rant #1

i was out of coffee this morning. which meant that before my eyes were fully open, i was driving. not the best way for me (or my neighbors) to start the week. i was minding my own business, listening to KUBE, (as i do) when i heard a McDonald's ad. it was for something they're calling a "mini meal." for the uninformed, a "mini-meal" consists of a small soda, small fries and your choice of a double cheeseburger (you read that right) a McChicken sandwich, or 4 chicken nuggets...all for under $3.

to state the blatantly obvious, there's nothing remotely "mini" about that pile of food. the double cheeseburger option and a regular soda will set you back around 870 calories. for those of us without the metabolism and work-out schedule of michael phelps, this a full meal + worth of calories. and of course, they know it. there's a very icky market fast food hucksters are trying to create. not only are they casting themselves as the value option, but they're also giving you an excuse to eat more (and therefore spend more) by manufacturing a need. so taco bell created the incredibly depressing "fourth meal" (read - stoner meal) and now McDonald's has introduced the "mini-meal." all of this begs the question, exactly how many meals a day do we need? and how much money can we really be saving if we eat all of them?

and this shit is cropping up everywhere. i saw an ad the other night for KFC. it was a *box* of food (because, i am not joking, the bag is too small to fit it all!) 2 sides, 1 piece of chicken, something called a snacker and 2 chicken tenders. i can't even remember how much it costs, i was too disturbed by the quantity. wait - i just went to their site. i forgot about the 32 oz. drink. ba-nanas!

subway, which rode the "health" bandwagon as hard as it could, was recently advertising foot-long sandwiches for under $5. i'm guessing the foot-long meatball isn't on Jared's diet, but he wasn't in the ad. instead they featured "real" people. construction and office workers (blue and white collar...hunger and the economy effect us all, man.) giddily singing an inane song about $5 sandwiches. and it's not like i'm disappointed in subway. the notion that fast food can ever be anything more than cheap, empty calories has always been a stretch. but no more than 4 weeks ago, fast food ads all featured their "healthier" options. i can almost hear the sigh of relief as they switch messaging from "healthy" to "cheap." but it's so insulting, since it both implies that they've been fleecing us in recent years, and that when we're poor, we feel the need to overeat. i guess, at these prices, we can hardly afford not to.