On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 17:22:28 -0600, Sqwertz >
wrote:

>On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 16:30:49 -0600, Chemiker wrote:
>
>
>> Is it easier to cook for 8? or 2? For those who've made the transition
>> from one to the other, what were the most difficult adjustments you
>> had to make?
>
>It's not much less trouble to cook for 2 rather than 6. I still
>buy in bulk, I just freeze more from the get go. The eception is
>things like last night pork butt roast. That you cook all at once
>and use the remainders for tacos, quesadillas, pork in gravy, etc..
>It's always easy to use leftover pork roast and other meats.
>
>I don't know if could easier to cook for 8 rather than 2. But it's
>certainly not 4 times as hard. It's more like 20% harder to cook
>for 8 rather than 2. But serving for serving and time wise, it's
>less expensive.

I don't doubt you at all. One prob is that we have a tendency to
decide "Oh, tonight I think I'd like Chicken picatta/stroganoff/
eggplant pizzaiola/quiche. I think one of goals is going to have to be
cooking in smaller quantities with fewer leftovers to be frozen for
future archeologists.

It really is a puzzle, because logic is not the major issue. It's the
age-old question: What's for supper? and WE get to choose rather than
eat what mom put on the table. That's one reason I like peasant
cookery, with cheap ingredients. Great flavor, low cost, often better
the next day.

Thanks for the thought.

Alex

Chemiker wrote:
>
> On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 17:22:28 -0600, Sqwertz >
> wrote:
>
> >On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 16:30:49 -0600, Chemiker wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Is it easier to cook for 8? or 2? For those who've made the transition
> >> from one to the other, what were the most difficult adjustments you
> >> had to make?
> >
> >It's not much less trouble to cook for 2 rather than 6. I still
> >buy in bulk, I just freeze more from the get go. The eception is
> >things like last night pork butt roast. That you cook all at once
> >and use the remainders for tacos, quesadillas, pork in gravy, etc..
> >It's always easy to use leftover pork roast and other meats.
> >
> >I don't know if could easier to cook for 8 rather than 2. But it's
> >certainly not 4 times as hard. It's more like 20% harder to cook
> >for 8 rather than 2. But serving for serving and time wise, it's
> >less expensive.
>
> I don't doubt you at all. One prob is that we have a tendency to
> decide "Oh, tonight I think I'd like Chicken picatta/stroganoff/
> eggplant pizzaiola/quiche. I think one of goals is going to have to be
> cooking in smaller quantities with fewer leftovers to be frozen for
> future archeologists.
>
> It really is a puzzle, because logic is not the major issue. It's the
> age-old question: What's for supper? and WE get to choose rather than
> eat what mom put on the table. That's one reason I like peasant
> cookery, with cheap ingredients. Great flavor, low cost, often better
> the next day.
>
> Thanks for the thought.
>
> Alex

There is nothing wrong with the "I'd like X tonight" as long as you
don't cook new when you have X in the freezer ready to heat and eat.
Once you've cooked larger portions and frozen the extra for a while,
much of the time what you're in the mood for will already be in the
freezer.

If it was prepared properly, vac bagged and frozen right away there will
be no perceptible degradation in quality of the leftovers. I have a very
low opinion of people who seem to think they're too good for leftovers
and constantly waste perfectly good food.

On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 17:32:28 -0600, Chemiker wrote:

> I don't doubt you at all. One prob is that we have a tendency to
> decide "Oh, tonight I think I'd like Chicken picatta/stroganoff/
> eggplant pizzaiola/quiche. I think one of goals is going to have to be
> cooking in smaller quantities with fewer leftovers to be frozen for
> future archeologists.

My biggest problem was cooking too much, and always wanting to cook
something new. And never eating the leftovers. I learned to cook
half as much and take leftovers to work for lunch. Which solved
most of the problem (and saves money at lunch). But not all stuff
was suitable for work, especially the smelly stuff: Pork and
sauerkraut, fermented fish fried rice, and all sorts of other
stuff.

I've been cooking too much lately and not eating what's already
there (haven't been working either, so I have more time to cook).
So the last few days I've been in "eat what's going to expire
first". I rarely ever freeze cooked foods. Rather I freeze raw
ingredients. I may prep a bunch of something like egg rolls or
flatten out a bunch of hamburger patties, but rarely ever foods
I've cooked. Those *always* got ignored. Try and avoid that.

-sw

On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 22:14:06 -0600, Sqwertz >
wrote:

>On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 17:32:28 -0600, Chemiker wrote:
>
>> I don't doubt you at all. One prob is that we have a tendency to
>> decide "Oh, tonight I think I'd like Chicken picatta/stroganoff/
>> eggplant pizzaiola/quiche. I think one of goals is going to have to be
>> cooking in smaller quantities with fewer leftovers to be frozen for
>> future archeologists.
>
>My biggest problem was cooking too much, and always wanting to cook
>something new. And never eating the leftovers. I learned to cook
>half as much and take leftovers to work for lunch. Which solved
>most of the problem (and saves money at lunch). But not all stuff
>was suitable for work, especially the smelly stuff: Pork and
>sauerkraut, fermented fish fried rice, and all sorts of other
>stuff.
>
>I've been cooking too much lately and not eating what's already
>there (haven't been working either, so I have more time to cook).
>So the last few days I've been in "eat what's going to expire
>first". I rarely ever freeze cooked foods. Rather I freeze raw
>ingredients. I may prep a bunch of something like egg rolls or
>flatten out a bunch of hamburger patties, but rarely ever foods
>I've cooked. Those *always* got ignored. Try and avoid that.

If you're not freezing food you've cooked you aren't cooking all that
much... and what little you do cook isn't all that good or you'd eat
it before it becomes left overs.

On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 23:20:05 -0500, Brooklyn1 wrote:

> If you're not freezing food you've cooked you aren't cooking all that
> much... and what little you do cook isn't all that good or you'd eat
> it before it becomes left overs.

Uh-huh, yah. Whatever you say, Cats.

-sw

On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 23:20:05 -0500, Brooklyn1 wrote:

> On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 22:14:06 -0600, Sqwertz >
> wrote:
>
>>
>>My biggest problem was cooking too much, and always wanting to cook
>>something new. And never eating the leftovers. I learned to cook
>>half as much and take leftovers to work for lunch. Which solved
>>most of the problem (and saves money at lunch). But not all stuff
>>was suitable for work, especially the smelly stuff: Pork and
>>sauerkraut, fermented fish fried rice, and all sorts of other
>>stuff.
>>
>>I've been cooking too much lately and not eating what's already
>>there (haven't been working either, so I have more time to cook).
>>So the last few days I've been in "eat what's going to expire
>>first". I rarely ever freeze cooked foods. Rather I freeze raw
>>ingredients. I may prep a bunch of something like egg rolls or
>>flatten out a bunch of hamburger patties, but rarely ever foods
>>I've cooked. Those *always* got ignored. Try and avoid that.
>
> If you're not freezing food you've cooked you aren't cooking all that
> much... and what little you do cook isn't all that good or you'd eat
> it before it becomes left overs.

he doesn't have a small army of cats to help him out.

blake