I believe I said at the time that it was like being on safari, and he said: “If you mean you staring at me while I look at my phone, then, yes, exactly like that.” I blame myself, but on the other hand, it was fascinating to watch, like a python swallowing a sheep. I don’t blame him, I don’t even blame Subway. It wasn’t even his dinner it was a snack. I once got my 13-year-old a foot-long Subway chicken and bacon ranch melt with all kinds of bespoke gunk in it that, I later worked out, contained more than 1,300 calories. Even if my nose didn’t work, I would have known because the kids are obsessed with Subway, and whenever children conceive a passion for anything unusual – Subway, sweet chilli sauce, katsu curry from a chain – it’s always because it contains a ton of sugar, it has headline sugar and small-print sugar, sugar crammed into every crevice, sometimes defeating the laws of physics to contain more sugar than actual product. I could have told the court about the sugar without any science, from the heady, sweet smell that emanates from the stores (contrast it, if you will, with the delicious wafts from Greggs, which mainly smell of sausage).
It is nobody’s job to rule on whether this, in fact, makes it cake. Which means it’s not exempt from VAT as Subway had been claiming.
They analysed the sugar content of Subway’s rolls and found it to be five times the qualifying level for bread, which means it’s not a staple food.
No, wait, there were scientists involved. The judges have had a sandwich from Subway and concluded that the bread isn’t bread. I t’s such a relief to read a supreme court story that isn’t about the grim and steady march of fascism, but then the Irish supreme court has more important things to worry about than constitutions.
0 kommentar(er)
