When Hitler’s party won influence in Parliament, and even after he was made chancellor of Germany in 1933 – about a year and a half before seizing dictatorial power – many American press outlets judged that he would either be outplayed by more traditional politicians or that he would have to become more moderate. Sure, he had a following, but his followers were “impressionable voters” duped by “radical doctrines and quack remedies,” claimed The Washington Post. Now that Hitler actually had to operate within a government the “sober” politicians would “submerge” this movement, according to The New York Times and Christian Science Monitor. A “keen sense of dramatic instinct” was not enough. When it came to time to govern, his lack of “gravity” and “profundity of thought” would be exposed.
When I was a kid, my parents refused to let me drink coffee because they believed it would “stunt my growth.” It turns out, of course, that this is a myth. Studies have failed, again and again, to show that coffee or caffeine consumption are related to reduced bone mass or how tall people are.
Coffee has long had a reputation as being unhealthy. But in almost every single respect that reputation is backward. The potential health benefits are surprisingly large.
Good news! Another vice becomes a virtue. A survey of various studies and meta-studies suggest coffee (in it’s unadulterated, non-sugary, non-high-caloric form, e.g. black coffee) is good for you.
The article mentions some “coffee” drinks that are bad for you. Like the Large Dunkin’ Donuts frozen caramel coffee Coolatta (670 calories, 8 grams of fat, 144 grams of carbs). A real cup of coffee has 5 calories.
This is all good news as I just bought a [amazon text=coffee grinder&asin=B00DS4767A] and [amazon text=maker&asin=B00O9FO1HK].
Or as I like to paraphraseTalleyrand
Black as the night, hot as hell; pure as an angel, bitter as love
The typical cost of a manicure in the city helps explain the abysmal pay. A survey of more than 105 Manhattan salons by The Times found an average price of about $10.50. The countrywide average is almost double that, according to a 2014 survey by Nails Magazine, an industry publication.
With fees so low, someone must inevitably pay the price.
Ever wonder why getting you nails done in NYC is cheaper then just about everywhere else? Doesn’t it seem incredible that one of the most expensive cities in the US could have a service that is cheaper then almost anywhere else? This is a great expose in the NYT about how workers are exploited.
I particularly liked this map showing the number of Starbucks vs. nail shops: