Hacker News Reader

Comment by pempem | Hacker News Reader

In which countries is it not cheaper to cook your own food than to buy it out? The only things I can think of are: - truly street food in areas like sinagpore or india which is not a sustainable every meal option for most digestive systems - island nations where you're comparing fresh produce to a prepared meal

It should be and is cheaper to cook your own food. Purchases are limited to need, meals are usually a tiny percentage of the overall purchase, cost does not include: rent, talent, fixed costs such as kitchens/tables/plates/etc, healthcare, marketing, etc.

View on HN

Mexico for one. It's typically cheaper to eat at a Taco restaurant then to buy your own at a grocery store. There are a lot of reasons for this, but the biggest is more limited selection, more efficient service and cheaper real estate. The real estate issue is not one that is easy to address, but the other issues are adjustable. It's silly to expect the government to bail out restaurants when they admit they can't even pay their employees a living wage. Regardless of what you think the government should do about helping poor people, it most certainly should not be guaranteeing small business owners a 6+ figure income. They can innovate like every other business. The ones that succeed will get rich, and the ones that fail will at least have access to a living wage working for a more successful business.

I can get two double cheeseburgers from Mcdonalds for $2.25 here in the USA, could do so all year. There's no way i could come close to that at home.

Also, what one doesn't factor in is the cost of waste of food at home. You (the consumer) generally don't waste food when buying out.

Restaurants waste tons and tons of food every year. Literally. I, on the other hand, waste very little food at home. I buy fresh, i freeze and i plan ahead.

Also, good luck with your mcdonalds only diet. I'll stick with a balanced, healthy, home cooked diet myself.

I wasn't comparing what a restaurant wastes compared to what a consumer wastes. I'm comparing what a consumer wastes eating out, vs eating at home.

Luckily for you, you can live without waste. You are the grand minority.

I bet you could, or at least get close.

How much does a 100 pack of the cheapest thin patties cost? A 100 pack of american cheese? A 100 pack of terrible buns? The only challenge is that most grocery stores aren't even stocking food so crappy, not that the food costs are considerably higher.

I'd have to buy a six pack of rolls, that's going to be around $4.

My budget is already shot.

The rolls I get at the store for that price are way better than the ones act McDonalds. And if you really want rolls for cheap, you can make them yourself from a couple cents of flour.

People working two jobs, having to juggle a family, don't have time for all of these luxury processes. Kudos to you that you are affluent. But this conversation isn't obviously about people at your level.

This is a false argument. You're switching the goal posts from cost of ingredients to cost of time in a society that literally purposefully ensures that you dont have time so you spend money.

We can discuss the system but its not a given. What is a given is the ingredients you use for your one meal at home should be cheaper than what it takes to make it at a restaurant. The inclusion of other humans to hire, manage, train, and then process, create, and discard the remainders of your order and clean alone should be indicative of that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com