LAWYERSCHILE EL MUNDO INTERNACIONAL DEL ABOGADO

Rodrigo González Fernández y un grupo de egresados de la Facultad de Derecho de la Universidad la Republica en Chile ha decidido poner al alcance de todo el mundo de la profesion legal importantes materias en Ingles para ir practicando el trabajo en materia de Tratados internacionales y que nuestra profesión estará en primera linea. Invitamos a todos a opinar, debatir, participar activamente.Es el primer blog legal en inglés de latinoamerica.

Monday, April 09, 2012

10 wine cocktails with Chilean spirit (and spirits)These drinks range from the traditional to the ingenious, with touches of European heritage and a Chilean sensibility.

10 wine cocktails with Chilean spirit (and spirits)

These drinks range from the traditional to the ingenious, with touches of European heritage and a Chilean sensibility.

Monday, April 09, 2012 Category: Daily life - Food - Entertainment

A creative twist on the Chilean classic: borgoña, with strawberries and other dark berries. (Photo by dinnerseries/Flickr)

	Loading…

Loading…

In the land of wine, ingenious mixologists keep coming up with more and more creative uses for the country's most celebrated spirit. Here, we've compiled 10 tried-and-true cocktail recipes employing Chilean reds, whites, bubblies, and local variations of grape ferments like vino añejo and chicha.

Terremoto

Chile's iconic mixed drink - the Terremoto, or "earthquake" - is ubiquitous during Independence Day celebrations on September 18 and 19, but it's possible to enjoy a pitcher year-round at the Santiago institution, La Piojera.

To make your own batch of Terremotos, you'll need the following:

1 bottle of white wine or vino pipeño (a sweet, homemade wine sold in plastic jugs, and similar to chicha - see Chicha Sour)

2 parts of fernet, rum, cognac OR pisco

2 scoops of pineapple ice cream

Mix the wine and liquor of choice thoroughly in a one-liter jar, then add ice cream. Serve immediately with a straw.

Ponche a la Romana

The best way to ring in the New Year, Chilean style, is with a brimming glass of Ponche a la Romana - sparkling wine with a scoop of pineapple ice cream. It's sweet, delicious, and one of the many colorful New Year's traditions in Chile, so you'll be in good company as you toast the new year (and rue the next morning).

Ponche (also, Clery)

New Year's Eve kicks off the summer, and for the rest of the warm months, it will be easy to find Ponche - white wine with diced peaches. To get the best flavor, mix the peaches into the wine and let sit for 12 hours. Canned peaches are generally used, but for that fresh peach flavor, dice a ripe peach and strain before serving. Serve cold.

Another variation - especially popular in the Chilean countryside - is called Clery, which is white wine with fresh strawberries.

Melón con Vino

Another summertime staple, Melón con Vino is just what it says - melon with wine. The trick is the serving method: carefully slice off the top of a round melon, scoop out the seeds, and fill with white wine. Stick in a straw, and pass around. The melon can be reused throughout the day, and is a staple on beaches throughout the central coast - just make sure to protect it from the sand!

Borgoña

Borgoña is another lovely pairing of Chilean wine and fruit, this time with red wine - we like it with Chile's classic varietal Carmenere - and fresh strawberries. Chop up the strawberries (you can also add blueberries and raspberries, if you're feeling daring) and place in a glass jug. Pour red wine over the strawberries and let sit for several hours, or serve immediately. Some like to add sugar to taste.

Navegado

Nothing beats the winter cold like a steaming mug of Navegado - a delicious mulled wine served throughout Chile's southern regions as the temperatures begin to drop. As with most great recipes, everyone has their own, but this as a basic framework.

1 bottle/box of red wine (the alcohol boils off and the liquid will reduce considerably, so there's no reason to use something fancy)

⅓ cup of orange juice

½ cup of sugar (or less, to taste)

Cinnamon sticks (one or two, to taste)

Cloves (five or six, to taste)

Orange slices - enough to cover most of the surface area of the pot

Once the wine has reached a simmer, it's ready to serve hot in tea cups or mugs. Letting the wine simmer longer will result in a thicker, more syrupy - and less alcoholic drink - and infuse your house with the delicious smell of spices and orange.

Chupilca

An old-school Chilean "energy drink," farmers in the central valley historically drank Chupilca midway through the day to keep up their strength, with a simple preparation of red wine, toasted flour and a little sugar. The toasted flour - harina tostada - gives a nice, porridge-like consistency to the drink, which is usually slurped with a spoon. If you've missed the chance to try it out on the farm, pour yourself a half glass of wine and mix with a spoonful of flour.

Jote (also, Chincol and Chuflay)

Perhaps the least glamorous of the wine cocktails, it's only fitting that the Jote is named for the black buzzard - a distinctly inglorious bird. Still, if you're trying to liven up some bad box wine (obviously not Chilean), there's no better cure than the Jote: mixing wine with Coca Cola.

The drink has spawned countless spin-offs, including Chincol - red wine and 7-Up - and Chuflay - white wine and Bilz y Pap. Beer drinkers, be sure to try the inimitable Fanschop as well, a combination of orange Fanta and "schop" or draft beer.

Chicha Sour

Of course, you've heard of the Pisco Sour. The famous national drink of both Chile and Peru (with contested origins), a Pisco Sour mixes lemon, amaretto and egg white with distilled grape brandy, or pisco. If you haven't tried one yet, you've likely never visited Chile.

A Chicha Sour uses the same main ingredients, but adds one of the Chilean countryside's best home-brewed wine alternatives: sweet chicha, a bubbly, young fermentation of grapes, usually bottled in five-liter plastic jugs and sold at produce stands in the central valley.

To make a Chicha Sour, you'll need the following:

3 oz of pisco

1 oz of "jarabe" - a thick syrup made from chicha. Try your local feria, or outdoor market.

1 oz of lemon juice

1 oz of chicha morada

1 tspn egg white*

4 ice cubes

2 drops of amaretto

Mix the pisco, jarabe, lemon juice, chicha morada and egg white vigorously in a blender or a cocktail shaker, until the egg white begins to foam. Pour into a cold cocktail glass, add the ice cubes and two drops of amaretto, and serve cold.

Vaina

The classy, older gentleman's aperitif of choice, Vainas are typically offered before or after a long, luxurious meal in finer establishments, poured into tiny cocktail glasses or champagne flutes.

To make your own, you'll need the following:

1.4 oz. vino añejo (aged wine, similar to port)

1 oz. cognac

1 oz. crème de cacao

3 tspn. sugar

1 egg yolk*

⅓ c. crushed ice

Cinnamon

Mix the vino añejo, cognac, crème de cacao, sugar and egg yolk in a blender. Add ice once the yolk is thoroughly mixed with the liquors. Serve and garnish with a sprinkling of cinnamon.

*A note on using raw egg in cocktails

Both the Chicha Sour and the Vaina use raw egg in their preparation. Raw egg can make you sick, especially if the eggs were not stored properly, so be careful where you order these drinks, or where you store your eggs. We've found that the drink pretty much tastes the same without egg - it just loses its pretty foam. Please prepare with care.

Fuente:

Saludos
Rodrigo González Fernández
Diplomado en "Responsabilidad Social Empresarial" de la ONU
Diplomado en "Gestión del Conocimiento" de la ONU

Diplomado en Gerencia en Administracion Publica ONU

Diplomado en Coaching Ejecutivo ONU(

PUEDES LEERNOS EN FACEBOOK

http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=1020328166

Siguenos en twitter: @rogofe47
HTTP://consultajuridica.blogspot.com
http://el-observatorio-politico.blogspot.com
http://lobbyingchile.blogspot.com
http://calentamientoglobalchile.blogspot.com
http://respsoem2.blogspot.com

http://coachingdechile.blogspot.com

http://chile-renovables.blogspot.com

http://agriculturablogger.blogspot.com

CEL: 93934521
Santiago- Chile
Soliciten nuestros cursos de capacitación y consultoría en GERENCIA ADMINISTRACION PUBLICA -LIDERAZGO - GESTION DEL CONOCIMIENTO - RESPONSABILIDAD SOCIAL EMPRESARIAL – LOBBY – COACHING EMPRESARIAL-ENERGIAS RENOVABLES , asesorías a nivel nacional e internacional y están disponibles para OTEC Y OTIC en Chile

The Measurement Chimera Mises Daily: Monday, April 09, 2012 by Daniel James Sanchez ArticleComments Also by Daniel James Sanchez AA 1 In chapter 1 of his groundbreaking treatise, The Theory of Money and Credit, Ludwig von Mises explains what money is

The Measurement Chimera

Mises Daily: Monday, April 09, 2012 by Daniel James Sanchez

In chapter 1 of his groundbreaking treatise, The Theory of Money and Credit, Ludwig von Mises explains what money is: a universally, or at least commonly, used medium of exchange.[1] In chapter 2, Mises stresses what money is not. Contrary to the common fallacy, it is not a measure of value.

According to Mises, the notion of money as a measure of value is an artifact of the value theory of the "older political economy." By this he means the "classical economics" of Adam Smith, David Ricardo, and John Stuart Mill.

The classical economists by and large believed that the value of a good was an objective attribute of the good itself. Economic actors, according to classical theory, only exchanged goods if the respective values of the goods were equal (a fallacy that goes back to Aristotle[2]).

And how do economic actors determine if an objective attribute of one thing is equal to the same objective attribute of another thing? Well, how do you determine equality between other objective attributes, like length, weight, volume, temperature, etc.? You measure, of course! And assuming value is an objective quantitative attribute, it would seem that the best unit of its measurement would be the money unit.

However, the classical economists were entirely backwards in their value theory. Therefore, their conception of money as a measure of value (derived, as it was, from their value theory) was equally backwards. Classical value theory was finally supplanted by what Mises calls "modern value theory" in the late 19th century. By this, Mises means the subjective-marginal-utility theory of value.

According to modern value theory, then, value is derived from utility. Valuation is a matter of preferring one good over another, according to the goods' respective utilities.

To prefer one good over another is to give the goods a rank order. Therefore "ordinal numbers" (first, second, etc.) can be applied to the valuation of goods. For example, you can say that, in order of your preference, a plum is first, an apple is second, and an orange is third.

But preferring is not measuring. Therefore, "cardinal numbers" (1, 2, 3¼, 4.5, etc.) cannot be applied to the valuation of goods.

While, after the advent of modern value theory, most economists accepted that valuation is not objective, and thus not cardinal, they just could not let go of cardinality altogether. Cardinality is necessary for the use of measurement and mathematics, and according to the prejudice of many thinkers, "science is measurement."[3]

Value could not be cardinal, because it is a subjective preference based on utility. But maybe, thought some, utility itself could be thought of as cardinal!

Even one of the greatest pioneers of modern value theory (and Mises's teacher) Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk (1851–1914) tried to bring cardinality back in in this manner. However, instead of formulating measurable utility, Böhm-Bawerk tried to formulate measurable satisfaction. (The two notions are closely related; the "utility" of a good is the good's "causal relevance" for the satisfaction of a desire.)

Irving Fisher (1867–1947), on the other hand, did try to conceive of a way to measure utility itself.

In rebutting Böhm-Bawerk and Fisher in The Theory of Money and Credit (1912), Mises never quite explicitly spells out why utility, value, and satisfaction cannot be measured. For the most part, he just states that the law of marginal utility[4] precludes it, and assumes his target audience (other economists) should be able to see why that is so at once.

However, Mises later summed up the argument nicely in Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth (1920):

Marginal utility does not posit any unit of value, since it is obvious that the value of two units of a given stock is necessarily greater than, but less than double, the value of a single unit.

Böhm-Bawerk's Attempt to Measure Satisfaction

Let us explore Böhm-Bawerk's attempt to find a measure for satisfaction, and see how, according to Mises, it does not "measure" up.

Böhm-Bawerk's argument runs as follows:

Let us say you would rather have eight plums than one apple, and you would rather have one apple than seven plums. We can then say that the satisfaction afforded by the consumption of an apple is more than seven times, but less than eight times, as great as the satisfaction afforded by the consumption of a plum. Voilà, cardinality!

Now let us see why this runs contrary to the very law of marginal utility that Böhm-Bawerk himself did so much to advance.

Böhm-Bawerk's claim is based on the supposition that the satisfaction provided by one apple is over seven times greater than the satisfaction provided by one plum.

But that is only true if you assume the satisfaction provided by seven plums is exactly seven times the satisfaction provided by one plum.

But the only reason one might assume that would be if one assumed that each plum provides exactly one seventh of the satisfaction of the whole collection of plums. And that would mean the satisfaction provided by each plum is equal.

But according to the law of marginal utility, the expected satisfaction provided by each successive unit of a good diminishes. So, the satisfaction provided by each successive plum cannot be equal to the satisfaction provided by the previous plum.

Therefore, even if you assume satisfaction can be measured at all, the satisfaction provided by seven plums cannot be equal to seven times the satisfaction provided by a single plum.

And thus there is no basis for concluding that the satisfaction provided by one apple is greater than seven times the satisfaction provided by one plum.

Fisher's Attempt to Measure Utility

Irving Fisher tried to discover a unit for the measurement of utility. And he purported to do so in a way that took the law of diminishing marginal utility into account.

His argument ran as follows:

Say you have 100 loaves of bread at your disposal in a given year. The marginal utility of 1 loaf, given that you have 100, is greater than the marginal utility of 1 loaf if you have 150.

Now let's say in that same year, you also have B gallons of oil.

Furthermore, let us call β (beta) the increment of B that is equal to the marginal utility of 1 loaf if you have 100 loaves.

Now let us say in the case in which you have 150 loaves, you have the same amount of oil (B). And let us say that, with 150 loaves, the marginal utility of a single loaf is equal to the marginal utility of half of β.

Since 1 loaf out of 150 gets you the marginal utility of half the oil that 1 loaf out of 100 gets, we can say that the marginal utility of 1 loaf out of 150 is half that of 1 loaf out of 100. Voilà, cardinality!

From that point Fisher proceeds to try to deduce a unit for measuring utility: the util.

At first glance, Fisher's attempt may seem more sophisticated than Böhm-Bawerk's. But it is really just more convoluted, and every bit as wrong (and for the exact same reason).

His conclusion only follows if it is supposed that the marginal utility of a given amount of oil (β) is twice the marginal utility of half that amount (β/2).

But that assumes that the marginal utility of a first increment of oil is equal to the marginal utility of a second equal increment of oil.

But just as with Böhm-Bawerk's plum argument, that flies in the face of the law of marginal utility. The marginal utility of a second increment of oil must be less than the marginal utility of the first increment.

Therefore there is no basis for saying that the marginal utility of a given amount of oil is twice the marginal utility of half that amount. And thus there is no basis for saying that the marginal utility of 1 loaf out of 150 is half that of 1 loaf out of 100.

Besides, if one is going to operate under the fallacious assumption that the marginal utility of a good necessarily rises and falls in strict proportion with its amount, why bother introducing the comparison good (oil) in the first place?

Under the same fallacious assumption, one could simply say at the outset that the marginal utility of 100 loaves of bread is necessarily 2/3 of the marginal utility of 150 loaves and be done with it!

Further Points

Later in chapter 2, Mises also counters Joseph Schumpeter's attempt to quantify satisfaction. He does so by pointing out that Schumpeter assumes that valuation must be preceded by some prior measuring process. But simple reflection demonstrates that we are perfectly capable of looking at an apple and an orange and simply selecting one based on a direct comparison of the two choices. We do not need to consider any intermediary quantities and then decide based on an arithmetic comparison of those two quantities.

In section 2 of the chapter, Mises argues that, since value cannot be quantified, neither can values be summed up to infer the "total value" of a collection of goods.

In section 3, Mises brings money back into the picture. Money is not a measure of value, because valuation is a process of prioritization, not of measurement.

When a man buys a newspaper for 25¢, he is not really demonstrating that 25¢ is the "measure" of its value to him. He is demonstrating the he values the newspaper over 25¢. Furthermore he values the newspaper over 24¢, 23¢, etc. And he may even value the newspaper over 26¢ as well; although of course he'd rather pay 25¢ than 26¢. And at some point, there is a certain number of cents above which he values the money over the newspaper.

$20.00$15.00

Strictly speaking, when a newspaper is purchased for 25¢, 25¢ is the newspaper's price, not its value.

Money, however, does introduce arithmetic into economic affairs in an important way. While money does not measure value, money prices can quantitatively express value in a somewhat commensurable way. This makes economic calculation (which is the hallmark of the market economy) possible.

Conclusion

One of Mises's greatest contributions was to purge many of the vestigial fallacies infecting modern economics that were carried over from pre–Marginal Revolution days. Pointing out why value, utility, and satisfaction can never be measured was one great instance of this.

Comment on this article.

Daniel James Sanchez is editor of Mises.org and director of the Mises Academy. Friend him on Facebook. Send himmail. See Daniel James Sanchez's article archives.