Hacker News Reader

Comment by daveFNbuck | Hacker News Reader

There are only 18,000 people in this town. To hit his goal of 60 diners a day would require the average person in town to visit more than once a year. How many middle class people are going to spend $130 on an entree on an average Tuesday night? I've never spent that much on a meal and my income is too high to be considered middle class in the US.

View on HN

There are about four Michelin starred restaurants within a 30km radius, there are also other towns within that radius, so its a little more complicated than one town of 18,000 one Michelin starred restaurant. Also menu items started at 30 and went up to approx 110 euros.

30 Euros per entree is still a lot for a middle-class family. I don't see how this makes it an issue of a declining middle class rather than just the decline of a particular town.

> menu items started at 30 and went up to approx 110 euros

Is it another restaurant than this one http://www.jeromebrochot.com/media/original/575147df7d79e/ca... ?

Prices are rather reasonnable here, on the expensive side but I would consider eating there. While a menu where items go from 30 to 110 euros is completely out of the question for anyone I know.

No, that's it. The prices I "sampled" were from 29 to prix fixe 130 (which I erroneously wrote as 110, but close enough)

It's the 110 euro part of the menu that he's ditching and losing the star over. The article mentions how much expensive sea bass and turbot is wasted because nobody buys it.

You need to count tourists, especially those specifically looking to tour Michelin star restaurants. There's the reason a tyre company is publishing a food guide in the first place.

Is touring Michelin star restaurants a middle-class hobby?

Why wouldn't it be? I love eating out at nice restaurants and traveling. Maybe the issue is the middle class doesn't have as much disposable money as it used to.

It’s actually the reason Michelin ( which is a tyre brand) invented this guide in the first place : to incite people with cars to hit the road and visit good restaurants outside their town.

Yes, that's the meaning of Michelin stars:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelin_Guide#Stars

1 Michelin star: "A very good restaurant in its category" 2 Michelin stars: "Excellent cooking, worth a detour" 3 Michelin stars: "Exceptional cuisine, worth a special journey"

But OP is abour one-star restaurant, which means it is only recommended for people who are already in the neighborhood or passing by.

Yep :) I can really recommend it. Haven’t been disappointed so far.

For folks who live in the general area but not necessarily that particular town, I imagine it easily could be. For folks who have to fly across the world and take significant time off from work, probably much less so.

Damn straight it is. It's my secondary hobby, after motorcycling.

Not at "$130"

Almost all middle class families can afford a $130 meal once or twice a year. It's really just about what else they're giving up. Think about how many "middle class" families own Harley motorcycles - and those things are inflated money sinks, similar to a boat, ATV+trailer, RV, lifted truck, or dirtbag travel habit. Most "middle class" families can afford one toy. On that scale, $130 even once a month is quite affordable.

> Almost all middle class families can afford a $130 meal once or twice a year.

It might be different in other countries I guess, but I live in France and Belgium, and nobody I know around here (family, friends, spanning from lower to upper middle class) would even consider eating at a restaurant with that kind of prices.

Nobody I know owns Harley motorcycles either, anyway, but it doesn't seem very relevant.

How many people do you know who smoke? A lot of middle and lower-class people smoke.

Some searching reveals that the smoking rate is north of 25% in both France and Belgium, and a pack of cigarettes in France is 7 EUR, let's round that down to 5.

So for a 110 EUR (~$130) meal we're talking about the equivalent of 26 days of 1 pack a day smoking, or just under 2 weeks of 2 pack a day.

Which I believe eloquently makes the point that you're out of touch with just how much $130 of disposable income over a year is.

We're talking about saving 30 cents/day, hardly out of reach of even the poorest of people who'd like to treat themselves to something like an expensive restaurant on a yearly basis.

> you're out of touch with just how much $130 of disposable income over a year is.

I'm not actually saying it's much or it's out of reach. I'm saying few people are willing to spend that at a restaurant, not because they're poor (I'm talking about doctors, for example) but mostly because there are so many cheaper and very good restaurants that those expensive ones look like they are just meant for other occasions or other people. The aforementionned doctors sometimes get invited there by pharmaceutical compagnies trying to sell them things, for example.

Around my homeplace I know quite a few restaurants with Michelin stars (two-star Coutanceau in La Rochelle for example, from where I came back just this week) and honestly most often the people there seem to be foreign tourists.

The context of this thread is whether dropping $130 at a restaurant is a "middle-class hobby", you were replying to a comment saying that was perfectly reasonable for someone of even limited means.

I'm not defending spending $130 at a restaurant, I can afford it and I don't, I think it's a dumb waste of money, but I think the same of a lot of other people's hobbies. Whether those hobbies are affordable to them if they're in the middle class is another question, and clearly dropping $130 at a restaurant every once in a while is.

There's a difference between a family that wouldn't consider spending $130 each on a meal for two because they'd rather spend that money on a weekend break for two or a meal for five and a family that couldn't afford to spend $260 on a leisure pursuit though

I think one of the points that is worth making, is that middle class is not what it used to be. It should be OK to consider a $130 meal if you are middle class. The economy has been booming (for the rich). But the middle class is no more...

This comes entirely down to how you define "middle class" and IMHO it's far too broad of a group to make sweeping statements on what they can and cannot afford. A family with 50k income total might be considered middle class and I doubt they would feel they could afford a $130 per person meal even once a year. A family with 200k income on the other hand might be just as you described. Both could easily consider themselves (or be considered by others) to be "middle class"

The number you are looking for is household discretionary income -- the money left over after taxes, housing, utilities, food, transportation, and other necessities are paid for. It is the money available for saving or spending on luxuries.

The US average discretionary income per household: ~$21,000. That leaves plenty of room for a few $130/head meals. Despite income stagnation, the US middle class still has amazing amounts of discretionary income compared to the rest of the industrialized world.

Couple of points: (1) median would be more insightful in this context than average and (2) neither do a great job of describing a range of situations like the term "middle class" does. Your point could be changed to "a family with average discretionary income could afford a few $130 per plate meals", but again my point is it's difficult to sweep that across a term that is increasingly describing a very broad range of financial situations.

Do they have kid menus? $130 for 4 people would be $520. That's insane.

That's the monthly rent for a many bedroom flat in France (outside of major cities). The after tax income is twice or three times that number. Don't expect a middle class family to eat there.

$520 for a group of 4 at a high-end restaurant isn't insane. It's actually fairly reasonable, especially if you throw a bottle of wine or two into the mix.

For upper-middle class people that value high-end dining experiences, $130/person for a meal a few times a year isn't particularly unusual (in the USA, at least). Such people are easy to find if you join a local foodie/dining interest group.

The income in France is many times less than the income in the USA.

I'm aware. I think my comment made it clear that I was speaking to the middle-class experience in the USA.

That said, $130 USD or €110 /person still isn't unreasonable for a truly good restaurant in France. It might be above what the 'middle class' is generally willing to spend, but you can practically throw a rock in France and hit a restaurant that charges these kind of prices. And people (including myself) go out of their way to travel to France to indulge in dining experiences at these sorts of places.

Wasn't clear to me. The article is about a restaurant in France in the middle of nowhere.

French families don't have that kind of money to spend on a restaurant. That could work with international tourists in Paris.

So is healthcare or education. For a couple with two kids, not having to spend 30000$ per kid on their university tuition is quite a difference.

Per kid per year.

I don't have kids (although I might be insane), but apparently there's a thing called a "baby-sitter" you can deploy in situations like this and for considerably less than $130 per child.

Then it is not familly dinner.

I've been to a few one-star restaurants, they have kid menus though they of course aren't quite a bargain. We spent just short of 200 euros for four, with only a glass of wine for each adult.

maybe you have a very distorted perception of how much disposable income the median middle class has.

I grew up in a decidedly lower-class family (at least as concerns income) and my parents would have been able to afford $130 a year. Of course the kind of financial discipline that lets you save money while on unemployment benefits/working a low-income job makes it quite unlikely to spend it all on a single meal.

I'm fairly certain that a middle-class family would be able to afford a $130 meal if they really wanted, it's just that they don't feel like they are getting more enjoyment than 4 $30 meals would provide, and that's OK. Don't pretend that middle-class people have no money to spend, when in reality they just have none left over after spending it on all kinds of things.

What the middle class is certainly has changed over time. I grew up middle class and there is no way in hell we'd ever go for a meal that was more than $100 per person.

If you've never spent that much on a meal, you're not a foodie. That's OK: but there are people who do appreciate excellent food, and are willing to pay for it.

Personally, the most I've spent is about $700 on a tasting menu for two at a place in Washington DC. $130 on a meal for two including wine wouldn't be unusual - I have meals like that maybe 10 to 15 times a year.

Michelin starred restaurants are frequently destination restaurants - they will attract people from some distance. That's why Michelin thought up the idea - to encourage people to drive and wear out their tires!

How much you're spending on a meal is not necessarily related to the quality of the food. You can have a Michelin-starred meal for just $2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong_Soya_Sauce_Chicken_R...

I've had a $5 plate from an inconspicuous family restaurant taste far better than a $250-per-person meal at a location where you had to reserve 3 months in advance. There are some ingredients that are worth the cost, but you can certainly appreciate and love food without having to spend an average individual's weekly paycheck on a single meal.

People who frequent these French villages do not have incomes that let them dine out in such a place 10-15 times a year.

For people wondering about the prices...

Here is the chef's website, with various menus and prices: http://www.jeromebrochot.com/fr/cartes-et-menus.html

It goes as low as 21€ for the Winter menu (starter, main course, dessert): http://www.jeromebrochot.com/media/original/575147df7d79e/me...

Up to 110€ for the New Year's Eve menu (170€ with drinks included): http://www.jeromebrochot.com/media/original/575147df7d79e/me...

OK so it looks like the 21-110 Euro range was for a set menu, not individual courses.

At a Michelin starred restaurant, you'd typically want to select a menu, usually the full tasting menu, rather than individual plates. You get a lot more variety and experience a full range of the creativity and skill of the chef. Otherwise it's a bit like going to a variety show and only seeing one or two acts.

> With a top menu at $130

That $130 is most likely for an entire several course meal, not an entree.

I think most middle class people go out to nice dinners a few times a year for anniversaries and birthdays.

Lots of people in the US with enough income to swing an occasional $250/couple dinner out consider The Olive Garden fancy and go somewhere like that for their “special” dinners. Source: personally know way more people in that situation than I do people who appreciate and can afford non-microwaved meals out. Could be regional—this is the midwest, after all. “Prix Fixe” isn’t in most people’s vocabulary here, even if they can easily afford good meals. It’s a socialization/class thing.

Olive Garden may be acceptable (I'm no snob), but no one considers it _fancy_. It's the least-expensive lowest-grade of sit-down meal.

I'm in Iowa and people really do think Olive Garden is "fancy". I got an Olive Garden gift card for Christmas and my and I even cracked a joke about going on a "fancy" date there, because so many people here think that it's what a "nice" restaurant is.

The Olive Gardens around here are worse than the middle tier of frozen Italian dinners you can grab at the grocery store, these days (they've definitely gotten worse over the last 10-15 years—I think they've preferred lowering quality over raising prices, though they've done that a bit, too). Some dishes are worse than cheap frozen dinners, even. Last time I went it seriously had the taste and consistency (and general watery-ness) of microwaved food, too. Actually that last part's true for most of the non-fine-dining Italian I've had around here lately, including a few mom & pop places, not just chains. If the cheap to middling sections of the frozen aisle are better than what you're making... please stop. Then again, it sells for some reason, so who am I to say.

[EDIT] and to back up Marpster below, it is nonetheless "fancy" around here to many (Missouri), including those who could certainly afford better for their special nights out.

> I think most middle class people go out to nice dinners a few times a year for anniversaries and birthdays.

I grew up "upper middle class" in the USA. We went out to nice dinners on anniversaries and birthdays - meaning $30 entrees and $5 desert, not $130 entrees. A $130 meal is a once in a lifetime type celebration (e.g. 50th wedding anniversary, making partner in a company you've worked for for a decade), not a few times a year. At least for my family.

I always find these discussions pointless without more context. How old are you? $40 in 1979 prices is $130 now.

And don't get me started on trying to define how American definitions of class have evolved in the last fifty years...

> And don't get me started on trying to define how American definitions of class have evolved in the last fifty years...

Yeah I don't understand what Americans mean by middle class... in the UK middle class means educated, successful, with a respected profession and more sophisticated cultural tastes. A doctor or lawyer who owns their own home and takes a couple of foreign holidays a year with children in private school would be a classic example of the UK middle class.

Middle class in America seems to basically mean poor? The phrase doesn't seem to translate at all.

> Middle class in America seems to basically mean poor?

Middle class has a slightly vague economic definition in the US. The US also commonly uses variations such as upper and lower middle class, and then there is poor, upper class, and rich. Middle class does not basically mean poor. The US middle class has an extraordinary income compared to the middle class of all but a few nations:

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/06/05/through-an-a...

It means your household income is typically between $40,000 to $100,000; above that and you're either upper middle class, or upper class; below that and you're either poor or lower middle class depending. For example, two people working median full-time jobs in the US will earn nearly $100,000. The median household income in the US is about $60,000.

To help the foreigners, generally in the USA getting most of your lifetime income from the government welfare means lower class, from a job means middle class, and from investments means upper class.

There are of course numerous lifestyle choices and plenty of classes copying other classes behavior often without even understanding the reason why. Our economic system is set up to keep the classes separate to the point of nearly being unable to communicate with each other. It is almost like three separate cultures that happen to coexist in the same space, mostly. Tomorrow I'm paying estimated quarterlies, which is a phrase that won't even make sense to people not in the upper class, whereas in comparison our mass media pop music is solely lower class to the point that you need an urban dictionary website to make any sense out of "our" music if you're not poor.

British middle class is... nuanced. The examples you have are certainly middle class, but then so is the primary school teacher on £25k a year. Private schooling only covers 8%ish of children, but about half the country consider themselves middle class.

All Americans like to imagine themselves "Middle Class" and woe betide the politician that says otherwise. The doctor making 250k per year, and the workman making 25k. Its the American love of egalitarianism and pretense of no classism.

I'm 25. I make about $150k. My father would never tell me how much money he makes ("it's rude to talk about money") but he probably makes at least double what I make. My mother doesn't work.

Definitely doesn't sound "upper middle class" to me.

According to Wikipedia, an "upper middle class" household has about U$ 120.000 in income - that means that splurging on a Michelin meal for 4 would be 4% of the monthly budget - definitely doable for a birthday or anniversary if you want to. Many people spend that much or more on a gift.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upper_middle_class_in_the_Unit...

Maybe you're having the same problem many people have, where they have price anchoring on some points in the past - $130 now is about $80 in 1997.

> if you want to

We didn't want to. And when the economy crashed in 2009, I saw my neighbors whose parents made more money than us sell their homes and move to cheaper neighborhoods and my parents used their savings to make it through comfortably.

In the OP, $130 is for a full Prix Fixe meal on New YEars Eve.

> $130 meal is a once in a lifetime type celebration (e.g. 50th wedding anniversary,

Most "traditional" weddings (like you see in TV shows) cost $130 per guest for meal and alcohol. Many people attend many of these in a lifetime.

> making partner in a company you've worked for for a decade

People in that situation would tend to do a $130 email to celebrate their annual bonus, not just the one time they get up to the $500k+/yr income band.

> > $130 meal is a once in a lifetime type celebration (e.g. 50th wedding anniversary,

> Most "traditional" weddings (like you see in TV shows) cost $130 per guest for meal and alcohol. Many people attend many of these in a lifetime.

Right, but the host pays for it all. Your children getting married is a "once in a lifetime event" like a 50 year anniversary or a major career promotion.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com