I just found a cookbook online that suggests "if money is scarce, cut sugar use to about 3 level tablespoons per person."
The book is Economical War-Time Cook Book, and was written in 1918. Apparently the author was ahead of her time on sugar consumption as far as heart effects go. The American Heart Association made it's ruling on Aug. 29, 2006. Think how many people who died of bad hearts between 1918 and 2006 who could've been saved by knowing this sugar information.
Guess who's going to die of something else, like laughter? I went through this cookbook and found here too, sugar amounts were all over the map--tablespoons all the way up to 2 cups. However, this book did come with a nice surprise on the last page: a recipe on how to can chicken meat. This could come in handy for emergency supplies (meat that doesn't have to be kept frozen). I'm sure there are recipes for canning other meats too--I just have yet to find them.
Sunday, May 30, 2010
Sugar Consumption Past and Present Through the Lens of Cookie Recipes
I recently received a book titled The First American Cookie Lady--it was a recipe collection/diary of an early American woman trying to create treats out of everyday baking ingredients. I ordered it so I could get a sense of the sugar use back before WWI, along with my Hearts & Homes, and Prairie Kitchen books.
It doesn't seem to matter where one lived (rural or urban) as far as sugar consumption in recipes goes--recipes called for as much as 3 cups to a recipe up until we got closer to war time. The normal and customary 3 cups of sugar then became 2 cups, and quite often those 2 cups were a mix of white and brown sugar. Right before war time, 2 cups became 1 cup (this was considered rationing), and there were a few recipes that required 1/2 cup or less of sugar. Most cut the sugar down to 1/2 cup and added another source: molasses, corn syrup, honey, jams/jellies, or brown sugar entirely (like that makes a difference!). The biggest items of rationing it seemed were eggs and wheat, replaced by corn meal and baking powder.
Back then cakes, cookies, and anything requiring sugar were occasional treats, not an everyday occurrence.
After WWI, sugar seems to go back up to 1 cup as the standard for recipes, then drops down to 1/2 cup, and then we have WWII, where rationing has us going from 1/4 cup all the way down to the occasional teaspoon here and there. Cakes and cookies were expected to help fill out an otherwise "skimpy" meal, and darn near became a daily ritual.
With WWII over, the usual and customary sugar measure is right around 1/2 cup and falling. Looking back, I'm surprised there weren't more cases of diabetes and obesity. Why weren't there?
The answer: activity level. Before WWI, people mainly lived on farms, and had lots of chores to do every day. Very little was mechanized until after WWII--then mechanizations and conveniences were multiplying before our eyes. Compared to pre-WWI activity levels, we're practically comatose nowadays.
Now the news is telling us that more than mere teaspoons' consumption per day causes atherosclerosis. What's truly frightening is that I saw that same warning (even using the big word "atherosclerosis") in a cookbook written back in 1976 (my More With Less book--page 18). If we knew about atherosclerosis way back then, why didn't the medical community speak up louder like they do now? How many lives could've been saved, or extended, with that knowledge? Sure, we didn't have little pills to combat it like we do now, but this shows you don't need those pills when measuring sugar by the teaspoon (instead of the cup or half-cup) will do.
As for the cookbook titled More With Less, yeah they preach a good story about doing more with less, and how we all should consume less sugar (less of everything really), but then the recipes go on to call for 1/2 cup, 1 full cup, and combining sweeteners just like recipes did between the wars. You should see their writeup on meat consumption, then go check out the recipes--standard USDA serving sizes go right out the window! That's what happens when the IDEA of social justice through food conservation meets up with the realities of wealth and taste.
CORRECTION: Recipes in the book More With Less are for crowds of 8-12 people. I neglected to mentally register the yields on them, so the sugar called for would truly be less, not more. One cup of sugar divided among 8 people would equal 1/8 cup per person (the AHA recommendation). The same goes for the meat listings in the recipes: the amount given in the recipes is supposed to cover a crowd, so again, more turns out to be less. My apologies, Doris--I failed to take in the yield on your recipes.
Now we have diabetic cookbooks which rely heavily on sugar alternatives (alcohols, stevia, Splenda, Nutrasweet, and the like) which can cause allergic reactions because they're foreign to the human body. Nutrasweet and Splenda are neurotoxins, which can numb and paralyze if used incorrectly or by people allergic to them. The benefits are a big fat zero on the sugar line of the nutritional label, though, and that alone garners big dollars from the diabetic community and those looking to cut sugar consumption. I have no idea if these products have any effect on atherosclerosis or the avoidance of it.
Saccharin, as we now know, is a known cancer-causer, yet it was widely used as a sugar replacement from WWII on until sometime in the 70's or 80's.
Honey is currently eschewed by vegans because it is considered an animal protein--apparently bees are animals and not insects. Vegans prefer to use agave, which is made from the same plant that tequila comes from. Hmmm...
Where does all this leave the average person? Well, it leaves me pondering the past, pondering my own past when it came to sugar consumption, congratulating myself for current levels of consumption, and looking forward to new lower levels of consumption--adjusting the taste buds doesn't happen overnight.
In the news recently: "Of the various kinds of added sugars, the worst seems to be fructose. Found in high-fructose corn syrup and plain table sugar, it forces your liver to pump out more LDL and triglycerides, which indirectly makes your body flush out healthy HDL cholesterol. A sugar overload also fires up chronic, body-wide inflammation and can make your cells less sensitive to insulin, increasing heart disease and diabetes risk."
Wondering how to get your cholesterol numbers back in line? Don't look to fat--look to sugar instead. I don't even want to know what the cholesterol readings of people back in the wars was--with more sugar consumed, and more activity than we see today, they were probably a whole lot better in spite of the sugar.
Taking a sneak peek at a conversion calculator, I see that 1 cup = 16 tablespoons or 48 teaspoons--this is shocking to me, even though I have access to a conversion chart like everyone else. It also brings home the fact that I need to really REALLY work on our sugar here.
1/2 cup = 8T. or 24 t.
1/4 cup = 4T. or 12 t.
American Heart Association recommended limits on daily sugar intake:
Women = 6 t. (2T. or 1/8 cup)
Men = 8 t. (3T. or about 1/6 cup)
Athletes = more.
Our saving grace right now? A super-high fiber intake, and protein combining--this is in conjunction with using the absolutely lowest-sugar foods I can find (both processed and natural).
UPDATE: One last note on sugar use findings: since there were far fewer processed foods in the past, it was okay to use seemingly large quantities of sugar in baked goods--not only were these recipes feeding large families and farm hands, it was pretty much the only sugar in their diets (besides naturally-occurring ones). Nowadays, we have to factor in the sugar in processed foods as well as those we make ourselves--the American Diabetes Assoc. uses no more than 6 grams/serving for their processed food goal, and the American Heart Assoc. uses 2-3T. (depending on gender) in place where we can control the sugar.
It doesn't seem to matter where one lived (rural or urban) as far as sugar consumption in recipes goes--recipes called for as much as 3 cups to a recipe up until we got closer to war time. The normal and customary 3 cups of sugar then became 2 cups, and quite often those 2 cups were a mix of white and brown sugar. Right before war time, 2 cups became 1 cup (this was considered rationing), and there were a few recipes that required 1/2 cup or less of sugar. Most cut the sugar down to 1/2 cup and added another source: molasses, corn syrup, honey, jams/jellies, or brown sugar entirely (like that makes a difference!). The biggest items of rationing it seemed were eggs and wheat, replaced by corn meal and baking powder.
Back then cakes, cookies, and anything requiring sugar were occasional treats, not an everyday occurrence.
After WWI, sugar seems to go back up to 1 cup as the standard for recipes, then drops down to 1/2 cup, and then we have WWII, where rationing has us going from 1/4 cup all the way down to the occasional teaspoon here and there. Cakes and cookies were expected to help fill out an otherwise "skimpy" meal, and darn near became a daily ritual.
With WWII over, the usual and customary sugar measure is right around 1/2 cup and falling. Looking back, I'm surprised there weren't more cases of diabetes and obesity. Why weren't there?
The answer: activity level. Before WWI, people mainly lived on farms, and had lots of chores to do every day. Very little was mechanized until after WWII--then mechanizations and conveniences were multiplying before our eyes. Compared to pre-WWI activity levels, we're practically comatose nowadays.
Now the news is telling us that more than mere teaspoons' consumption per day causes atherosclerosis. What's truly frightening is that I saw that same warning (even using the big word "atherosclerosis") in a cookbook written back in 1976 (my More With Less book--page 18). If we knew about atherosclerosis way back then, why didn't the medical community speak up louder like they do now? How many lives could've been saved, or extended, with that knowledge? Sure, we didn't have little pills to combat it like we do now, but this shows you don't need those pills when measuring sugar by the teaspoon (instead of the cup or half-cup) will do.
As for the cookbook titled More With Less, yeah they preach a good story about doing more with less, and how we all should consume less sugar (less of everything really), but then the recipes go on to call for 1/2 cup, 1 full cup, and combining sweeteners just like recipes did between the wars. You should see their writeup on meat consumption, then go check out the recipes--standard USDA serving sizes go right out the window! That's what happens when the IDEA of social justice through food conservation meets up with the realities of wealth and taste.
CORRECTION: Recipes in the book More With Less are for crowds of 8-12 people. I neglected to mentally register the yields on them, so the sugar called for would truly be less, not more. One cup of sugar divided among 8 people would equal 1/8 cup per person (the AHA recommendation). The same goes for the meat listings in the recipes: the amount given in the recipes is supposed to cover a crowd, so again, more turns out to be less. My apologies, Doris--I failed to take in the yield on your recipes.
Now we have diabetic cookbooks which rely heavily on sugar alternatives (alcohols, stevia, Splenda, Nutrasweet, and the like) which can cause allergic reactions because they're foreign to the human body. Nutrasweet and Splenda are neurotoxins, which can numb and paralyze if used incorrectly or by people allergic to them. The benefits are a big fat zero on the sugar line of the nutritional label, though, and that alone garners big dollars from the diabetic community and those looking to cut sugar consumption. I have no idea if these products have any effect on atherosclerosis or the avoidance of it.
Saccharin, as we now know, is a known cancer-causer, yet it was widely used as a sugar replacement from WWII on until sometime in the 70's or 80's.
Honey is currently eschewed by vegans because it is considered an animal protein--apparently bees are animals and not insects. Vegans prefer to use agave, which is made from the same plant that tequila comes from. Hmmm...
Where does all this leave the average person? Well, it leaves me pondering the past, pondering my own past when it came to sugar consumption, congratulating myself for current levels of consumption, and looking forward to new lower levels of consumption--adjusting the taste buds doesn't happen overnight.
In the news recently: "Of the various kinds of added sugars, the worst seems to be fructose. Found in high-fructose corn syrup and plain table sugar, it forces your liver to pump out more LDL and triglycerides, which indirectly makes your body flush out healthy HDL cholesterol. A sugar overload also fires up chronic, body-wide inflammation and can make your cells less sensitive to insulin, increasing heart disease and diabetes risk."
Wondering how to get your cholesterol numbers back in line? Don't look to fat--look to sugar instead. I don't even want to know what the cholesterol readings of people back in the wars was--with more sugar consumed, and more activity than we see today, they were probably a whole lot better in spite of the sugar.
Taking a sneak peek at a conversion calculator, I see that 1 cup = 16 tablespoons or 48 teaspoons--this is shocking to me, even though I have access to a conversion chart like everyone else. It also brings home the fact that I need to really REALLY work on our sugar here.
1/2 cup = 8T. or 24 t.
1/4 cup = 4T. or 12 t.
American Heart Association recommended limits on daily sugar intake:
Women = 6 t. (2T. or 1/8 cup)
Men = 8 t. (3T. or about 1/6 cup)
Athletes = more.
Our saving grace right now? A super-high fiber intake, and protein combining--this is in conjunction with using the absolutely lowest-sugar foods I can find (both processed and natural).
UPDATE: One last note on sugar use findings: since there were far fewer processed foods in the past, it was okay to use seemingly large quantities of sugar in baked goods--not only were these recipes feeding large families and farm hands, it was pretty much the only sugar in their diets (besides naturally-occurring ones). Nowadays, we have to factor in the sugar in processed foods as well as those we make ourselves--the American Diabetes Assoc. uses no more than 6 grams/serving for their processed food goal, and the American Heart Assoc. uses 2-3T. (depending on gender) in place where we can control the sugar.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
After Playing WITH the Rations Game, I Discovered...
...we pretty much already ARE living on rations every day! With the addition of two regular meatless days per week, some more work fine-tuning the sugar and egg consumption, and the adherence to USDA serving sizes and portions for non-rationed foods, all we need is for availability of off-ration foods to dry up to really test our meddle.
I figured ration living would be worse than what we're doing now, but it isn't. It's almost the same (except for the constant availability of off-ration items).
I suppose now I need to move onto gas rations--3-5 gallons/week for household use, and 11 gallons/week for commuters. Thank God we only live 12 miles from Hubby's work.
After seeing how the meat ration works out perfectly to the prescribed USDA serving size, I'm convinced rationing is the birthplace of USDA portion sizes, and that maybe the Food Guide Pyramid is also set to accommodate ration and off-ration food portion sizes. Now, if only the Food Stamp and WIC programs were set up like the rationing program...but no--they rely on shelf-stable foods, convenience foods, and foods from the Farm Subsidy program.
Alternating chicken between beef, pork, and turkey, while throwing in Meatless Fridays made it all work. I could add Fat Tuesdays (veggie days) to it, I suppose, cutting in half my reliance on off-ration, theoretically-hunted turkey.
Also, grinding meat makes it feed more than just 1 person for every 3 oz.--casseroles, meat loaves, chili, and the like make meals feed more with less. Combining beans/legumes with grains also forms complete proteins, so nobody has to worry about not getting enough protein or calories.
I thought I'd come away feeling deprived and hopeless. I haven't even begun the game, and come away happy and satisfied that when rationing comes to America, I'm already ready for it. So many of us won't be. So many of us just eat what's in the box, or what's handed to us through a window. Many of us don't even know what the Food Guide Pyramid is.
But then we black-belt frugalites have been living this way for years, even decades, and are ready to help others if needed.
I've canceled my participation, but you don't have to. I live it every day, but intend to make improvements.
I figured ration living would be worse than what we're doing now, but it isn't. It's almost the same (except for the constant availability of off-ration items).
I suppose now I need to move onto gas rations--3-5 gallons/week for household use, and 11 gallons/week for commuters. Thank God we only live 12 miles from Hubby's work.
After seeing how the meat ration works out perfectly to the prescribed USDA serving size, I'm convinced rationing is the birthplace of USDA portion sizes, and that maybe the Food Guide Pyramid is also set to accommodate ration and off-ration food portion sizes. Now, if only the Food Stamp and WIC programs were set up like the rationing program...but no--they rely on shelf-stable foods, convenience foods, and foods from the Farm Subsidy program.
Alternating chicken between beef, pork, and turkey, while throwing in Meatless Fridays made it all work. I could add Fat Tuesdays (veggie days) to it, I suppose, cutting in half my reliance on off-ration, theoretically-hunted turkey.
Also, grinding meat makes it feed more than just 1 person for every 3 oz.--casseroles, meat loaves, chili, and the like make meals feed more with less. Combining beans/legumes with grains also forms complete proteins, so nobody has to worry about not getting enough protein or calories.
I thought I'd come away feeling deprived and hopeless. I haven't even begun the game, and come away happy and satisfied that when rationing comes to America, I'm already ready for it. So many of us won't be. So many of us just eat what's in the box, or what's handed to us through a window. Many of us don't even know what the Food Guide Pyramid is.
But then we black-belt frugalites have been living this way for years, even decades, and are ready to help others if needed.
I've canceled my participation, but you don't have to. I live it every day, but intend to make improvements.
Playing the Rations Game
I spent a good deal of time yesterday finding out what was rationed, what the ration amounts were, what the worst-case scenario was for rationing (the lowest limit), and separating the U.S. from the U.K. amounts.
After gathering all this up, I set to make myself lists in preparation for The Rations Game, where I play along...or at least try to. Right off the bat, I have trouble with food allergies, so I have to figure out what to do about dairy, since I have dairy allergies. The coffee ration would also have to go, since I drink tea. Since we have little loaf bread around here, the jam/jelly ration could also go.
I wonder what the people of the time did with rationing and food allergies, and the whole "special diet" thing in general during the war.
Here's the list of rationed foods and amounts according to several various websites (this was always subject to change depending on severity of need at the warfront--some months more food, some months less food)--I chose the less-food version:
One month rationed supplies for 2 people
Sugar--4 lbs.
Butter--2 lbs.
Cheese--2 lbs.
Fat/Oil--2 lbs.
Fruit/Veg (store-bought canned, fresh in bags, frozen)--16 lbs.
Bacon/Sausage--2 lbs.
Tea--1 lb.
Chocolate/Sweets--2 lbs.
Jam/Jelly--2 lbs.
Eggs--8 (with 24-egg dried egg allowance)
Onions--16 lbs.
Coffee--2 lbs.
Meat (beef)--5 lbs.
Fluid milk--3 gallons
Dried milk--indeterminate amount (says 1 packet, but how much did one packet make?)
There are things on this list we don't/won't eat or drink, so I'm pretending people could make swaps to get more of what they DO use. My altered rationed goods allowance list:
Exchange coffee ration for more tea--+2 lbs. tea
Exchange butter for more cheese--+2 lbs. cheese
Exchange jam/jelly for more eggs--+8 eggs
Exchange 1/2 chocolate/sweets for more sugar--1 lb. sugar
Exchange 1/2 fat/oil for more sugar--+1 lb. sugar
Exchange ham/sausage ration for equal ration of ground pork
Exchange 1/2 fluid milk ration for more sugar--+12 lbs. sugar (1 gallon = 128 oz. converted to lbs., so 1.5 gallons = 192 oz. = 12 lbs.)
Exchange 1/2 fluid milk ration for more tea--+ 12 lbs. tea (that's all we drink)
My new monthly rations list for two
Sugar--20 lbs. (this covers 1 c./day for 2 gallons iced tea, and 1/4 c./day for muffin batter)
Tea--15 lbs.
Eggs--16 + equivalent of 24 dried (for muffins)
Cheese--4 lbs. (for Hubby): 1 24 oz. jar of Parmesan, the rest block or sliced
Fruit/Veg (incl. onions)--32 lbs.
Chocolate/Sweets--1 lb. (in chocolate chips or cocoa powder for muffins)
Oil--1 lb. (I'll take sunflower oil, please)
Meat (beef/pork combined)--7 lbs.
This may or may not seem like a lot of food, but when you add in all the off-ration stuff (provided you had the points or money to buy it, or stuff to barter with), this seems like nothing but a time to get creative and have some fun experimenting. For instance, I see plenty of potential for casseroles when you add in potatoes, pasta, or rice, and this is probably where the invention of casseroles came from. This may also be the birthplace of USDA serving sizes.
Unrationed foods
Chicken
Potatoes (although in short supply)
Anything grown in your garden
Anything farmed
Anything bartered from a gardener or farmer
Other animal meat (horse, goat, sheep, etc.)
Dried foods (raisins, beans, rice, pasta, oatmeal, etc.--although expensive)
Anything foraged (nuts, mushrooms, dandelions, etc.)
Foods canned, boxed, or frozen beyond ration amount (although in short supply)
Fish (fresh-caught)
Meat (hunted--anything, including birds, deer, rodents, etc.)
Wheat Flour and pre-made bread (although in short supply)
Corn meal and corn flour (used to replace wheat flour)
Vitamins and supplements (other than A and D)--kids were given rations of cod liver oil to supply these, but adults had to make due with the fish they ate, or the milk they drank, unless they could afford vitamin pills
So this is what I have to play with, since there are no shortages (yet)--I will adhere to USDA serving sizes for these foods. Starting in June, I'll start living the ration-al life with the foods listed, but not the rest of the rationing (tires, gasoline, nylons, pots and pans, etc.), because we already cut those down to bare bones, and we already recycle. This should be interesting--how does one make 5 lbs. of beef last a month with a carnivore husband, and how did one make due with multiple food allergies back in those days?
I'm going to find out the hard way. I'm also going to get a stark look at how much of what we're consuming--the exchange list gave me a hint.
After gathering all this up, I set to make myself lists in preparation for The Rations Game, where I play along...or at least try to. Right off the bat, I have trouble with food allergies, so I have to figure out what to do about dairy, since I have dairy allergies. The coffee ration would also have to go, since I drink tea. Since we have little loaf bread around here, the jam/jelly ration could also go.
I wonder what the people of the time did with rationing and food allergies, and the whole "special diet" thing in general during the war.
Here's the list of rationed foods and amounts according to several various websites (this was always subject to change depending on severity of need at the warfront--some months more food, some months less food)--I chose the less-food version:
One month rationed supplies for 2 people
Sugar--4 lbs.
Butter--2 lbs.
Cheese--2 lbs.
Fat/Oil--2 lbs.
Fruit/Veg (store-bought canned, fresh in bags, frozen)--16 lbs.
Bacon/Sausage--2 lbs.
Tea--1 lb.
Chocolate/Sweets--2 lbs.
Jam/Jelly--2 lbs.
Eggs--8 (with 24-egg dried egg allowance)
Onions--16 lbs.
Coffee--2 lbs.
Meat (beef)--5 lbs.
Fluid milk--3 gallons
Dried milk--indeterminate amount (says 1 packet, but how much did one packet make?)
There are things on this list we don't/won't eat or drink, so I'm pretending people could make swaps to get more of what they DO use. My altered rationed goods allowance list:
Exchange coffee ration for more tea--+2 lbs. tea
Exchange butter for more cheese--+2 lbs. cheese
Exchange jam/jelly for more eggs--+8 eggs
Exchange 1/2 chocolate/sweets for more sugar--1 lb. sugar
Exchange 1/2 fat/oil for more sugar--+1 lb. sugar
Exchange ham/sausage ration for equal ration of ground pork
Exchange 1/2 fluid milk ration for more sugar--+12 lbs. sugar (1 gallon = 128 oz. converted to lbs., so 1.5 gallons = 192 oz. = 12 lbs.)
Exchange 1/2 fluid milk ration for more tea--+ 12 lbs. tea (that's all we drink)
My new monthly rations list for two
Sugar--20 lbs. (this covers 1 c./day for 2 gallons iced tea, and 1/4 c./day for muffin batter)
Tea--15 lbs.
Eggs--16 + equivalent of 24 dried (for muffins)
Cheese--4 lbs. (for Hubby): 1 24 oz. jar of Parmesan, the rest block or sliced
Fruit/Veg (incl. onions)--32 lbs.
Chocolate/Sweets--1 lb. (in chocolate chips or cocoa powder for muffins)
Oil--1 lb. (I'll take sunflower oil, please)
Meat (beef/pork combined)--7 lbs.
This may or may not seem like a lot of food, but when you add in all the off-ration stuff (provided you had the points or money to buy it, or stuff to barter with), this seems like nothing but a time to get creative and have some fun experimenting. For instance, I see plenty of potential for casseroles when you add in potatoes, pasta, or rice, and this is probably where the invention of casseroles came from. This may also be the birthplace of USDA serving sizes.
Unrationed foods
Chicken
Potatoes (although in short supply)
Anything grown in your garden
Anything farmed
Anything bartered from a gardener or farmer
Other animal meat (horse, goat, sheep, etc.)
Dried foods (raisins, beans, rice, pasta, oatmeal, etc.--although expensive)
Anything foraged (nuts, mushrooms, dandelions, etc.)
Foods canned, boxed, or frozen beyond ration amount (although in short supply)
Fish (fresh-caught)
Meat (hunted--anything, including birds, deer, rodents, etc.)
Wheat Flour and pre-made bread (although in short supply)
Corn meal and corn flour (used to replace wheat flour)
Vitamins and supplements (other than A and D)--kids were given rations of cod liver oil to supply these, but adults had to make due with the fish they ate, or the milk they drank, unless they could afford vitamin pills
So this is what I have to play with, since there are no shortages (yet)--I will adhere to USDA serving sizes for these foods. Starting in June, I'll start living the ration-al life with the foods listed, but not the rest of the rationing (tires, gasoline, nylons, pots and pans, etc.), because we already cut those down to bare bones, and we already recycle. This should be interesting--how does one make 5 lbs. of beef last a month with a carnivore husband, and how did one make due with multiple food allergies back in those days?
I'm going to find out the hard way. I'm also going to get a stark look at how much of what we're consuming--the exchange list gave me a hint.
This Time, I Got the Jump on Glenn Beck
Last night, he talked about what may be coming--rationing. Usually, he gets the jump on me (his antenna is bigger) for seeing over the horizon, but this time, I got him.
My tinfoil hat scenario (as my husband calls it): whether or not the North Koreans, backed up by the Chinese, declare war on South Korea, dragging us, possibly Europe, and definitely Russia into it (not on our side, of course), there will be rationing--Obama and his very powerful/influential power-and-money-seeking circle of friends will see to it, because it's the ultimate social justice. It conveniently answers many of society's problems in one fell swoop.
There is a platform being set for a one-world order---global governance, and guess who'd be in charge? The same power structure in the shadows of the Obama admin. today, plus the illustrious Al Gore, and whatever Mao/Stalin worshipers still exist.
I foresee China as being ultimate authority if any of this comes true, which means lifetime rationing (as it does in China and North Korea now). Guaranteed and continued employment will actually mean slave labor for all of us. Eminent domain will mean guaranteed housing for all of us, since there aren't many countries with private property rights.
It's a Socialist's dream, I know, but it came to me while I was awake. Pray I'm wrong (I do), and pray we manage to pull away from the iron grip of Democrat power and intent.
What else can you do? Prepare for it--learn all you can about rationing, WWII, the Korean War, Socialism, and if you haven't got that pantry stocked by now, woe is you--the currency will be devalued to the point where you won't be able to afford anything, and you can't eat gold. You can eat from credit cards, so they'd better be cleared of debt.
As far as rationing and hoarding, inspectors used to come to houses in Europe and check your house to make sure you weren't hoarding, and if you were, they'd take it away. My suggestion is to have a backup pantry offsite--I'm looking into renting a storage unit and filling it with backup supplies (there is talk of our own "lost decade" like Japan, so I'd plan for that). I'd definitely plan for at least the remaining time Obama has in office, plus the next administration (so we're talking 6 years minimum). It will take at least a decade to undo what has been done.
Your money is best spent invested in non-perishable food and supplies at this point, because the whole world will be going down in flames (well, not literally, but economically), and there will be no safe place to invest (except maybe in military contractors). The shadow powers-to-be want to control energy (electric rationing/gas and oil rationing), health care (HCR rationing), the internet (net neutrality), housing (Fannie Mae, the unending bailout fund, and holder of some 97% of our mortgages), banking (financial reform), employment and manufacturing (unions), and possibly the food supply (ignoring the Gulf Coast oil mess, killing off much of our seafood industry--I haven't figured out the rest yet).
Surprisingly, rationing might just save a lot of currently-obese lives. Sadly, land (some 10 million acres) from Montana to New Mexico are quietly being eminent-domained by the Feds in order to build monuments (or so they say)--this is land that could be farmed, or just lived on with housing. My personal feeling is that they intend to make this some sort of reservation (or maybe even prison camps?). Tell me who needs 10 million acres for a monument or two?
This has been my tinfoil hat moment brought to you by Reynolds Wrap. :)
My tinfoil hat scenario (as my husband calls it): whether or not the North Koreans, backed up by the Chinese, declare war on South Korea, dragging us, possibly Europe, and definitely Russia into it (not on our side, of course), there will be rationing--Obama and his very powerful/influential power-and-money-seeking circle of friends will see to it, because it's the ultimate social justice. It conveniently answers many of society's problems in one fell swoop.
There is a platform being set for a one-world order---global governance, and guess who'd be in charge? The same power structure in the shadows of the Obama admin. today, plus the illustrious Al Gore, and whatever Mao/Stalin worshipers still exist.
I foresee China as being ultimate authority if any of this comes true, which means lifetime rationing (as it does in China and North Korea now). Guaranteed and continued employment will actually mean slave labor for all of us. Eminent domain will mean guaranteed housing for all of us, since there aren't many countries with private property rights.
It's a Socialist's dream, I know, but it came to me while I was awake. Pray I'm wrong (I do), and pray we manage to pull away from the iron grip of Democrat power and intent.
What else can you do? Prepare for it--learn all you can about rationing, WWII, the Korean War, Socialism, and if you haven't got that pantry stocked by now, woe is you--the currency will be devalued to the point where you won't be able to afford anything, and you can't eat gold. You can eat from credit cards, so they'd better be cleared of debt.
As far as rationing and hoarding, inspectors used to come to houses in Europe and check your house to make sure you weren't hoarding, and if you were, they'd take it away. My suggestion is to have a backup pantry offsite--I'm looking into renting a storage unit and filling it with backup supplies (there is talk of our own "lost decade" like Japan, so I'd plan for that). I'd definitely plan for at least the remaining time Obama has in office, plus the next administration (so we're talking 6 years minimum). It will take at least a decade to undo what has been done.
Your money is best spent invested in non-perishable food and supplies at this point, because the whole world will be going down in flames (well, not literally, but economically), and there will be no safe place to invest (except maybe in military contractors). The shadow powers-to-be want to control energy (electric rationing/gas and oil rationing), health care (HCR rationing), the internet (net neutrality), housing (Fannie Mae, the unending bailout fund, and holder of some 97% of our mortgages), banking (financial reform), employment and manufacturing (unions), and possibly the food supply (ignoring the Gulf Coast oil mess, killing off much of our seafood industry--I haven't figured out the rest yet).
Surprisingly, rationing might just save a lot of currently-obese lives. Sadly, land (some 10 million acres) from Montana to New Mexico are quietly being eminent-domained by the Feds in order to build monuments (or so they say)--this is land that could be farmed, or just lived on with housing. My personal feeling is that they intend to make this some sort of reservation (or maybe even prison camps?). Tell me who needs 10 million acres for a monument or two?
This has been my tinfoil hat moment brought to you by Reynolds Wrap. :)
Monday, May 24, 2010
WWII-Style Energy Rationing as Part of Cap-and-Trade
From the U.K. Register--May 29, 2008
"The ration, or "personal carbon allowance" or PCA, is a measure of an individual's energy usage, either at home or traveling. Such usage is capped, and "further emissions rights will simply not be available," the Committee says. You may choose between a holiday, and turning on the heating. Points win prizes, however, and frugal individuals would be rewarded financially from the creation of an internal market.
"We could not find or imagine analogues in other fields of human activity for individual carbon trading beyond rationing during and after World War 2," the authors of the DEFRA-commissioned report "A Rough Guide to Individual Carbon Trading" wrote in 2006.
The Committee, chaired by Tim Yeo MP, lauds the potential for "engagement", which will "increase awareness" of energy consumption - what the Tyndall Centre calls "carbon consciousness" - which in turn would "spearhead behavioural change". According to the MPs, "awareness is crucial if behaviours are to change."
The committee called for "a shift in the debate away from ever-deeper and more detailed consideration of how personal carbon trading could operate towards the more decisive questions of how it could be made publicly and politically acceptable."
In other words, the MPs want to end the debate about whether or not it's a desirable option, and start marketing it as the only option.
(That's what you pay your taxes for, folks)."
In the bigger scheme, rationing is part of Obama's grand plan to "spread the wealth" through social justice--first, health care rationing, next it's energy rationing...just wait for the food part--you see the school lunches coming under attack already. If this catches on, it'll be spread globally, but what if an imbalance occurs? What if the formerly (and currently) poorer countries suddenly became rich (through better nutrition and money-saving), rose up, and demanded more power--are the rest of us going to be expected to succumb to a Zimbabwean dictator, a North Korean dictator, or even a Cuban dictator, or worse...China? Will the Somali pirates at last get what they're plundering for now?
This is the problem I see with global rationing, spreading the wealth, and social justice--it would be like handing the reins of power over from Obama to the Black Panthers. This may be exactly what some people have in mind, and had all along.
"The ration, or "personal carbon allowance" or PCA, is a measure of an individual's energy usage, either at home or traveling. Such usage is capped, and "further emissions rights will simply not be available," the Committee says. You may choose between a holiday, and turning on the heating. Points win prizes, however, and frugal individuals would be rewarded financially from the creation of an internal market.
"We could not find or imagine analogues in other fields of human activity for individual carbon trading beyond rationing during and after World War 2," the authors of the DEFRA-commissioned report "A Rough Guide to Individual Carbon Trading" wrote in 2006.
The Committee, chaired by Tim Yeo MP, lauds the potential for "engagement", which will "increase awareness" of energy consumption - what the Tyndall Centre calls "carbon consciousness" - which in turn would "spearhead behavioural change". According to the MPs, "awareness is crucial if behaviours are to change."
The committee called for "a shift in the debate away from ever-deeper and more detailed consideration of how personal carbon trading could operate towards the more decisive questions of how it could be made publicly and politically acceptable."
In other words, the MPs want to end the debate about whether or not it's a desirable option, and start marketing it as the only option.
(That's what you pay your taxes for, folks)."
In the bigger scheme, rationing is part of Obama's grand plan to "spread the wealth" through social justice--first, health care rationing, next it's energy rationing...just wait for the food part--you see the school lunches coming under attack already. If this catches on, it'll be spread globally, but what if an imbalance occurs? What if the formerly (and currently) poorer countries suddenly became rich (through better nutrition and money-saving), rose up, and demanded more power--are the rest of us going to be expected to succumb to a Zimbabwean dictator, a North Korean dictator, or even a Cuban dictator, or worse...China? Will the Somali pirates at last get what they're plundering for now?
This is the problem I see with global rationing, spreading the wealth, and social justice--it would be like handing the reins of power over from Obama to the Black Panthers. This may be exactly what some people have in mind, and had all along.
Should We Bring Back Rationing?
A January article from the BBC.
"Yet there are many parallels between a generation having to go short because of the war and one now being told to change its eating and purchasing habits by the government and environmental campaigners.
The author Philip Pullman told a newspaper last year that he advocated WWII-style rationing for environmental reasons.
But could we bring back rationing to fight obesity or save the planet? Would people accept the state forcing them to eat less?"
...
""There is no point in bringing back rationing, but there is in bringing back healthy eating and bringing back 'no waste'. That was one of the golden rules."
And yet for many people there were great positives in rationing.
"So many of the foodstuffs that bring about obesity were in short supply," says Mr Charman.
Of course that's not to say every aspect of the rationing diet was wonderful.
Most fresh vegetables, like most fresh fruit, were not rationed, but could very often be in short supply, despite the Dig for Victory allotment campaign."
...
"From a nutritional point of view there was both good and bad," says Anna Denny of the British Nutrition Foundation.
"Offal was quite a rich source of some nutrients we tend to lack in our [current] diet such as zinc. Teenagers tend not to get enough zinc."
A downside would have been a lack of some types of fish. Fish was not rationed, but its price was not controlled, says Mr Charman, meaning that it was often expensive."
...
"Whatever the statistical picture, the nature of our calorie consumption has changed dramatically. The UK has grown more sedentary over the years, shifting to office-based jobs and away from calorie-burning manual work. Even the housewife of 1942 would have worked much harder.
For Dr David Haslam, chairman of the National Obesity Forum, the current wave of overeating has its roots in the end of rationing in the 1950s and the shift to a society of plenty."
...
"Of course there is a lesson for current politicians in the way attitudes to rationing changed after the war, when privation continued because of the efforts to feed the liberated countries and Germany, as well as bad harvests and economic chaos.
"People made the best of it but were very horrified when it went on so long after the war," says Ms Patten."
In the 50's, we introduced the credit card to the U.S. populace--could there be a connection to all this? Talk about a leap back into abundance!
I found a blog about a family living for a year on rations (I presume the American version)--Rational Living.
"Yet there are many parallels between a generation having to go short because of the war and one now being told to change its eating and purchasing habits by the government and environmental campaigners.
The author Philip Pullman told a newspaper last year that he advocated WWII-style rationing for environmental reasons.
But could we bring back rationing to fight obesity or save the planet? Would people accept the state forcing them to eat less?"
...
""There is no point in bringing back rationing, but there is in bringing back healthy eating and bringing back 'no waste'. That was one of the golden rules."
And yet for many people there were great positives in rationing.
"So many of the foodstuffs that bring about obesity were in short supply," says Mr Charman.
Of course that's not to say every aspect of the rationing diet was wonderful.
Most fresh vegetables, like most fresh fruit, were not rationed, but could very often be in short supply, despite the Dig for Victory allotment campaign."
...
"From a nutritional point of view there was both good and bad," says Anna Denny of the British Nutrition Foundation.
"Offal was quite a rich source of some nutrients we tend to lack in our [current] diet such as zinc. Teenagers tend not to get enough zinc."
A downside would have been a lack of some types of fish. Fish was not rationed, but its price was not controlled, says Mr Charman, meaning that it was often expensive."
...
"Whatever the statistical picture, the nature of our calorie consumption has changed dramatically. The UK has grown more sedentary over the years, shifting to office-based jobs and away from calorie-burning manual work. Even the housewife of 1942 would have worked much harder.
For Dr David Haslam, chairman of the National Obesity Forum, the current wave of overeating has its roots in the end of rationing in the 1950s and the shift to a society of plenty."
...
"Of course there is a lesson for current politicians in the way attitudes to rationing changed after the war, when privation continued because of the efforts to feed the liberated countries and Germany, as well as bad harvests and economic chaos.
"People made the best of it but were very horrified when it went on so long after the war," says Ms Patten."
In the 50's, we introduced the credit card to the U.S. populace--could there be a connection to all this? Talk about a leap back into abundance!
I found a blog about a family living for a year on rations (I presume the American version)--Rational Living.
Sunday, May 23, 2010
WW II Rationing--the Google Search
From U.S. History.com
The interesting bits: "The federal government needed to control supply and demand. Rationing was introduced to avoid public anger with shortages and not to allow only the wealthy to purchase commodities. While industry and commerce were affected, individuals felt the effects more intensely. People were often required to give up many material goods, but there also was an increase in employment."
...
"Individual efforts evolved into clubs and organizations coming to terms with the immediate circumstances. Joining together to support and maintain supply levels for the troops abroad meant making daily adjustments. Their efforts also included scrap drives, taking factory jobs, goods donations and other similar projects to assist those on the front."
...
" Rationing regulated the amount of commodities that consumers could obtain. Sugar rationing took effect in May 1943 with the distribution of "Sugar Buying Cards." Registration usually took place in local schools. Each family was asked to send only one member for registration and be prepared to describe all other family members. Coupons were distributed based on family size, and the coupon book allowed the holder to buy a specified amount. Possession of a coupon book did not guarantee that sugar would be available. Americans learned to utilize what they had during rationing time.
While some food items were scarce, others did not require rationing, and Americans adjusted accordingly. "Red Stamp" rationing covered all meats, butter, fat, and oils, and with some exceptions, cheese. Each person was allowed a certain amount of points weekly with expiration dates to consider. "Blue Stamp" rationing covered canned, bottled, and frozen fruits and vegetables, plus juices and dry beans; and such processed foods as soups, baby food and catsup. Ration stamps became a kind of currency with each family being issued a "War Ration Book." Each stamp authorized a purchase of rationed goods in the quantity and time designated, and the book guaranteed each family its fair share of goods made scarce, thanks to the war.
Rationing also was determined by a point system. Some grew weary of trying to figure out what coupon went with which item, or how many points they needed to purchase them, while some coupons did not require points at all. In addition to food, rationing encompassed clothing, shoes, coffee, gasoline, tires, and fuel oil. With each coupon book came specifications and deadlines. Rationing locations were posted in public view. Rationing of gas and tires highly depended on the distance to one's job. If one was fortunate enough to own an automobile and drive at the then specified speed of 35 mph, one might have a small amount of gas remaining at the end of the month to visit nearby relatives.
Rationing resulted in one serious side effect: The black market, where people could buy rationed items on the sly, but at higher prices. The practice provoked mixed emotions from those who banded together to conserve as instructed, as opposed to those who fed the black market's subversion and profiteering. For the most part, black marketeers dealt in clothing and liquor in Britain, and meat, sugar and gasoline in the United States."
...
"Recycling was born with the government’s encouragement. Saving aluminum cans meant more ammunition for the soldiers. Economizing initiatives seemed endless as Americans were urged to conserve and recycle metal, paper and rubber. War bonds and stamps were sold to provide war funds, and the American people also united through volunteerism. Communities joined together to hold scrap iron drives, schoolchildren pasted saving stamps in bond books.
Others planted "Victory Gardens" to conserve food. For a small investment in soil, seed and time, families could enjoy fresh vegetables for months. By 1945, an estimated 20 million victory gardens produced approximately 40 percent of America's vegetables.
Training sessions were held to teach women to shop wisely, conserve food and plan nutritious meals, as well as teach them how to can food items. The homemaker planned family meals within the set limits. The government's pursuading of people to give up large amounts of red meats and fats resulted in people eating more healthily.
The government also printed a monthly meal-planning guide with recipes and a daily menu. Good Housekeeping magazine printed a special section for rationed foods in its 1943 cookbook. Numerous national publications also featured articles explaining what rationing meant to America."
...
"After three years of rationing, World War II came to a welcome end. Rationing, however, did not end until 1946. Life resumed as normal and the consumption of meat, butter and sugar inevitably rose. While Americans still live with some of the results of World War II, rationing has not returned."
Okay, so now I know that what are commonly thought of as "frugal foods" today (beans, rice, etc.) were rationed right along with everything else. I guess the simplest way of sorting it out is "if you grew it, hunted it, or fished it, you owned it." As for clothing and other material items: "if you made it, you owned it." I think bartering with neighbors was also allowed--if a neighbor had chickens, a cow, or whatever, you could barter with or buy from them your butter, eggs, chicken meat, or whatever.
From Mother Jones: "Rationed items included tires, cars, bicycles, gasoline, fuel oil and kerosene, solid fuels, stoves, rubber footwear, shoes, sugar, coffee, processed foods, meats, canned fish, cheese, canned milk, fats, and typewriters." Let's not forget those all-important nylons!
This from a lesson plan Citizen Involvement in the War Effort at Home—Food Rationing:
* Why was rationing important during WWII?
* How would your eating habits change if your foods were rationed tomorrow as in 1943?
* There were benefits to rationing. With less gasoline and rubber, traffic deaths dropped sharply. Can you think of other ways in which rationing might have benefited Americans?
* Why was it important to have families can all kinds of food during WWII?
The World War Two in Northern England site tells us "the legendary (Hormel) SPAM was almost always available and for many families became the multi-purpose meat of wartime existence. Housewives used it in a variety of ingenious ways" and "The Women's Land Army (WLA) was formed in 1939 to replace farmer's helpers who had been conscripted in the armed forces or to augment existing work forces. Young women were recruited and underwent intense, high caliber, training before being assigned to farms. They were uniformed in khaki shirts & jodhpurs, dark green wool pullovers and sturdy brown boots. WLA members resided on the farms to which they were assigned and performed every farm task imaginable. The program was an enormous success and the efforts of the WLA went a long way to insure the civilian population was adequately fed throughout the war. Even the smallest farms were assigned WLA members on application."
Apparently Spam and coffee weren't rationed, although coffee was in short supply (thanks to German supply boat bombings). It's good to see women put to good use by training them for farm work, as well as the Rosie the Riveter activities we did over here. Maybe this is an answer to our unemployment and illegal alien problems--not just for women, but for everybody who's unemployed! Put them to work on farms, and we won't need any more illegals to pick our fruit, clean our houses, manage our gardens, and roof our houses.
Spam SHOULD'VE BEEN rationed for the salt content. :)
The interesting bits: "The federal government needed to control supply and demand. Rationing was introduced to avoid public anger with shortages and not to allow only the wealthy to purchase commodities. While industry and commerce were affected, individuals felt the effects more intensely. People were often required to give up many material goods, but there also was an increase in employment."
...
"Individual efforts evolved into clubs and organizations coming to terms with the immediate circumstances. Joining together to support and maintain supply levels for the troops abroad meant making daily adjustments. Their efforts also included scrap drives, taking factory jobs, goods donations and other similar projects to assist those on the front."
...
" Rationing regulated the amount of commodities that consumers could obtain. Sugar rationing took effect in May 1943 with the distribution of "Sugar Buying Cards." Registration usually took place in local schools. Each family was asked to send only one member for registration and be prepared to describe all other family members. Coupons were distributed based on family size, and the coupon book allowed the holder to buy a specified amount. Possession of a coupon book did not guarantee that sugar would be available. Americans learned to utilize what they had during rationing time.
While some food items were scarce, others did not require rationing, and Americans adjusted accordingly. "Red Stamp" rationing covered all meats, butter, fat, and oils, and with some exceptions, cheese. Each person was allowed a certain amount of points weekly with expiration dates to consider. "Blue Stamp" rationing covered canned, bottled, and frozen fruits and vegetables, plus juices and dry beans; and such processed foods as soups, baby food and catsup. Ration stamps became a kind of currency with each family being issued a "War Ration Book." Each stamp authorized a purchase of rationed goods in the quantity and time designated, and the book guaranteed each family its fair share of goods made scarce, thanks to the war.
Rationing also was determined by a point system. Some grew weary of trying to figure out what coupon went with which item, or how many points they needed to purchase them, while some coupons did not require points at all. In addition to food, rationing encompassed clothing, shoes, coffee, gasoline, tires, and fuel oil. With each coupon book came specifications and deadlines. Rationing locations were posted in public view. Rationing of gas and tires highly depended on the distance to one's job. If one was fortunate enough to own an automobile and drive at the then specified speed of 35 mph, one might have a small amount of gas remaining at the end of the month to visit nearby relatives.
Rationing resulted in one serious side effect: The black market, where people could buy rationed items on the sly, but at higher prices. The practice provoked mixed emotions from those who banded together to conserve as instructed, as opposed to those who fed the black market's subversion and profiteering. For the most part, black marketeers dealt in clothing and liquor in Britain, and meat, sugar and gasoline in the United States."
...
"Recycling was born with the government’s encouragement. Saving aluminum cans meant more ammunition for the soldiers. Economizing initiatives seemed endless as Americans were urged to conserve and recycle metal, paper and rubber. War bonds and stamps were sold to provide war funds, and the American people also united through volunteerism. Communities joined together to hold scrap iron drives, schoolchildren pasted saving stamps in bond books.
Others planted "Victory Gardens" to conserve food. For a small investment in soil, seed and time, families could enjoy fresh vegetables for months. By 1945, an estimated 20 million victory gardens produced approximately 40 percent of America's vegetables.
Training sessions were held to teach women to shop wisely, conserve food and plan nutritious meals, as well as teach them how to can food items. The homemaker planned family meals within the set limits. The government's pursuading of people to give up large amounts of red meats and fats resulted in people eating more healthily.
The government also printed a monthly meal-planning guide with recipes and a daily menu. Good Housekeeping magazine printed a special section for rationed foods in its 1943 cookbook. Numerous national publications also featured articles explaining what rationing meant to America."
...
"After three years of rationing, World War II came to a welcome end. Rationing, however, did not end until 1946. Life resumed as normal and the consumption of meat, butter and sugar inevitably rose. While Americans still live with some of the results of World War II, rationing has not returned."
Okay, so now I know that what are commonly thought of as "frugal foods" today (beans, rice, etc.) were rationed right along with everything else. I guess the simplest way of sorting it out is "if you grew it, hunted it, or fished it, you owned it." As for clothing and other material items: "if you made it, you owned it." I think bartering with neighbors was also allowed--if a neighbor had chickens, a cow, or whatever, you could barter with or buy from them your butter, eggs, chicken meat, or whatever.
From Mother Jones: "Rationed items included tires, cars, bicycles, gasoline, fuel oil and kerosene, solid fuels, stoves, rubber footwear, shoes, sugar, coffee, processed foods, meats, canned fish, cheese, canned milk, fats, and typewriters." Let's not forget those all-important nylons!
This from a lesson plan Citizen Involvement in the War Effort at Home—Food Rationing:
* Why was rationing important during WWII?
* How would your eating habits change if your foods were rationed tomorrow as in 1943?
* There were benefits to rationing. With less gasoline and rubber, traffic deaths dropped sharply. Can you think of other ways in which rationing might have benefited Americans?
* Why was it important to have families can all kinds of food during WWII?
The World War Two in Northern England site tells us "the legendary (Hormel) SPAM was almost always available and for many families became the multi-purpose meat of wartime existence. Housewives used it in a variety of ingenious ways" and "The Women's Land Army (WLA) was formed in 1939 to replace farmer's helpers who had been conscripted in the armed forces or to augment existing work forces. Young women were recruited and underwent intense, high caliber, training before being assigned to farms. They were uniformed in khaki shirts & jodhpurs, dark green wool pullovers and sturdy brown boots. WLA members resided on the farms to which they were assigned and performed every farm task imaginable. The program was an enormous success and the efforts of the WLA went a long way to insure the civilian population was adequately fed throughout the war. Even the smallest farms were assigned WLA members on application."
Apparently Spam and coffee weren't rationed, although coffee was in short supply (thanks to German supply boat bombings). It's good to see women put to good use by training them for farm work, as well as the Rosie the Riveter activities we did over here. Maybe this is an answer to our unemployment and illegal alien problems--not just for women, but for everybody who's unemployed! Put them to work on farms, and we won't need any more illegals to pick our fruit, clean our houses, manage our gardens, and roof our houses.
Spam SHOULD'VE BEEN rationed for the salt content. :)
A Radical Idea That Just Might Solve Food Poverty
I've been book-shopping because TV is getting boring--I've watched all the reruns of reruns I care to watch, and my "current" shows are on summer hiatus, so I need something to keep my brain from turning further into sludge.
I've also been reading to death one particular book I already own: Eating For Victory. Putting war rationing together with the War on Obesity, it seems to me that war rationing might be the solution to obesity, hunger, and poverty in general.
Here's how I got there: if people can't or won't learn to shop for sensible, healthful foods on their own, let's revamp the food stamp program to align with the WWII ration book rather than the farm subsidy program (which it does now, as well as the carb-heavy Food Guide Pyramid).
One paragraph in particular from the book's intro from Jill Norman gave me the spark from which this brainchild was born:
I know this is just fantasy, and I need to learn much more about the rationing system and what went into it (and what got left out of it), but this crazy idea came to me, and I wanted to share it. Could this be THE ANSWER to poverty, obesity, and excess in general? The bad news is it may be coming back our way whether we want it or not, thanks to global economic calamity and Obama's war on excess.
To top this off, there's a group of people over at The Dollar Stretcher forums who regularly engage in "ration living", and compare notes on how much money was saved, and how much weight was lost. I just might have to check in.
I'm also curious as to whether they maintain this way of living even when times are good.
I've also been reading to death one particular book I already own: Eating For Victory. Putting war rationing together with the War on Obesity, it seems to me that war rationing might be the solution to obesity, hunger, and poverty in general.
Here's how I got there: if people can't or won't learn to shop for sensible, healthful foods on their own, let's revamp the food stamp program to align with the WWII ration book rather than the farm subsidy program (which it does now, as well as the carb-heavy Food Guide Pyramid).
One paragraph in particular from the book's intro from Jill Norman gave me the spark from which this brainchild was born:
"During the war, although there were privations and shortages, people generally had a good diet. When the war ended, it was found that the average food intake had risen from where it began. This was mostly because many poor people had been too poor to feed themselves properly, but with virtually no unemployment and the rationing system, with its fixed prices, they ate better than in the past."
...
"People at all levels of society took nutrition seriously and fed their families sensibly with rations and whatever vegetables and fruit was available, and with less sugar and fewer sweet snacks there was less tooth decay. As a whole, the population was slimmer and healthier than it is today; people ate less fat and sugar, less meat, and many more vegetables."
I know this is just fantasy, and I need to learn much more about the rationing system and what went into it (and what got left out of it), but this crazy idea came to me, and I wanted to share it. Could this be THE ANSWER to poverty, obesity, and excess in general? The bad news is it may be coming back our way whether we want it or not, thanks to global economic calamity and Obama's war on excess.
To top this off, there's a group of people over at The Dollar Stretcher forums who regularly engage in "ration living", and compare notes on how much money was saved, and how much weight was lost. I just might have to check in.
I'm also curious as to whether they maintain this way of living even when times are good.
Saturday, May 22, 2010
The Vanishing Homeowner's Insurance
From Fox News and WalletPop.
"It can happen unexpectedly. Maybe you took an extended vacation. Perhaps you placed your home on the market and moved into a new one. Or maybe you’ve gone into a nursing home temporarily. If you’ve moved out of your home for any reason – including renovation – your home insurance policy
may have moved out, too.
Unfortunately, a common clause in home insurance policies says that coverage is void on vacant homes – and you probably won’t realize your home insurance has vanished until it’s too late."
"It can happen unexpectedly. Maybe you took an extended vacation. Perhaps you placed your home on the market and moved into a new one. Or maybe you’ve gone into a nursing home temporarily. If you’ve moved out of your home for any reason – including renovation – your home insurance policy
may have moved out, too.
Unfortunately, a common clause in home insurance policies says that coverage is void on vacant homes – and you probably won’t realize your home insurance has vanished until it’s too late."
Monday, May 17, 2010
Plan B--Skip College
From the New York Times.
"A small but influential group of economists and educators is pushing another pathway: for some students, no college at all. It’s time, they say, to develop credible alternatives for students unlikely to be successful pursuing a higher degree, or who may not be ready to do so."
...
"Among the top 10 growing job categories, two require college degrees: accounting (a bachelor’s) and postsecondary teachers (a doctorate). But this growth is expected to be dwarfed by the need for registered nurses, home health aides, customer service representatives and store clerks. None of those jobs require a bachelor’s degree."
...
"I’m not saying don’t get the B.A,” he said. “I’m saying, let’s get them some intervening credentials, some intervening milestones. Then, if they want to go further in their education, they can."
Exactly what the Amish do--if furthering their education (through workshops lectures, and training, but no college or formal settings) will help their work life (or business life), then they pursue it. Otherwise, it's money that could've been spent more efficiently.
"A small but influential group of economists and educators is pushing another pathway: for some students, no college at all. It’s time, they say, to develop credible alternatives for students unlikely to be successful pursuing a higher degree, or who may not be ready to do so."
...
"Among the top 10 growing job categories, two require college degrees: accounting (a bachelor’s) and postsecondary teachers (a doctorate). But this growth is expected to be dwarfed by the need for registered nurses, home health aides, customer service representatives and store clerks. None of those jobs require a bachelor’s degree."
...
"I’m not saying don’t get the B.A,” he said. “I’m saying, let’s get them some intervening credentials, some intervening milestones. Then, if they want to go further in their education, they can."
Exactly what the Amish do--if furthering their education (through workshops lectures, and training, but no college or formal settings) will help their work life (or business life), then they pursue it. Otherwise, it's money that could've been spent more efficiently.
Saturday, May 08, 2010
Cut-the-Crap GF Recipe: WAPF Muffins/Snack Cake
This is nearly allergen-free--make it allergen-free by substituting appropriately. No gums, mixers of any kind, or a bewildering array of flours needed for this one.
First, I'll start off with some terminology, because some of my readers will wonder what planet I woke up on this morning:
GF = gluten-free (no wheat, no gluten, typical for Celiacs and wheat/gluten intolerant)
WAPF = Weston A. Price Foundation (refers to a food preparation method involving overnight soaking)
guar/xanthan gum = a gluten substitute used to hold batter together and make baked goods rise--none needed for this recipe
Now, on to the actual recipe!
1 cup binder flour (any bean type or potato starch)
1 cup grain flour (any acceptable Celiac grain other than GF oatmeal)
1 can coconut milk (or substitute 2 c. any milk type)
Combine the flours and milk--stir together, then add 2 T. acid medium (lemon juice, yogurt, apple cider vinegar, etc.). Stir again, and leave overnight, covering bowl with dish towel.
The next day, uncover batter and stir again. Preheat oven to 350 and add the following ingredients:
1 T. baking soda
1/4 c. sugar (any type, or substitute equivalent sweetener)
1 egg
Whatever flavorings/additions you want--up to 2 T. flavoring/spices, and up to 1 c. fruit/flavored chips/coconut/nuts/etc.
*1 T. psyllium husk powder (fiber powder) or nutritional yeast--optional (purely for nutrition's sake)
Stir batter until all ingredients incorporated--batter may seem thick and oddly-textured (especially if fiber powder added). Grease muffin pan or square/round cake pan. Spoon or scrape batter into chosen pan (filling muffin cups half full), then bake at 350 for 1 hour. Remove from oven and cool on rack. Makes 6 large muffins, 12 regular muffins, or 1 snack cake.
The finished product will be a complete protein, and if fiber powder/nutritional yeast is added, will boost the nutrition that's already in the flours and additions. I make this recipe at least 3 times a week (weather permitting), and these products freeze well.
Flavoring/addition suggestions: raisin/spice, blueberry/vanilla, banana/chocolate chip, chocolate chip/almond, tropical fruit/orange--your imagination is your guide here. Frost if you wish, but you won't need it.
First, I'll start off with some terminology, because some of my readers will wonder what planet I woke up on this morning:
GF = gluten-free (no wheat, no gluten, typical for Celiacs and wheat/gluten intolerant)
WAPF = Weston A. Price Foundation (refers to a food preparation method involving overnight soaking)
guar/xanthan gum = a gluten substitute used to hold batter together and make baked goods rise--none needed for this recipe
Now, on to the actual recipe!
1 cup binder flour (any bean type or potato starch)
1 cup grain flour (any acceptable Celiac grain other than GF oatmeal)
1 can coconut milk (or substitute 2 c. any milk type)
Combine the flours and milk--stir together, then add 2 T. acid medium (lemon juice, yogurt, apple cider vinegar, etc.). Stir again, and leave overnight, covering bowl with dish towel.
The next day, uncover batter and stir again. Preheat oven to 350 and add the following ingredients:
1 T. baking soda
1/4 c. sugar (any type, or substitute equivalent sweetener)
1 egg
Whatever flavorings/additions you want--up to 2 T. flavoring/spices, and up to 1 c. fruit/flavored chips/coconut/nuts/etc.
*1 T. psyllium husk powder (fiber powder) or nutritional yeast--optional (purely for nutrition's sake)
Stir batter until all ingredients incorporated--batter may seem thick and oddly-textured (especially if fiber powder added). Grease muffin pan or square/round cake pan. Spoon or scrape batter into chosen pan (filling muffin cups half full), then bake at 350 for 1 hour. Remove from oven and cool on rack. Makes 6 large muffins, 12 regular muffins, or 1 snack cake.
The finished product will be a complete protein, and if fiber powder/nutritional yeast is added, will boost the nutrition that's already in the flours and additions. I make this recipe at least 3 times a week (weather permitting), and these products freeze well.
Flavoring/addition suggestions: raisin/spice, blueberry/vanilla, banana/chocolate chip, chocolate chip/almond, tropical fruit/orange--your imagination is your guide here. Frost if you wish, but you won't need it.
Wednesday, May 05, 2010
The New Way Marketers Make You Buy
From MSN Money.
"Neuromarketing, which relies on technologies from the field of neuroscience, such as functional MRIs and PET scans and other biological measures, "gives us a look inside that black box," Dooley adds. "It doesn't change what's happening. The real promise of neuromarketing is to help advertisers and product developers get better feedback from customers, for better market research."
Neuromarketing doesn't change what happens to you when you look at a Porsche or the new G line of Gatorade drinks. But neuromarketers think that by gauging your unconscious emotional responses to ads, websites and products, they can alter those messages to increase your engagement and drive your purchasing choices.
But can they?"
...
"Lindstrom found that when smokers looked at a billboard of a cowboy on a horse, with a certain red background, it would kick up the neurological response in the nucleus accumbens region of the brain, associated with pleasure and addiction. Guess why.
Paradoxically, health warnings on cigarette packages, Lindstrom found, also stimulated the nucleus accumbens, suggesting that those warnings actually increased the craving for a smoke instead of squelching it."
...
"Emotions tag information for relevance," Marci says. So, your emotional response to a brand or product (cowboy = smoking = feeling good) can nudge it to the top of your to-do -- or to-buy -- list.
The marketers' job is to flip those emotional switches by testing and measuring the elements that stir consumers' level of interest or engagement."
...
"It's not about mind control," Marci says. "It's more about optimizing stimuli, whether that's a TV ad, website or shelf display. The world is a cluttered place. How do you break through that clutter?"
...
What to do about it:
" * Think before you spend. If you notice a sudden preference for a certain brand of overpriced face cream but you can't say why, stop. "Be sure that there is a conscious thought process going on," Dooley says, "so that any short-term appeal is muted." (Hint: Mom was right. Comparison shopping pays off.)
* Hold onto your cash. "The moment when someone takes out their credit card or cash is a moment of consciousness," Marci says. Don't even take out your wallet unless you're sure of your reasons for buying.
* Beware the fantasy. I asked Marci why catalogs, in particular, can be such a strong temptation to spend. He said that catalogs play to the fact that you're probably browsing in a quiet moment at home, when you can get caught up in the fantasy these marketing tools provide. The same may be true of a TV commercial or a website. If you find yourself sliding into that life you've always wanted to live as Robert Redford's hip, Western, laid-back, horse-riding neighbor, don't click on that shopping cart.
* Visualize the future. Dooley says that whenever you're tempted to spend money on something you don't need (but your brain is telling you that you desperately want), visualize one of your bigger priorities, such as a new home, a college-bound kid, a jet-setting retirement. "By focusing on the most compelling aspects of the long-term reward, you lessen the power of that short-term desire," he says."
Just like Mickey D's sells the smell, OTC smoking cessation products sell the nicotine delivery system, and makeup sells the look of youth, marketers use your weaknesses to sell everything--even weaknesses you didn't know you had.
"Neuromarketing, which relies on technologies from the field of neuroscience, such as functional MRIs and PET scans and other biological measures, "gives us a look inside that black box," Dooley adds. "It doesn't change what's happening. The real promise of neuromarketing is to help advertisers and product developers get better feedback from customers, for better market research."
Neuromarketing doesn't change what happens to you when you look at a Porsche or the new G line of Gatorade drinks. But neuromarketers think that by gauging your unconscious emotional responses to ads, websites and products, they can alter those messages to increase your engagement and drive your purchasing choices.
But can they?"
...
"Lindstrom found that when smokers looked at a billboard of a cowboy on a horse, with a certain red background, it would kick up the neurological response in the nucleus accumbens region of the brain, associated with pleasure and addiction. Guess why.
Paradoxically, health warnings on cigarette packages, Lindstrom found, also stimulated the nucleus accumbens, suggesting that those warnings actually increased the craving for a smoke instead of squelching it."
...
"Emotions tag information for relevance," Marci says. So, your emotional response to a brand or product (cowboy = smoking = feeling good) can nudge it to the top of your to-do -- or to-buy -- list.
The marketers' job is to flip those emotional switches by testing and measuring the elements that stir consumers' level of interest or engagement."
...
"It's not about mind control," Marci says. "It's more about optimizing stimuli, whether that's a TV ad, website or shelf display. The world is a cluttered place. How do you break through that clutter?"
...
What to do about it:
" * Think before you spend. If you notice a sudden preference for a certain brand of overpriced face cream but you can't say why, stop. "Be sure that there is a conscious thought process going on," Dooley says, "so that any short-term appeal is muted." (Hint: Mom was right. Comparison shopping pays off.)
* Hold onto your cash. "The moment when someone takes out their credit card or cash is a moment of consciousness," Marci says. Don't even take out your wallet unless you're sure of your reasons for buying.
* Beware the fantasy. I asked Marci why catalogs, in particular, can be such a strong temptation to spend. He said that catalogs play to the fact that you're probably browsing in a quiet moment at home, when you can get caught up in the fantasy these marketing tools provide. The same may be true of a TV commercial or a website. If you find yourself sliding into that life you've always wanted to live as Robert Redford's hip, Western, laid-back, horse-riding neighbor, don't click on that shopping cart.
* Visualize the future. Dooley says that whenever you're tempted to spend money on something you don't need (but your brain is telling you that you desperately want), visualize one of your bigger priorities, such as a new home, a college-bound kid, a jet-setting retirement. "By focusing on the most compelling aspects of the long-term reward, you lessen the power of that short-term desire," he says."
Just like Mickey D's sells the smell, OTC smoking cessation products sell the nicotine delivery system, and makeup sells the look of youth, marketers use your weaknesses to sell everything--even weaknesses you didn't know you had.
Tuesday, May 04, 2010
Why Amish Businesses Don't Fail (with Addition)
From CNN Money.
"Wesner, who worked in business management and sales before immersing himself in all things Amish, thinks it lies in the culture, which emphasizes "qualities like hard work and cooperation." Networking through Facebook doesn't exactly have the same community-building pull as teaming up with neighbors to build a barn, and few Americans these days can point to a childhood where they awoke regularly at dawn to milk the cows.
Another key advantage is that Amish business owners tend to stick with what they know.
"Everything about the Amish says things like 'rustic,' 'traditional,' 'handmade,' so they tend to play to those strengths," Wesner says. "Would consumers trust an Amish cell-phone dealer or an Amish computer repair guy to know what he's doing? It'd be a pretty big mental and marketing hurdle to get over."
...
"Even if most people's idea of an Amish businessman is someone selling homemade cheese transported by horse and buggy, Miller isn't an anomaly, according to Kraybill, who has become one of the nation's leading academic experts on the Amish. He estimates that there are at least 9,000 Amish business owners across the U.S, which he divides into two groups: "caretakers" and "entrepreneurs."
"Caretakers generally have smaller, at-home or near-home businesses with five or fewer employees, and they don't want to grow, but simply sustain income for themselves and a small number of employees," Kraybill says. "The entrepreneurs are a different breed. They have larger businesses and somewhat want to grow, and they are more aggressive in marketing, trying new ideas, and are willing to take risks."
...
"while the Amish have made allowances and will, for instance, make products that they don't use themselves -- like designer-label leather clothing or high-priced toys -- they won't touch any business "that may be seen as morally questionable." Don't hold your breath waiting for an Amish-owned casino, liquor store or debt collection service.
But modern touches are creeping into the business scene. Some Amish retailers use electricity in their shops, more as a nod to customers who expect air-conditioning and credit-card machines. They're often fueled with alternative energy sources, like solar and wind power."
...
""The smarter you get, and the more technology you use for your business, the more impact it has on families," he says. "For instance, there was a time the farmer would be in the parlor milking cows, and everyone was there, singing songs, and it was work, but it was also family time. Now, an Amish farmer is likely to be milking forty cows, and the children are at school. That's practical living, and you've got to keep up. But at the same time, it takes away from that balance, and you have to ask yourself, 'How far do you let technology affect your business?'"
Miller answers his own question in the next breath: "I guess you just have to stay true to your convictions and draw your own lines and not overdo it where you lose the values and your way of life."
I wrote my .02 about the Amish here.
ADDITION: Here's also a book on it.
"Wesner, who worked in business management and sales before immersing himself in all things Amish, thinks it lies in the culture, which emphasizes "qualities like hard work and cooperation." Networking through Facebook doesn't exactly have the same community-building pull as teaming up with neighbors to build a barn, and few Americans these days can point to a childhood where they awoke regularly at dawn to milk the cows.
Another key advantage is that Amish business owners tend to stick with what they know.
"Everything about the Amish says things like 'rustic,' 'traditional,' 'handmade,' so they tend to play to those strengths," Wesner says. "Would consumers trust an Amish cell-phone dealer or an Amish computer repair guy to know what he's doing? It'd be a pretty big mental and marketing hurdle to get over."
...
"Even if most people's idea of an Amish businessman is someone selling homemade cheese transported by horse and buggy, Miller isn't an anomaly, according to Kraybill, who has become one of the nation's leading academic experts on the Amish. He estimates that there are at least 9,000 Amish business owners across the U.S, which he divides into two groups: "caretakers" and "entrepreneurs."
"Caretakers generally have smaller, at-home or near-home businesses with five or fewer employees, and they don't want to grow, but simply sustain income for themselves and a small number of employees," Kraybill says. "The entrepreneurs are a different breed. They have larger businesses and somewhat want to grow, and they are more aggressive in marketing, trying new ideas, and are willing to take risks."
...
"while the Amish have made allowances and will, for instance, make products that they don't use themselves -- like designer-label leather clothing or high-priced toys -- they won't touch any business "that may be seen as morally questionable." Don't hold your breath waiting for an Amish-owned casino, liquor store or debt collection service.
But modern touches are creeping into the business scene. Some Amish retailers use electricity in their shops, more as a nod to customers who expect air-conditioning and credit-card machines. They're often fueled with alternative energy sources, like solar and wind power."
...
""The smarter you get, and the more technology you use for your business, the more impact it has on families," he says. "For instance, there was a time the farmer would be in the parlor milking cows, and everyone was there, singing songs, and it was work, but it was also family time. Now, an Amish farmer is likely to be milking forty cows, and the children are at school. That's practical living, and you've got to keep up. But at the same time, it takes away from that balance, and you have to ask yourself, 'How far do you let technology affect your business?'"
Miller answers his own question in the next breath: "I guess you just have to stay true to your convictions and draw your own lines and not overdo it where you lose the values and your way of life."
I wrote my .02 about the Amish here.
ADDITION: Here's also a book on it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
