Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Then compare that to southern and soul food cuisines instead of which state serves more Imitation of others cuisines from other places. People should give opinions that what posters do on city data anyways. I just felt the way people were judging by foreign foods didn't even make sense, but that cool
The title of this thread is: "Which has BETTER food . . . " And there's no debate that the food known as regional in Georgia is "Southern or Soul Food." Is it "better" because it is loaded with either sugar\ spices\ fats & tastes good? Southern food, in general, is unhealthy food that makes people fat & dietetic [deadly]. This is not the case in California where diet is a way of life for many many people who want to live healthy. So they eat salads\ veggies\ healthy fruit juice drinks\ tofu\ grilled not fried foods. To eat in California means to eat healthy w/ less sodium & calories found in Southern or Soul food.
BBQ is a favorite American food that is served all over the country. Because of the climate in California, BBQ is common & well-liked [be it carne asada\ or fish\ corn\ onions, etc]. The BBQ in California is also mostly quickly grilled so that there is plenty of red raw fish in the tuna. Never over cooked. In Georgia, slow smoking BBQ is more common than here & tends to cook out all the nutrients in food. It tastes good but it is not necessarily good for you. California is more conscious of health than probably any state in American & the laws here are strict when it comes to maintaining good health [ie. first state to outlaw indoor smoking 20 years ago yet smoking is still allowed in restaurants in Georgia & all the Southern states]. What does that say about Georgia? Not an intelligent picture, I'm afraid.
AGAIN NON OF THAT "variety" IS Californian food It's FOREIGN FOOD SERVED IN CALI, How about this people in foreign countries can
actually try Southern and/or Soul food! but they can't actually try Californian Food because there's not a Unique cuisine that started in California with recognition, If someone Mexican from Mexico wanted to try Unique Californian food in Mexico. Mexican food would not be the answer.
There dosen't need to be as much mexican foods and etc in Georgia as in Cali because there not as Many Georgians! again "Yall are acting like Cali has more food per capita to an individual or something for each mouth in Cali to have more food. it’s too funny" "Yall are arguing Cali has more food.... ummm that cause yall have more people, not to mention more land. With more people, creates more demand and yall have the land to grow it on, what are we playing the ignore fractions game?" If you want Chinese food in Georgia go get chinese food dawg. There are more Xbox 360s in Cali as well, does that mean in Georgia you have less of a chance of getting a Xbox? and does that even matter cali has more? in Georgia you can get the exact same Dishes as Cali YES! is there just as much serving as in cali NO, but is it even necessary to have just as much NO. Grocery stores will be over stock and a lot of food would be wasted.
"this is all based on opinion. "best food state" is going to be highly subjective, because people have different tastes. So that means we can't really compare on what is "good" or "bad", just on which state has the most variety" Instead stating taste and opinions of which state has better food since Cali doesn’t have a cuisine like Georgia your trying to avoid it, so it's let's compare both states by which state serves more Imitation of others cuisines from other places.
Not sure why you are stuck on this point? That is not the argument. Even the OP (original poster) has clarified what he means. We are comparing food in general, all varieties, low to high end, international, quality of restaurants, produce, and freshness, everything's in play. You compare a state like Georgia to its peers like Tennesee, Louisiana, or Arkansas. California is an international state of global proportions, it cannot and should not be compared. Someone mentioned Yankees vs. little leagues.
Besides, not sure why the variety of hundreds of international cuisines at the top/middle/low ends of what we serve in California should have less relevance than a singular endemic cuisine (Southern). Furthermore, Georgia cannot lay claim to the entire Southern cuisine. There's 17 or 18 other southern states that might not agree with that.
By Definition: here is where Southern cuisine orginated, how many bastardized or stolen elements of others can you count? Should I dismiss it like you dismiss California cuisine:
The most notable influences come from British, Scots-Irish, French, Native American, African American , and to a lesser extent Spanish cuisines. Soul food, Creole, Cajun, Lowcountry, and Floribbean are examples of Southern cuisine. In recent history, elements of Southern cuisine have spread north, having an effect on the development of other types of American cuisine.
Many items such as squash, tomatoes, corn (and its derivatives, including grits), as well as the practice of deep pit barbecuing were inherited from the southeastern Native American tribes such as the Caddo, Choctaw, and Seminole. Many foods associated with sugar, flour, milk, eggs (many kinds of baking or dairy products such as breads and cheeses) are more associated with Europe. The South's propensity for a full breakfast (as opposed to a Continental one with a simple bread item and drink) is derived from the British fry up, although it was altered substantially. Much of Cajun or Creole cuisine is based on France, and on Spain to a lesser extent. Floribbean is more Spanish-based with obvious Caribbean influences, while Tex-Mex has considerable Mexican and native tribes touches.
Not sure why you are stuck on this point? That is not the argument. Even the OP (original poster) has clarified what he means. We are comparing food in general, all varieties, low to high end, international, quality of restaurants, produce, and freshness, everything's in play. You compare a state like Georgia to its peers like Tennesee, Louisiana, or Arkansas. California is an international state of global proportions, it cannot and should not be compared. Someone mentioned Yankees vs. little leagues.
Besides, not sure why the variety of hundreds of international cuisines at the top/middle/low ends of what we serve in California should have less relevance than a singular endemic cuisine (Southern). Furthermore, Georgia cannot lay claim to the entire Southern cuisine. There's 17 or 18 other southern states that might not agree with that.
By Definition: here is where Southern cuisine orginated, how many bastardized or stolen elements of others can you count? Should I dismiss it like you dismiss California cuisine:
The most notable influences come from British, Scots-Irish, French, Native American, African American , and to a lesser extent Spanish cuisines. Soul food, Creole, Cajun, Lowcountry, and Floribbean are examples of Southern cuisine. In recent history, elements of Southern cuisine have spread north, having an effect on the development of other types of American cuisine.
Many items such as squash, tomatoes, corn (and its derivatives, including grits), as well as the practice of deep pit barbecuing were inherited from the southeastern Native American tribes such as the Caddo, Choctaw, and Seminole. Many foods associated with sugar, flour, milk, eggs (many kinds of baking or dairy products such as breads and cheeses) are more associated with Europe. The South's propensity for a full breakfast (as opposed to a Continental one with a simple bread item and drink) is derived from the British fry up, although it was altered substantially. Much of Cajun or Creole cuisine is based on France, and on Spain to a lesser extent. Floribbean is more Spanish-based with obvious Caribbean influences, while Tex-Mex has considerable Mexican and native tribes touches.
First of all anything with southeastern Native American cuisine, Southern and Soul food cuisines can use it’s the same place. 2nd Than Southern and Soul food cuisines are influence by others cuisines! it’s NOT British, Scots-Irish, French, Cuisines Sorry! Dude Soul Food and African American cuisine are the same thing so I think you mean west African, it’s West African influence but it’s NOT West African food, and by the way Soul food comes from the south. “Georgia cannot lay claim to the entire Southern cuisine. There's 17 or 18 other southern states that might not agree with that.” I think your missing the ideal of Southern cuisine, meaning it comes from the region, Georgia is part of that region, if there was North Carolina vs. Ohio it would be the same thing. Only
Louisiana and Texas are a little different, and Georgia isn’t claiming those states differences. So while you're talking about Southern cuisines “stolen” (LAMO) elements of others cuisines to make new cuisines. You're trying to still other cuisines all together, The American flag use British color the American flag is not the British flag, Your trying to use a British flag and say if we make here it ours ummm No.
I have said repeatedly if Cali takes something and put there on spin to it’s Cali cuisine. A few poster posted Cali food that ok "Then compare that to southern and soul food cuisines instead of which state serves more Imitation of others cuisines from other places. People should give opinions that what posters do on city data anyways. I just felt the way people were judging by foreign foods didn't even make sense, but that cool”
And original poster said back
Quote:
Originally Posted by AcroJimmy2
That's a fair point.
When I started this thread I was thinking just in general which state people think has better food, which includes local cuisines, types of foods and products available and to what extent, quality of restaurants, etc. It was purposely a fairly vague question, I just wanted to make sure people didn't just focus on the big cities.
Umm yeah this is a Cali superior complex like crazy Quote Best coast “California is an international state of global proportions it cannot and should not be compared. Someone mentioned Yankees vs. little leagues” dude ever state with in the top 10 most populated states would be in the 50 largest GPA’s in world if they were a stand along country. Georgia would be the 28th largest economy in the world out of 194 countries. But I said this “If you want Chinese food in Georgia go get Chinese food dawg. There are more Xbox 360s in Cali as well, does that mean in Georgia you have less of a chance of getting a Xbox? and does that even matter Cali has more? in Georgia you can get the exact same Dishes as Cali YES! is there just as much serving as in cali NO, but is it even necessary to have just as much NO. Grocery stores will be over stock and a lot of food would be wasted."
Meaning Just cause Cali serves or even grows more food doesn’t mean it going to you! It’s for the demand of the larger population you as a individual would have same food per capita as a individual Georgian that’s the answer to “types of foods and products available and to what extent” to the original poster. It’s same it’s like arguing a larger GPA, land area and population makes yall have a larger individual per capita when it come to food, that's still funny. Instead of comparing the quality of restaurants (if Cali wins that's fair), and local cuisines Southern and Soul food vs. cali food (if the cuisine you're eating is name after another region it's that region cuisine!) yall rather boast a superior complex on something that doesn’t even make sense.
Last edited by chiatldal; 01-24-2010 at 12:23 PM..
The title of this thread is: "Which has BETTER food . . . " And there's no debate that the food known as regional in Georgia is "Southern or Soul Food." Is it "better" because it is loaded with either sugar\ spices\ fats & tastes good? Southern food, in general, is unhealthy food that makes people fat & dietetic [deadly]. This is not the case in California where diet is a way of life for many many people who want to live healthy. So they eat salads\ veggies\ healthy fruit juice drinks\ tofu\ grilled not fried foods. To eat in California means to eat healthy w/ less sodium & calories found in Southern or Soul food.
BBQ is a favorite American food that is served all over the country. Because of the climate in California, BBQ is common & well-liked [be it carne asada\ or fish\ corn\ onions, etc]. The BBQ in California is also mostly quickly grilled so that there is plenty of red raw fish in the tuna. Never over cooked. In Georgia, slow smoking BBQ is more common than here & tends to cook out all the nutrients in food. It tastes good but it is not necessarily good for you. California is more conscious of health than probably any state in American & the laws here are strict when it comes to maintaining good health [ie. first state to outlaw indoor smoking 20 years ago yet smoking is still allowed in restaurants in Georgia & all the Southern states]. What does that say about Georgia? Not an intelligent picture, I'm afraid.
you need to be careful of these blanket statements
Location: The Greatest city on Earth: City of Atlanta Proper
8,485 posts, read 14,993,141 times
Reputation: 7333
Quote:
Originally Posted by californio sur
The title of this thread is: "Which has BETTER food . . . " And there's no debate that the food known as regional in Georgia is "Southern or Soul Food." Is it "better" because it is loaded with either sugar\ spices\ fats & tastes good? Southern food, in general, is unhealthy food that makes people fat & dietetic [deadly]. This is not the case in California where diet is a way of life for many many people who want to live healthy. So they eat salads\ veggies\ healthy fruit juice drinks\ tofu\ grilled not fried foods. To eat in California means to eat healthy w/ less sodium & calories found in Southern or Soul food.
BBQ is a favorite American food that is served all over the country. Because of the climate in California, BBQ is common & well-liked [be it carne asada\ or fish\ corn\ onions, etc]. The BBQ in California is also mostly quickly grilled so that there is plenty of red raw fish in the tuna. Never over cooked. In Georgia, slow smoking BBQ is more common than here & tends to cook out all the nutrients in food. It tastes good but it is not necessarily good for you. California is more conscious of health than probably any state in American & the laws here are strict when it comes to maintaining good health [ie. first state to outlaw indoor smoking 20 years ago yet smoking is still allowed in restaurants in Georgia & all the Southern states]. What does that say about Georgia? Not an intelligent picture, I'm afraid.
You are either naive or just intentionally trying to push buttons if you actually believe any of that mess.
-Georgian's do not eat Southern food or BBQ all day, every day. You do know it's the 21st century and we have access to the same cuisine everyone else does, right?
-Not everyone in California eats healthy since nearly a third of all Californians are obese.
You should really try traveling more so that you might actually find a clue...
Georgia was definitely producing crops way before California as Georgia is one of the 13 original colonies.So they do know something about agriculture and whether someone bakes or fries something in the south is by personal preference.
I know that Georgia raises a lot of chickens and a lot of dishes obviously come from this but as I stated before it is the way something is prepared as to whether it is healthy or not. Poultry and fish are probably the two best and healthiest meats you can eat until you fry them but not everyone does in the south as some bake.
You are either naive or just intentionally trying to push buttons if you actually believe any of that mess.
-Georgian's do not eat Southern food or BBQ all day, every day. You do know it's the 21st century and we have access to the same cuisine everyone else does, right?
-Not everyone in California eats healthy since nearly a third of all Californians are obese.
You should really try traveling more so that you might actually find a clue...
The topic is a general idea of what is better: Georgia cooking or California cooking. That doesn't mean everyone in either state cook or eat alike. But the general opinion of how food is cooked clearly shows the differences between Georgia and California. For example, eventually cigarette smoking in restaurants will be outlawed in Georgia. The question is: why did it take so long? That's where smarts enters the discussion.
Location: The Greatest city on Earth: City of Atlanta Proper
8,485 posts, read 14,993,141 times
Reputation: 7333
Quote:
Originally Posted by californio sur
The topic is a general idea of what is better: Georgia cooking or California cooking. That doesn't mean everyone in either state cook or eat alike. But the general opinion of how food is cooked clearly shows the differences between Georgia and California. For example, eventually cigarette smoking in restaurants will be outlawed in Georgia. The question is: why did it take so long? That's where smarts enters the discussion.
Cigarette smoking is allowed only at bars in Georgia. If a restaurant with a bar wishes to allow smoking, then only people 18 years or older are allowed to enter. Since that will take away from revenue, not to many restaurants opt for that. It has been this way since 2005:
http://www.dhr.georgia.gov/portal/site/DHS/menuitem.24259484221d3c0b50c8798dd03036a0/?vgnextoid=1e13a5d513f94010VgnVCM100000bf01010aRCR D (broken link)
Cigarette smoking is allowed only at bars in Georgia. If a restaurant with a bar wishes to allow smoking, then only people 18 years or older are allowed to enter. Since that will take away from revenue, not to many restaurants opt for that. It has been this way since 2005:
GA Smoke Free Air (http://www.dhr.georgia.gov/portal/site/DHS/menuitem.24259484221d3c0b50c8798dd03036a0/?vgnextoid=1e13a5d513f94010VgnVCM100000bf01010aRCR D - broken link)
Thanks for providing the link\ info. I am glad that tobacco use is being restricted in the South esp around food & drink. Have you ever been eating when someone nearby decides to smoke?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
First of all anything with southeastern Native American cuisine, Southern and Soul food cuisines can use it’s the same place. 2nd Than Southern and Soul food cuisines are influence by others cuisines! it’s NOT 
Umm yeah this is a Cali superior complex like crazy Quote Best coast “California is an international state of global proportions it cannot and should not be compared. Someone mentioned Yankees vs. little leagues” dude ever state with in the top 10 most populated states would be in the 50 largest GPA’s in world if they were a stand along country. Georgia would be the 28th largest economy in the world out of 194 countries. But I said this “If you want Chinese food in Georgia go get Chinese food dawg. There are more Xbox 360s in Cali as well, does that mean in Georgia you have less of a chance of getting a Xbox? and does that even matter Cali has more? in Georgia you can get the exact same Dishes as Cali YES! is there just as much serving as in cali NO, but is it even necessary to have just as much NO. Grocery stores will be over stock and a lot of food would be wasted."
