6 ms·

Andy Warhol: "What’s great about this country is that America started the tradition where the richest consumers buy essentially the same things as the poorest.

Andy Warhol: "What’s great about this country is that America started the tradition where the richest consumers buy essentially the same things as the poorest. You can be watching TV and see Coca-Cola, and you know that the President drinks Coke, Liz Taylor drinks Coke, and just think, you can drink Coke, too. A Coke is a Coke and no amount of money can get you a better Coke than the one the bum on the corner is drinking. All the Cokes are the same and all the Cokes are good. Liz Taylor knows it, the President knows it, the bum knows it, and you know it."

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
vacri 9y ago
This is different to soft drinks in other countries... how? Change the drink to whiskey, another popular one, and you can be sure that there's a difference between what the American rich and poor drink. > no amount of money can get you a better Coke than the one the bum on the corner is drinking. All the Cokes are the same and all the Cokes are good And coke is not the same everywhere either. My guess is that the prez isn't going to be drinking much watery post-mix coke with his meals. Similarly, coke in glass bottles is nicer than post-mix coke, and it's more expensive. 'Regular' cokes are in-between. And, for the US with its HFCS coke, you can import the much better-tasting sucrose-coke, which is more expensive to obtain if you're importing it yourself (although a lot of places on the Mexican border already have it).
- njarboe 9y ago
  You can buy Mexican cokes now in California Safeway's and Lucky's supermarkets.
  - squeaky-clean 9y ago
    They're common even in South Florida convenience stores. Not every single one, but maybe 25% of stores.
- adventured 9y ago
  > This is different to soft drinks in other countries... how? The US - along with a select few nations - was a pioneer when it comes to mass-consumer economics that leverage a relatively free market to deliver high quality goods to both rich and poor. It required a dramatic leap in productivity, manufacturing output, to get the scale necessary to drive prices down to such an extent. Ford's Model T was arguably the earliest, best example of that. Over eight years post introduction it went from $850 (6k unit sales) to $360 (577k unit sales), eventually bottoming out under $300 (and incomes climbed substantially over that ~16 year total period). Whether we're talking mass production soda, or cars, or radios, or kitchen appliances, the US was particularly a global pioneer at it from ~1880-1980. > And, for the US with its HFCS coke, you can import the much better-tasting sucrose-coke To be fair, that's a Warhol quote from 1975. At the time he said it, Coke was still using sugar in the US market. It was 1984 when Coke and Pepsi announced plans to switch to HFCS.
- petecox 9y ago
  Yes, Coke does taste different depending on the country. (And I've tried it on 5 different continents.)
  - Macha 9y ago
    Whenever I go to the US, I always switch to diet coke. Not because of cutting down on that area to compensate for holiday food intake, but because aspartame coke tastes nicer than HFCS coke.
mandeepj 9y ago
Coke is a bad example. Let's talk about a bottle of wine which is $20k. I certainly can't afford that along with a lot of other people.
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  $20k wine is probably not going to taste any better than $20 wine, objectively speaking. It's just a luxury good for conspicuous spending.
  - dvfjsdhgfv 9y ago
    It's not true. Yes, there are snobs, and there is a lot of subjectivity involved, an several studies exposed that. On the other hand, some wines have a certain richness of flavor not present in other wines. Certain aspects of it can be better appreciate by people who developed a certain taste of wines and can differentiate better. They're the target group of the more expensive wines. You pay for a unique experience, for something that you like but you can' really get anywhere else. True, the prices of certain wines reach ridiculous levels, but it doesn't mean they wouldn't taste better, especially for someone who tasted a lot of wines and can appreciate them. All this in spite of the fact that "objectively better taste" is in fact an oxymoron, since all discussions of taste (as well as beauty etc.) are by nature subjective and all notions of objectivity are assumed because of a certain consensus (by a majority, an authority/experts etc.).
    - KozmoNau7 9y ago
      With wine and spirits, you're often paying for rarity, rather than outright quality. I'm not a huge wine snob (most wines I buy are in the $10-$20 range), but I have tasted some rather expensive wines. In a lot of cases, you're not really paying for "richness of flavor" (a lot of cheaper wines have plenty of richness and balance), you're paying for name and for rarity, especially when it comes to older wines. I'm actually more into whisky, and I can tell you in no uncertain terms, that the best whisky I have ever tasted in my life costs around $400. Now, that is still somewhat expensive compared to the <$100 whiskies I usually enjoy, but it's not outrageously expensive, especially considering how long a bottle of whisky lasts, when compared to a bottle of wine, once it's opened. And it was immeasurably better than any multi-thousand dollar whisky I've had the chance to taste. With Macallans, Dalmores, Pappy van Winkle and other high-priced spirits, you are absolutely paying for a name, not necessarily for the quality.
Symbiote 9y ago
This was said before fancier soft drinks were sold, I assume. For example, some bars round here sell this cola: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fentimans_Curiosity_Cola https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fentimans_Curiosity_Cola
- varjag 9y ago
  But is is really… unaffordable to anyone but the richest?
  - monsieurbanana 9y ago
    Nop http://www.mysupermarket.co.uk/tesco-price-comparison/Soft_Drinks/Fentimans_Curiosity_Cola_275ml.html http://www.mysupermarket.co.uk/tesco-price-comparison/Soft_D...
- Kluny 9y ago
  I mean, it's still only three bucks.
- joe5150 9y ago
  even the wealthiest people are probably still going to go for a Coke (Fentimans isn't that good imo)

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

vacri 9y ago

This is different to soft drinks in other countries... how? Change the drink to whiskey, another popular one, and you can be sure that there's a difference between what the American rich and poor drink. > no amount of money can get you a better Coke than the one the bum on the corner is drinking. All the Cokes are the same and all the Cokes are good And coke is not the same everywhere either. My guess is that the prez isn't going to be drinking much watery post-mix coke with his meals. Similarly, coke in glass bottles is nicer than post-mix coke, and it's more expensive. 'Regular' cokes are in-between. And, for the US with its HFCS coke, you can import the much better-tasting sucrose-coke, which is more expensive to obtain if you're importing it yourself (although a lot of places on the Mexican border already have it).

njarboe 9y ago
You can buy Mexican cokes now in California Safeway's and Lucky's supermarkets.
- squeaky-clean 9y ago
  They're common even in South Florida convenience stores. Not every single one, but maybe 25% of stores.
adventured 9y ago
> This is different to soft drinks in other countries... how? The US - along with a select few nations - was a pioneer when it comes to mass-consumer economics that leverage a relatively free market to deliver high quality goods to both rich and poor. It required a dramatic leap in productivity, manufacturing output, to get the scale necessary to drive prices down to such an extent. Ford's Model T was arguably the earliest, best example of that. Over eight years post introduction it went from $850 (6k unit sales) to $360 (577k unit sales), eventually bottoming out under $300 (and incomes climbed substantially over that ~16 year total period). Whether we're talking mass production soda, or cars, or radios, or kitchen appliances, the US was particularly a global pioneer at it from ~1880-1980. > And, for the US with its HFCS coke, you can import the much better-tasting sucrose-coke To be fair, that's a Warhol quote from 1975. At the time he said it, Coke was still using sugar in the US market. It was 1984 when Coke and Pepsi announced plans to switch to HFCS.
petecox 9y ago
Yes, Coke does taste different depending on the country. (And I've tried it on 5 different continents.)
- Macha 9y ago
  Whenever I go to the US, I always switch to diet coke. Not because of cutting down on that area to compensate for holiday food intake, but because aspartame coke tastes nicer than HFCS coke.

mandeepj 9y ago

Coke is a bad example. Let's talk about a bottle of wine which is $20k. I certainly can't afford that along with a lot of other people.

TeMPOraL 9y ago
$20k wine is probably not going to taste any better than $20 wine, objectively speaking. It's just a luxury good for conspicuous spending.
- dvfjsdhgfv 9y ago
  It's not true. Yes, there are snobs, and there is a lot of subjectivity involved, an several studies exposed that. On the other hand, some wines have a certain richness of flavor not present in other wines. Certain aspects of it can be better appreciate by people who developed a certain taste of wines and can differentiate better. They're the target group of the more expensive wines. You pay for a unique experience, for something that you like but you can' really get anywhere else. True, the prices of certain wines reach ridiculous levels, but it doesn't mean they wouldn't taste better, especially for someone who tasted a lot of wines and can appreciate them. All this in spite of the fact that "objectively better taste" is in fact an oxymoron, since all discussions of taste (as well as beauty etc.) are by nature subjective and all notions of objectivity are assumed because of a certain consensus (by a majority, an authority/experts etc.).
  - KozmoNau7 9y ago
    With wine and spirits, you're often paying for rarity, rather than outright quality. I'm not a huge wine snob (most wines I buy are in the $10-$20 range), but I have tasted some rather expensive wines. In a lot of cases, you're not really paying for "richness of flavor" (a lot of cheaper wines have plenty of richness and balance), you're paying for name and for rarity, especially when it comes to older wines. I'm actually more into whisky, and I can tell you in no uncertain terms, that the best whisky I have ever tasted in my life costs around $400. Now, that is still somewhat expensive compared to the <$100 whiskies I usually enjoy, but it's not outrageously expensive, especially considering how long a bottle of whisky lasts, when compared to a bottle of wine, once it's opened. And it was immeasurably better than any multi-thousand dollar whisky I've had the chance to taste. With Macallans, Dalmores, Pappy van Winkle and other high-priced spirits, you are absolutely paying for a name, not necessarily for the quality.

Symbiote 9y ago

This was said before fancier soft drinks were sold, I assume. For example, some bars round here sell this cola: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fentimans_Curiosity_Cola https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fentimans_Curiosity_Cola

varjag 9y ago
But is is really… unaffordable to anyone but the richest?
- monsieurbanana 9y ago
  Nop http://www.mysupermarket.co.uk/tesco-price-comparison/Soft_Drinks/Fentimans_Curiosity_Cola_275ml.html http://www.mysupermarket.co.uk/tesco-price-comparison/Soft_D...
Kluny 9y ago
I mean, it's still only three bucks.
joe5150 9y ago
even the wealthiest people are probably still going to go for a Coke (Fentimans isn't that good imo)