Peter Aitken wrote:
> "Food Snob" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> >
> > D.Currie wrote:
> >> We went out to dinner tonight to a local place. When it came time to pay,
> >> I
> >> needed the waitress to make change so I could tip her. She came back with
> >> a
> >> five and a ten, and muttered something about "sorry, no change." Grrr.
> >> Five
> >> bucks was less than 15 percent, but even though she wasn't a spectacular
> >> waitress, I didn't want to leave that little. We go to this place often,
> >> and
> >> we've had this waitress before. But the full $10 was more than 20 percent
> >> and that bugged me. Half of me was thinking she was just a little too
> >> dumb
> >> to understand that I needed the singles for the tip, but the other half
> >> of
> >> me was thinking that she was pushing me to make the choice between the $5
> >> and the $10 and figuring she'd get the better tip.
> >
> > At the one restaurant where we are regulars, I tip very well, but
> > expect great service. If my son and I go there for lunch, and the bill
> > is $10, I tip $2 for marginal service, $3 for good service, or most
> > likely, $4 for excellent service. The servers know this, and bring me
> > salsa before I run out, and always keep my water glass from running
> > dry. If my wife is with us, the check will likely be ~$18, for which I
> > leave $4, $5, or more likely $6. Is $2, $3, even $5 or $10 too much to
> > pay for VIP treatment?
> >
> > Let's take the $18 check. 15% rounded up to the nearest dollar would
> > be a $3, making the meal total $21. A $6 (which is ~33%) tip would
> > bring the meal total to $24. $24 is only ~14% more than $21, but that
> > extra 14% has a huge effect on the overall pleasure of the dining
> > experience.
> >
> > When we go in there and are assigned a server who doesn't know us,
> > (s)he brings water and chips&salsa, just like for every customer.
> > After the server goes back to the back, (s)he acts differently,
> > obviously having been told by other staff that I am a huge tipper, but
> > only for spectacular service. I also often tip with $2 bills, which
> > just serves to highlight the size of the gratuity.
> >
> > In addition to the benefits I derive, there's the plus of knowing
> > you've done a good thing, even if your motives were not primarily
> > altruistic.
>
> All well and good, but what about people who do not go to a restaurant
> regularly? It's nice to be known and treated well because of your tipping,
> but relatively few people I think patronize any restaurant that frequently.

Really? I know people who have favorite restaurants, and the owners
know some of them by name.
>
> And then what about the other patrons? Suppose I came to your restaurant as
> an unknown. Is my service going to be slighted because the waitress is busy
> attending to her known big tippers?
>
Are you suggesting that economic relationships in the American economy
are based on fairness? Perhaps you get what you pay for. It took me
a while to develop the economic relationship, doing the dance back and
forth. I reckon that's analogous to having accumulated capital. Now I
can use said capital to acquire benefits that a person who does not
have capital does not have access to. In this narrow circumstance, I
am considered by the system to be better than equal to others. I merit
special priveleges.

In the big wide world, those who possess wealth can use it to great
benefit.

Read this:

Equal Justice

In twelfth century England, the rules of chivalry dictated
that nobles, when captured by their rivals were no longer to
be put to death, as had been the practice in earlier times.
However, in the preceding battles many common soldiers were
killed or maimed.

Today, in America, working class criminals are treated far
more harshly than white-collar criminals. After non-
confiscatory fines and short or suspended prison sentences,
corporate criminals are allowed to resume their opulent
lifestyle. Fairness would dictate a confiscation of all assets
for serious property crimes. Also, why would the CEO of a
corporation who knowingly endangers the lives of citizens,
and ultimately causes their deaths, not be held to the same
standard of guilt as an armed robber who murders in the
commission of his or her crime of greed?

Current law reflects a current mindset that suggests that
the very lives of these two classes of people are of a different
value. This, I utterly reject!
--Bobo Bonobo

I don't have much pecuniary capital, and my minor celebrity status and
$2.95 will buy me a latte at Kaldi's, but I think what I've done in the
circumstance is, on the whole, positive. I wrote that Equal Justice
piece several years ago, and while I see greed as an emotion
undevorcible from the human condition*, I don't see it as something to
be admired. I don't see my restaurant thing as a zero sum thing**.
Servers put out say, X amount of effort, distributed among their
customers. Might they not still put out just as much effort for the
rest, but ramp up their total output because they have a marked
increase in productivity in dealing with myself and others who follow
the same tip-well-for-excellent-service scheme?

Your post opened what I think is an interesting can of worms. Too bad
so few people bother to fish anymore.
>
> --
> Peter Aitken

--Bryan