my guess is about 1 to 1
There’s definately not enough cake for everyone.
A muffin for every man, woman and child? What planet are you from? And what about madelaines? French fancies? Battenburg squares? Bakewell tarts?
Do your damn research before coming and posting your unsubstantiated claims here, buster!
I dont know…there’s a good 5 billion (probably more) people in the world…and there’s AT LEAST that many twinkie wrappers on my floor right now.
wow…what a great post… and a boring day. This was almost gone for good (second to last page). I would like to take my previous presumptions back. I now feel strongly that the ratio is at a very strong 1.4142835 to 1, that is to say there are 2^.5 people to every peace of cake. I have proof. My report will be available in the Glory Hole, CA bi-anual periodical entitled “Bullshit” in the first half of next year.
Peace,
Brian
I’d say it all depends on the season.
Ever seen this place around CNY?
The ratio goes way up.
I say the ratio of Cake to People (as in Village) is 4 to 6.
[color=blue]
:
[/color] 
It’s definitely less than 2:1, hence the expression about not being able to have your cake AND eat it.
Cake or death, sir?
Not so. That saying doesn’t suggest there are cake-less people in the world (although admittedly some people in war-torn or impoverished regions may have less than a full cake, from time-to-time, during periods of greatest privation). It merely states that some people may have their cake[s] but be unable to eat it[them] for various possible reasons, including possibly lacking sufficient teeth or digestive fluids or perhaps having psychological disorders that render them incapable of eating the cake[s] that they possess. So, regrettably I don’t believe that time-tested truism helps answer the question at issue.
what about choc-ices?
Choc-ices aren’t cake, are they?
What about Jaffa cakes?
Choc-ices aren’t cake, are they?
What about Jaffa cakes?[/quote]
true… but they are “afters”
Choc-ices aren’t cake, are they?
What about Jaffa cakes?[/quote]
true… but they are “afters”[/quote]
Now you’re just opening up Pandora’s box, Mr Funk. What would be next? Jelly? After Eights? Baked Alaska? Think of the consequences, man.
I notice there you are talking about desserts along class-lines.
Jelly- the after dinner treat of the working man
After Eights- the post meal snack of the chattering classes
Baked Alaska- the cake of the foppish dandies of the ruling class.
If you have none of these, surely you are living in absolute rather than relative poverty?
[quote=“Funk500”]I notice there you are talking about desserts along class-lines.
Jelly- the after dinner treat of the working man
After Eights- the post meal snack of the chattering classes
Baked Alaska- the cake of the foppish dandies of the ruling class.
If you have none of these, surely you are living in absolute rather than relative poverty?[/quote]
You saw inside my head - that’s what I was thinking as I typed those out.
What about classless sweets? Is there anything able to cross that divide? I’m betting Henry Whitford-Smythe doesn’t eat Wagon Wheels…
Thank god for that… I thought you were advocating some sort of class war based around dessert choices for a while there. I’m pretty sure that only Werthers Originals, and Licorice are the sweets to cross the divide. And that means all divides… Turkish and Greek soldiers often share these sweets in Cyprus.
Anyway, what about those people who just don’t like cake dammit! Can they have their cake and eat it? Don’t they mess up the ratios?