product in terms of value. It takes up a lot of space and weight and needs to be stored properly to avoid spoilage, which can be a big problem if you produce more grain than you can feasibly transport to the market to sell. Liquor is very value-dense compared to the grain you made it from and lasts basically forever once properly bottled. It became a very good idea for farmers with the know-how and material to make stills that they could use to turn their excess grain into whiskey. Rural American society often went about with little or no cash, trading inherently valuable goods and services instead of exchanging money. A farmer-distiller could become quite "wealthy" in his own community through the valuable product he produced. Farmers without stills would go to the distillers and give them grain to turn into whiskey, with the distiller keeping a portion for himself as payment. Whiskey was so valuable that George Washington built a distillery at Mt. Vernon in 1797 for commercial production (I've been there and bought a bottle of their whiskey, which is a nearly exact replica of Washington's whiskey made on reproduction equipment). When Hamilton's whiskey tax was put into effect, you had the option of paying a flat tax or paying by the gallon. The first problem is that, as I said, many of these farmer-distillers had no money in the first place because their daily society didn't require it. The second is that if you produced a sufficient volume, you could pay the flat tax and end up effectively paying less per gallon than someone who paid by the gallon. This was compounded by whiskey costing less in the Appalachians where these farmers were based (when you had money to buy it) than in the eastern cities. The tax was thus seen as destroying the livelihood of many farmers by giving an unfair advantage to wealthy East Coast commercial operations. Gee, I wonder where this narrative has shown up before? A similar motivation was behind the resistance to the Molasses Act, Sugar Act, and Tea Act decades earlier. The Thirteen Colonies had begun producing rum on a large scale thanks to the cheap molasses from French Caribbean sugar plantations (which used some of the most horrific chattel slavery in world history to keep the costs down) while ignoring the more expensive British sugar. The Molasses Act 1733 put heavy tariffs on non-English molasses to give an advantage to English molasses by making it cheaper (this was even worse because there were no outbound tariffs on goods from the colonies, so they would straight up lose money to benefit politically powerful English sugar planters). This was avoided through heavy smuggling or outright ignoring of the tax collectors, but the Sugar Act 1764 that replaced it was enforced uncommonly strictly to clamp down on smuggling. The Tea Act 1773, likewise, was implemented to give the politically connected British East India Company a market while it was struggling and caused anger through its blatant existence to help a wealthy corporation. Gee, I wonder where this narrative has shown up before? chitoryu12 has a new favorite as of 04:02 on Jan 7, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 04:00
|
|
|
That’s very interesting
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 04:03
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:Whiskey was so valuable that George Washington built a distillery at Mt. Vernon in 1797 for commercial production (I've been there and bought a bottle of their whiskey, which is a nearly exact replica of Washington's whiskey made on reproduction equipment). How was it?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 07:10
|
|
|
Vavrek posted:How was it? It's 65% rye, 35% corn, and 5% malted barley so it's the same mashbill as a typical rye whiskey, but it's completely unaged and 86 proof. If you've ever bought unflavored "moonshine" or "white whiskey" at the liquor store, you've got a good idea of what it tastes like. It's a raw, somewhat sweet grain flavor that tastes like a fermentation tank smells. Even the different notes that rye whiskey have compared to bourbon don't come out until you barrel age it. That's how whiskey was back then. Distilleries usually sold to wholesalers and rectifiers who did any blending, aging, and rectifying through second or third distillations. They, in turn, sold their product under their own brand names to saloons or stores. Because there was no FDA at this time, what you actually got as "whiskey" could be drat near anything. The bottle could say it's 5 year old straight whiskey from Old Bourbon County when it's actually watered down neutral molasses spirit with a little real whiskey that's maybe 20% ABV, adulterated with lanolin for body, burnt sugar or tobacco for color, and some acid for the burn to keep you from thinking you got cheated. Bottles were usually embossed with the brand and then filled up with drat near anything, like a saloon owner dumping the dregs of several bottles into one to save on shelf space. James C. Crow's whiskey, Old Crow, is credited as the first bourbon to actually gain a positive reputation as a brand name applied to a specific recipe rather than a wholesaler's brand, and Hiram Walker (who would make Canadian Club) is credited with being the first to base his whiskey brand on aging it properly starting in the 1850s. Then Old Forester is believed to be the first whiskey to be sold exclusively in bottles with a guarantee of quality from the distillery, in part to allow doctors to safely issue quality whiskey to their patients as a cure-all. Then came the Bottled in Bond Act of 1897 which established standards for bourbon to meet to get the coveted phrase on their label as a guarantee of quality and the FDA being established in 1906, and that's when we finally get the modern spirits market in America.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 16:05
|
|
|
product quality laws sounds like communism though, maybe all consumers should have hydrometers and other testing equipment everytime they want to buy ______
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 19:05
|
|
|
Also I should point out that if you want to buy Old Crow today, do not. Jim Beam bought the brand and put almost all of their purchased brands on the Jim Beam mashbill, but Old Crow is the cheapest one. It's literally just worse Jim Beam in a jug.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 21:20
|
|
|
A lot of the above is also part of why America gave prohibition a shot- we as a nation really did have a problem with alcohol because it was so economical to produce.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 22:02
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:A lot of the above is also part of why America gave prohibition a shot- we as a nation really did have a problem with alcohol because it was so economical to produce. I've read/seen stats about pre-prohibition drinking in America and it really was off the charts bananas: quote:By 1830, alcohol consumption reached its peak at a truly outlandish 7 gallons of ethanol a year per capita. Via Okrent: https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2018/08/the-1800s-when-americans-drank-whiskey-like-it-was.html
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 22:16
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:A lot of the above is also part of why America gave prohibition a shot- we as a nation really did have a problem with alcohol because it was so economical to produce. We still do have a problem with alcohol. The death toll is staggering, it blows guns and car accidents out of the water. People are just okay with that now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 22:17
|
|
|
If I wanna die partying that's my own choice.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 22:35
|
|
|
Apparently Wild Turkey is considered swill, but I really like the taste of it 
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 23:17
|
|
|
Push El Burrito posted:If I wanna die partying that's my own choice. Just don’t drink and drive
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 23:24
|
|
|
Randaconda posted:Apparently Wild Turkey is considered swill, but I really like the taste of it Try the 101. It’s definitely not swill.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 23:28
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Try the 101. It’s definitely not swill. that's the only one i drink. the 80 proof has a weird flavor for some reason
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 23:29
|
|
|
Wild Turkey 101 used to be Hunter S. Thompson's drink of choice, but after spending some time not drinking he came back to it and declared it to taste like gasoline. He switched to Chivas Regal 12. I like both. Higher proof has more burn but also allows more flavor to come through.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 23:35
|
|
|
1redflag posted:Just don’t drink and drive I see you've never been golfing before.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 23:39
|
|
|
It doesn't even really burn all that much, to be honest, and I just drink it straight or maybe with some ice, depending on how it is
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 23:41
|
|
|
Wild Turkey isn't notably worse than most other popular mass-market whiskeys. The one that I never understood is Fireball. Mix in all the cinnamon you want, it's still overpriced by half in terms of quality.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 23:48
|
|
|
Plastik posted:Wild Turkey isn't notably worse than most other popular mass-market whiskeys. The one that I never understood is Fireball. Mix in all the cinnamon you want, it's still overpriced by half in terms of quality. so much loving sugar. But most of the cinnamon flavored booze I've had has been gross. Fireball, Goldschlager
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 23:49
|
|
|
Randaconda posted:that's the only one i drink. the 80 proof has a weird flavor for some reason Do they still make the 80? Okay, yeah, the 80 is swill. The 81 is considerably better, although not near as good as the 101.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 23:52
|
|
|
Drink whatever gets you drunk the fastest and cheapest
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 23:54
|
|
|
oldpainless posted:Drink whatever gets you drunk the fastest and cheapest *dies from ethanol poisoning*
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 23:58
|
|
|
oldpainless posted:Drink whatever gets you drunk the fastest and cheapest What's the word? Thunderbird!
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 23:59
|
|
|
Randaconda posted:What's the word? Thunderbird! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KHGqyGBeys
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2020 00:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 02:13 |
|
|
Randaconda posted:What's the word? Thunderbird! I’ve seen the light and I’ve heard the word I’m staying away from that ol’ dirty thunderbird. A message come from Heaven, radiant and fine And now all I drink’s Communion wine. Six days a week. https://youtu.be/xjeGL3wjFUQ
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2020 00:10
|
|