Yes...I get that and it is the same throughout the United States regarding take away or eat in. However, in the UK, at least at some restaurants (pret a manger for example) they ask take away? If you say yes, they bag it just like Mickey D and the prices are what it says on the little slots on the shelves. Say eat in and the price goes up 20% for value added tax (sort of sales tax) and they put it on a tray to indicate it is eat in. (But to whom). I have figured out this is a law (whether eu or British I don't know). I do see some people say take away and sit down at a table. What I wonder, but I will say that I am an honest person, sneaky at times but honest is if the government sends inspectors around to catch people pulling this ploy and what the punishment might be because after all you are allowed to change your mind, aren't you?

I think it is unfortunate when people automatically assume a chain is going to be bad or "uncool" but there's no accounting for intellect now is there?

I think it is unfortunate when people automatically assume a chain is going to be bad or "uncool" but there's no accounting for intellect now is there?
__________
I think it is a safe assumption that where the food is older than the kids preparing it and most of it is prepared off-site using who know what ingredients, and often frozen, that the food will be bad. At this point I start with the idea that chains are bad unless proved otherwise.

One exception for me, is Le Pain Quotidien.

What constitutes a chain? Pret a manger is clearly a chain as it has countless branches throughout London and the rest of the UK. Itsui which I referred to in my post I know of 3 branches although there certainly might be more. Wagamama has many branches throughout the UK and is clearly a chain. Is a restaurant which has a satellite operation a few blocks away or across town be a chain? I don't know the answer.

Pret says that their food, including their bread, is made fresh on-site daly. Do you disbelieve them? Also, it is naive to think that just because a restauarant is NOT part of a chain it is not using mass produced and frozen ingredients.

That is true Thursday about non-chains. And you can usually taste the items that are not made on the premises.

In the US, if you see a Sysco truck in front of a restaurant, it means that at least of the food is mass produced.

I have never eaten at a Pret, but Subway makes it own bread and it is awful.

<i>I think it is a safe assumption that where the food is older than the kids preparing it and most of it is prepared off-site using who know what ingredients, and often frozen, that the food will be bad.</i>

I think that you are describing a very specific kind of fast food and that a) not all chains are fast food and b) even for those that are, the trend is away from large quantities of frozen food being reheated on site.

<i>At this point I start with the idea that chains are bad unless proved otherwise. </i>

That probably isn't a terrible assumption about many restaurants, chain or not.

"Incidentally, with this take out/eat in thing, when I go to McDonald's, I don't see a price difference even though they ask me. Or is there one and I'm not realizing it?"

The system regards McD as a restaurant, and therefore liable to VAT on virtually everything it sells. So "eat in/eat out" is a meaningless question for tax liability in that case.

There's no simple solution to the underlying problem that doesn't sound daft at some point.

But ANY civilised democracy constantly takes decisions that sound daft to unthinking outsiders unable to see the wider picture: America's disgraceful tolerance of mendacious price ticketing in stores, for example. We realise, of course, - once it's explained to us - that American computer technology is so primitive its stores can't print shelf-edge price labels that include local sales tax. We still think that's daft though.

Britain (like all of Europe) has high - typically 20% - sales taxes (in effect a necessary consequence of EU membership): unlike most of Europe it refuses to tax food sold in food stores.

Clearly some stores sell food both to be eaten in and to be taken away: exempt such stores from food VAT altogether and you give them (typically a major chain) an unfair competitive advantage over the (usually independent) cafe next door, so that's not acceptable. Tax food and you get a voter revolt. Don't tax restaurant meals and you get the equally unacceptable situation of £200 a head meals not being taxed while basic clothing is taxed at 20% - and you're a week away from headlines saying "80 year old dies of hypothermia while zillionaires quaff champagne tax-free."

So in stores that sell food both for taking home (typically cold) and for eating in the law is takeaway's untaxed and eat in is taxed and you're asked which applies to you. That determines whether VAT is liable: VAT inspectors do a little bit of compliance auditing, and if they find abuse the merchant is penalised - or in this case, probably given a warning to enforce the law better: there are far bigger potential VAT abuses inspectors routinely monitor for.

Abuse of any sort in this area is rare. The system sounds a lot dafter than it is in real life.

Regarding the 2 examples given above of bread "made" on site, Pret and Subway, it may be baked on site but it's almost certainly made and frozen in a factory, particularly obvious by the taste of the stuff at Subway, as IMD says.

The US had a huge discussion about "baked on premises" several years ago, causing a few lawsuits, with Subway being the largest offender. Subway would say they baked their bread on premises, but what they actually did was took frozen dough from their supplier and baked it in the store. I think legally they had to change the language in their advertising. I think it originally said "Made fresh daily" and they were required to put "baked fresh daily" or something similar to that.

Well no doubt one of my favorite McDonald's, It's one of affordable & delicious chain restaurant.

One exception for me, is Le Pain Quotidien.

For you, that's fine; for me, I will never do what people call "eat" and I call "suffer" in one ever again. Ergo we can be non-intellectual together and both laugh while these others tell us how great their non-chain food experiences have been. (Imagine eating on one of their homes!!!!)

Oh, there is one other exception, Waffle House. Not one has cleaned their grill or waffle maker since 1957 and that is the charm. No excuses, not pretending to be more than they are. Just food that will kill you by the time you reach the front door.