[HN Gopher] Restaurant prices in the 19th and 20th centuries (2009) ___________________________________________________________________ Restaurant prices in the 19th and 20th centuries (2009) Author : benbreen Score : 51 points Date : 2021-07-31 02:59 UTC (20 hours ago) (HTM) web link (restaurant-ingthroughhistory.com) (TXT) w3m dump (restaurant-ingthroughhistory.com) | [deleted] | arh68 wrote: | Interesting, the prices and choices. See also | https://www.economist.com/big-mac-index and | https://github.com/TheEconomist/big-mac-data , though you may | want more historicals. | telesilla wrote: | >[1987] However, at a top restaurant such as Masa's in San | Francisco a fixed-price meal runs $48 (almost certainly excluding | drinks and tip), while diners at Berkeley's innovative Chez | Panisse can expect to pay at least $45. | | Gosh - I'm pretty sure the last time I walked out of Chez Panisse | it wasn't for less than $250 each (with wine).. inflation surely | doesn't count for this?` | Aunche wrote: | Part of it is that fine dining is much more labor intensive now | than it used to be. Chocolate lava cake was at the pinnacle of | fine dining desserts in 1987, but now it's considered rather | pedestrian. | quickthrower2 wrote: | Cook it a bit longer and it's a souffle | Mikeb85 wrote: | Nope, a proper lava cake is a layer of cake surrounding a | layer of ganache. Under-cooking a chocolate cake is the | lazy way. | | Also a souffle has a high % of whipped egg whites versus a | typical cake which has unwhipped eggs but a bit of baking | powder. | tony0x02 wrote: | Source? Just wondering where you got this info from. | JumpCrisscross wrote: | Do we have an index of the ratio between the cost of fine | dining and peasant/fast food over the last few centuries? | bobthepanda wrote: | it might be hard to do, particularly for anything that was | pre-industrial. aristocrats mostly ate in their homes with a | massive kitchen, gardening, hunting staff. | | fine dining in a city needs a support base, and for a good | deal of history there weren't enough people who could afford | to eat out luxury food to support a fine dining scene. | vkou wrote: | Overall inflation doesn't account for it. A dollar today is | worth ~40 cents back then. | | Wage inflation for professionals living in San Francisco, | however, does. A lot more people in SF are making | ~$400,000/year, than were making ~$10,000/year, back then. | Hence, the restaurant can charge ~4x, and still be fill its | tables every night. | [deleted] | daggersandscars wrote: | There's multiple factors in play here. Inflation is one. | | Population growth is another. The Bay-area population went up | by ~2 million people between 1990 and 2020. Even if the income | distribution remains the same, the number of potential diners | who can afford an expensive meal goes up. | | Income distribution is another. If the percentage of the | population who could afford an expensive meal and would buy one | goes up, the number of potential diners goes up even faster. | | Perceived social impact of an expensive meal is another factor. | If more people believe there is social benefit in buying to an | expensive meal, the number of potential diners goes up. This | could be due to a larger pool of expensive meal buyers trying | to impress each other, better awareness of expensive | restaurants by the general population, etc. | | Edit: changed "going to an expensive meal" to "buying [...]" | paulpauper wrote: | _1981 The chain restaurant TGI Friday's charges $2.95 for its | Plain Potato Skins appetizer, which comes with sour cream and | chives for dipping, but $5.20 for Loaded Potato Skins which | arrive with cheddar cheese and crumbled bacon._ | | Seems way too much | mleonhard wrote: | The information would be much more interesting if it were | adjusted for inflation or purchasing-power. | code_duck wrote: | I thought the non-adjusted prices were interesting. No idea | what story it tells if you adjust it, but non adjusted, the | prices were essentially the same from 1840-1925. | choeger wrote: | Yes. That's interesting. Your grandfather could tell you what | a dinner should cost by his experience. How did that happen? | Did wages not increase? | geogra4 wrote: | The Gold standard | dsr_ wrote: | The data's not available before 1947, but the trend is | clear: you're looking at the early part of a compound | growth formula (with large annual variability). | | https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/A939RX0Q048SBEA/ | | US GDP per person has grown about 1% per year on average. | | Wages stopped increasing to match productivity in the early | 1980s, and that trend continues. | bluGill wrote: | The gold standard made inflation nearly impossible. Thus | prices stayed the same long term. | easymovet wrote: | Turns out monetary expansion does cause price inflation: " 1849 | Sky high "gold rush" prices at a fashionable eating house in San | Francisco: Corned Beef & Cabbage (1.25), Sweet Potatoes (50C/), | Apple Pie (75C/)." | ximonn777 wrote: | Before 1971 gold backed currency. After its fiat with only | backing a promise and price doubling every 15 years on average. | msla wrote: | Gold-backed currency is fiat, with government setting gold- | money exchange rate. | | Besides, there were more bank runs back in the gold standard | era. | TheGigaChad wrote: | Idiot. Enjoy your inflation. | sethc2 wrote: | Does this really effect anything? If it did you figure the | economic statistics would show drastic changes starting round | then. | DavidWoof wrote: | > 1885...Two eggs, fried or boiled, accompanied by the invariable | boiled potato, fetch from 10 to 15 cents; steak 15 cents; | sirloin, 25 cents; plain omelet, 25 cents; | | 10c for two fried eggs, but 25c for a plain omelet? Did omelet | mean something other other than eggs back then? Or is it that | "omelet" implies cooked fresh, while boiled and fried eggs are | cooked in bulk and served cold? | cco wrote: | Its very possible the omelet contained more eggs, 4-5 would | make some sort of sense for these prices. | crooked-v wrote: | Omelets take a fair bit more attention from the cook than doing | a big batch of fried or boiled eggs all at once. | [deleted] | dmarchand90 wrote: | Yeah weird the egg based dishes consistently seem to outprice | steak: | | 1860 The Globe, Salt Lake City: Porter House Steak (25C/), Ham | & Eggs (371/2C/), Bowl of Oyster Soup (1.00). | | 1865 The Pioneer Restaurant, Portland OR: Porter House Steak | (20C/), Sirloin Steak (15C/), Ham & Eggs (25C/), Apple, Prune, | or Pear Sauce (5C/), Cranberry, Apple, or Custard Pie (5C/). | jlarocco wrote: | Omeletes are eggs with extra ingredients (ham, peppers, etc.) | dgfitz wrote: | I believe it says "plain omelette" which I read to mean at | most they added cheese. | picodguyo wrote: | A lot is said about portion sizes nowadays, but that chicken | dinner from 1960 looks like a gut buster! | legulere wrote: | Would be interesting to compare those values to typical wages of | the time. How many hours did you need to work for a restaurant | visit? | | Most products are far cheaper in terms of hours of labour needed | to produce them nowadays, while services and restaurants largely | stayed the same in labour-intensity, so inflation-adjusted | numbers would not be very helpful. | michaelbuckbee wrote: | The dinners aren't the same across the years so it's not a very | apples to apples charting of it, but I plucked some | representative values out and did the inflation lookups on them | here: | | https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1dWiKEfbXmDGcQUYMI-5x... | ardit33 wrote: | The old menus (from the 1800s), just read as much more healthy | wholesome food. It seems that sometimes after the 50s, | restaurant/dinner food quality took a dive and it looks like mass | market food you find a groecery store now. | | Recently, I remember in Williamsburg, there used to be a | food/restaurant store where you could by home cooked style meals. | Eg, greens, beans, turkey, brisket and other home style food. It | was cheap and good. | | Not sure what happened to those stores, but the replacements, | that sell 'build your salad bowl' type of food feel more sterile | and just not as good. | | eg. There is a huge difference in taste between a good local | burito place, then going to Chipoltle and such. | TheGigaChad wrote: | But it lacks gluten free vegan dishes, that can be eaten with a | mask on. | whathappenedto wrote: | I feel like more restaurants have been going with cheap wheat- | based ingredients and heavy batter deep frying. | | The trend towards fried chicken sandwiches reduces the "meat" | part of the sandwich only 50% meat. Happy hours consist of | flatbreads, fries, sliders, artichoke dip (mostly oil, and | chips to dip), egg rolls, bruschetta, wings with heavy | breading, etc. | | Basically even medium-tier restaurants are evolving into bar | and diner food, and making it seem like a trendy thing. | syedkarim wrote: | The old menus seem amazingly bland. | rishikeshs wrote: | When the food became fast to make, the quality and nutrition | value decreased! ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2021-07-31 23:00 UTC)