The Welfare State

Without a doubt, socialism has to be the most misconstrued term in the political dictionary. Nobody really knows what it means. So here’s our take on how government gets involved with the economy. First, there are five styles.  

Communism is max, where everyone works for the state. The minimum is where government exists only to defend the shores, make and enforce laws, maintain a federal currency, and run the post office. It’s called Jeffersonian and was popular in the late 1700s. Other than a few exceptions, neither of these are being used today. Instead, we see mixed economies, where both capitalism and socialism operate together. And they come in three forms:

  • High Socialism (most government involvement)
  • New Deal (least government involvement)
  • New Deal 2.0 (most popular)

High Socialism

Socialism refers to the amount of public ownership in an economy. Total government ownership is found only in communism (along with rules like no private property and everything has to be painted grey). Other than that, there really aren’t any “socialist countries.” Only socialized elements found in every country. For example, we say Canada has socialized medicine but within our system there are capitalist components like private drug plans and cosmetic surgery.

High socialism refers to large amounts of government ownership. It’s found in countries where governments keep certain industries for themselves (typically natural resources and utilities). Common in the developing world, parts of this style remain in Canada where many provinces still run their own liquor business and auto insurance.

And there are valid reasons for high socialism. Namely a country’s population and business environment. If a nation’s population isn’t large enough to support competition, you’re basically forced into having monopolies run the airline, railroad, and utilities. Likewise with developing natural resources. Some nations simply don’t have the required infrastructure (e.g., property rights, rule of law) for capitalism to operate. But remember, a mall in a highly socialized country is essentially the same as a mall in America. Every facet from manufacturers to retailers to food courts are privatized. That’s because even within highly socialized countries, consumer and industrial goods are still produced and sold by the private sector.

New Deal

Initially, we had only one style—1700s Jeffersonian. But in the mid-1800s, people started to feel the benefits of capitalism weren’t being evenly shared. They increasingly saw industrialists as selfish hogs who cared little about the masses. This sentiment grew to spawn the communist movement.

In response to worker uprisings and social unrest everywhere, countries like Germany, England, and France rolled out what would later be called in America, The New Deal. Varying by country, it included programs like unemployment insurance, public pensions, public education, and public health care. Plus, they added laws to ensure labour standards, promote unions, and regulate industry. Communism did make its gains but these steps worked well to retain capitalism in most of the developed world. And socialist policies were adopted into each country’s conscience. Free market economist, Milton Friedman, called it a watershed moment.

New Deal 2.0

Through the 1900s and into the new millennium, many countries grew their social programs to include more items like child care, public transit, free education at the post-secondary level, and increased business regulation. So starting from left to right, it goes:

Communism ⇨ High Socialism ⇨ Large Welfare State ⇨ Small Welfare State ⇨ Jeffersonian

Liberals pull to the left and conservatives to the right. In Canada, this means lefties want new programs like national daycare and complete pharmacare. They’ll lobby for schools to provide no-pay preschool delivered by properly compensated provincial employees. They’ll fight for healthcare to be expanded to cover the cost of all drugs (replacing private plans that do it now) and they’ll want post-secondary education to be free. Throw in a public dental plan and you can almost see the future.

Summary

US senator, Bernie Sanders, is often called a socialist but he’s really not. Bernie is simply a proponent of a larger welfare state. Perhaps for America, this is a safer term. And remember, social safety nets don’t always have to be delivered by the public sector—many times they’re outsourced.

In the end, people change, environments change, and we continue to learn from our past. We also learn about what works best within human nature. The notion of a large and comforting welfare state sounds wonderful, as long as it doesn’t take us back. Liberals openly welcome the change while ardent conservatives feel they erode humanity’s basic sense of self-reliance (plus they wonder who’s paying for all this?). We’ll see.

For more information, see the Economy of Sweden, Welfare in Sweden, and this video. You’ll be amazed by what you find. Sweden isn’t a socialist country as commonly understood, it’s a capitalist one with a large welfare state. As a matter of fact, it’s more capitalist than Canada in a number of ways (e.g., charter schools, privately run hospitals, and their auto insurance is totally privatized, where it’s public in BC, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and Quebec).

Intimacy

The biggest element to any boyfriend-girlfriend relationship is intimacy. And since humans are complicated, there are two types: physical and verbal. Think back to when you were dating. You probably cuddled all the time and talked until four in the morning. And though both sexes require both types of intimacy, men tend to be more physical, while women like to talk.

To explore this point further, please meet the following couples:

Darryl and Cheryl

Darryl was a pipefitter—a beer-drinking, sports-watching, Sunshine-girl-subscribing, journeyman pipefitter. Generally a decent guy, Darryl was rather simple—not possessing much of an opinion on anything more than work, beer, buddies, or sports.

Cheryl was a dedicated soccer mom who worked full-time for Dr. Sparks. A school volunteer who devoted herself entirely to children, Cheryl spoke to her sister and mom on a daily basis. She, too, was a generally nice person.

Residing in a middle-class home in a middle-class neighbourhood, Darryl and Cheryl were living a rather normal middle-class marriage. That is, until Darryl “changed.”

One day while doing the laundry, Cheryl found a matchbook with a phone number written in what seemed to be lady’s handwriting. She thought it odd, since Darryl worked mostly with men. That night, she returned the matchbook, inquiring as to whose number it was. He replied, “Nobody,” and continued on his way.

Over the next few weeks, Cheryl noticed Darryl going out more often, spending less time with the kids, and avoiding eye contact. He no longer had much to say at dinner, and once the dishes were done, he either had someplace to go or was off to his room in the basement.

One day, during her daily conversation with her mom, she mentioned that Darryl seemed rather distant. Mom suggested that maybe he was having an affair. After shrugging off the suggestion with, “Who would want old Darryl?” she started to cry.

What happened

This couple fell victim to a significant but natural problem: lack of physical intimacy. This problem affects half of all marriages today and is a common reason why couples split.

What’s also natural is that Cheryl didn’t see it coming. Why? Because she was somewhat intimately satisfied herself. She spoke with her family daily and hugged her kids often. And though not perfect, the intimacy in her life was decent; she certainly wasn’t starving.

Mary and Larry

Now let’s put the shoe on the other foot. Meet Mary and Larry.

Mary was a pretty girl who got lots of attention for it. An only child with a quasi-distant relationship with her parents, she didn’t really have many close friends, especially since they’d moved. Larry was a good-looking, great dad with a high-paying job, who had an awesome sex life. What more could he ask for?

Mary loved her life—Larry, the kids, all of it. Only thing, this high-paying job required Larry to travel and he often had to work late. When home, Larry was almost always preoccupied with work or had even more of it to do. Mary was a devoted wife and real trooper: she understood what it took to be married to an executive and didn’t complain about all the time she spent alone. But they were missing something. It was like they never seemed to have enough time for “us.”

She talked about this often with her hairdresser, Ray—a cute guy on his own. Ray seemed to understand, and she liked speaking with him. One day she ran into Ray at the supermarket, and they went for coffee. Somehow these encounters became more frequent, and eventually they landed in bed.

This action shocked Mary because she loved her husband and respected their marriage. She’d never do anything to upset that. How did this happen? How could it happen?

What happened

What happened to Mary is also quite common. She was starved for verbal intimacy. She didn’t sleep with Ray because she wanted to have sex—it was simply an extension of their verbal relationship, and verbal intimacy is something Mary could not live without.

And just like Cheryl, Larry didn’t see it coming. Why? Because since he had a great lovelife, he assumed the intimacy in their relationship was fine. He didn’t know there were two parts. So he wasn’t aware that his wife was starving.

Summary

There’s more to intimacy than this, but try to remember the following:

  • The boyfriend-girlfriend component of any relationship is all about intimacy, and there are two kinds: physical and verbal.
  • Though we require both, men are generally more inclined to physical intimacy, and women to verbal.
  • When one is denied physical intimacy, they’ll withdraw from verbal, which only serves to widen the gap. Likewise, someone will withdraw from physical if denied verbal.
  • People need intimacy to survive. If your partner is starved, they’ll seek new relationships. But if you’re sensitive to both their physical and verbal needs (and aren’t too much of a slob), they’ll probably never leave.

Note: This excerpt comes from the book, Marriage Figured Out.

Jian Ghomeshi

Interest in the Ghomeshi trial peaked last week in Alberta because my wife wanted to charge me with the same thing. After the verdict, I said, “Fifty Shades of Grey—sugar. I’d get off!” But seriously, fathers and daughters need to start talking about men.

Until 1983, rape in Canada was defined as unlawful sexual intercourse with a woman against her will. After the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, this term was folded into a new crime called sexual assault, which covers everything from unwanted touching to any form of penetration.

Public education is widely available, but girls should be getting more from their homes. Here’s what they need to know:

  • Most guys are great but you have to watch jocks, nerds, and opportunists.

Jocks

Jocks are all those guys used to getting lots of tail. They include athletes, musicians, and hotshots. They can potentially come with two issues: younger ones treat groupie-chicks like objects, and older ones have drives that are advanced.

Younger men have always been confused about sexuality and the role that gender plays. Add in high testosterone and the macho thing, and you see why guys who get lots of action expect the next to be the same. So partying with football players may sound great, but there are lots of good guys who don’t make the team.

In terms of jocks over fourty, once you’ve slept with thousands your tastes kinda change. Sexual veterans find regular formats to be boring and thrive on pushing the limit (alla Fifty Shades). So though it may seem cool to sleep with a rock star, you might be getting in over your head.

Nerds

Nerds are sexually frustrated fellas who hang around with girls they can’t have.

Sure, male friends can be fun—but only if gay. Guys only hang out with you lots if they like you as a girl, not as a friend. And sometimes this attraction can explode.

Opportunists

If a girl shows up at a party wearing a miniskirt and gets drunk enough to pass out, there’s a good chance someone will touch her leg. And the guy won’t be far off from the norm.

Men have strong sex drives, especially when young. So even though piranha look like goldfish, it’s best to acknowledge they have teeth. Never let me catch you leaving this house half-naked with a full bottle of gin on your way to a frat. Because it’s difficult for boys to resist—even if good.

Conclusion

Feminists go ape when you mention anything about prevention because they place the blame squarely on men. But remember, though we have laws to stop theft, people still lock their doors.

Contact without consent is wrong because it’s damaging to the recipient and contrary to people being free. But it continues to exist. A step forward is for dads to start talking to daughters about men. Because feminists can fight all they want for the freedom to walk around topless in Iraq—my girls are going to know what they should.

Talking Back

Remember the olden days when kids were seen and not heard? Back then parents could get away with almost anything. But today, children have this new ability to talk back to those who’ve given so much. So is it right that kids are allowed to treat us this way, or should we go back to beating them with a stick?

Pay it forward

In the past, the reason you had to keep quiet was because parents were the givers and you—the little pukes—only took. So how dare you not respect them at all times?

But many who grew up under this system came to abhor it. We resented its unfairness and started to believe that parenting isn’t about equalization, it’s about paying it forward. And the debt I owe is not to you, but to my own.

Resentment

Experts from the University of Edmonton say if a child is expected to suppress his or her natural anger, they’ll harbour resentment. That’s why many adults no longer speak with dad or call on Mother’s Day. It’s best for everyone to be allowed to lash back. Because if this freedom is denied, the resentment only festers—resulting in deeper anger that will eventually burst.

So the next time your kids tell you to piss off, smile. It means they’re emotionally stable. And your grandchildren will be the same. Then again, there’s nothing wrong with a cuff in the head.

Note: Also see Evolution of Management.

Just Lie

This week the federal Liberals posted their first budget. After recording a $1.9B surplus for 2015 and a $5.4B deficit for 2016, Canada is projected to incur another $81B in deficits over the next 3 years—with no plan to return to balanced books.

Deficits can be justified and conditions certainly change, but isn’t this vastly different than what Justin just said during the election—6 months ago? When he promised to run short-term losses of less than $10B in each of the next two fiscal years (2016 and 17)? Politicians are known to break promises but this one appears to be deliberate, which calls into question what voters can and can’t believe, and how a person should vote.

Non-disclosure

Before jumping all over the libs, let’s take a look back at Harper. He didn’t lie about the numbers but did fail to disclose his personal position towards the Bible. Because if we had outright known he was a super-Christian, we could have predicted his disposition towards things like minimum sentencing, gay marriage, funding abortions in developing countries, doctor-assist, and policies that were pro-Israel. So he sorta lied too.

Machiavellianism

Machiavelli was an Italian diplomat who wrote The Prince. In this work, the protagonist employs cunning and deceitfulness to achieve an altruistic goal. Linguistically, this “end justifies the means” behaviour has been coined after him.

And if you like a good liar, next time we should get Trump. Can you imagine if Donald partook in our last debate? He would have responded to Justin’s middle-class tax cut with this: “Nobody loves the middle-class more than me. I love the middle-class. But I also love the poor, so I’m going to extend that tax break to them too. Because nobody loves the poor like me.”

Ideology

In his book, My Years as Prime Minister, Jean Chretien wrote that politicians running for office do it for one reason only—power. And that people who crave power will say almost anything in order to obtain it. So voting has essentially come down to choosing an ideology. That’s what our American friends do.

Because they vote twice as often, these people have discovered that it’s mostly about style. After being duped a number of times by campaign lies, they’ve matured to the realization that voting isn’t about discussing issues. It’s about ignoring what everybody says and analyzing who these people actually are. That’s why they use ideology as the driving factor behind checking either box.

The results from our last Canadian election prove this. Stephen Harper would never have socially legalized marijuana or fiscally incurred such debt. So if you’re the type who generally agrees with conservative principles, vote blue. Otherwise, check red. And if you’re ever campaigning for something—just lie.

P.S. What’s funny is that many believe Thomas Mulcair lost the election because he opted to support not running deficits. So either he lost because he didn’t lie, or was planning to do the same thing.

Unions

Stats Canada says 4.7 of our 18 million workers are covered by a collective agreement. Since 20% of our workforce is employed by the government — and gov workers are 80% unionized — this leaves just over 1.8 million within the private sector, or 12.5%.

Opponents feel unionization has outgrown its purpose and question current validity. They say unions interfere with free-market economics and only serve to give lazy people a job. Regardless, there are two instances where unions are essential:

  • sole employer
  • blue-collar trades

Since government services are almost always provided by a monopoly, there is no opportunity for the free market to operate. For example, teachers can only work for the province. That’s why we have the Alberta Teachers Union. There is no marketplace for individual talents to be tendered among numerous employers. 

And hey, unions do more than just collective bargaining. They provide apprenticeship training and sometimes manage employee benefits. These two additions are popular in the construction industry. White-collar trades like law and accountancy, have societies that collect dues and perform similar duties for their profession, but their educational component is delivered by public institutions (say, a university). Tradespeople aren’t taught solely in a classroom so the public system doesn’t work for them. Most of their training comes “on the job,” administered by a union.

Plus, certain occupations aren’t conducive to long-term employment within a single firm. Many tradespeople (e.g., welders, pipefitters, steamfitters) work for a number of companies throughout the year. In their world, general contractors win the work and then hire from the local union hall. When the job is done, the employees are done. And because of this hopping around, instead of using the system where employers manage benefit plans, the union does it—because it makes sense.

Middle class

Government and the construction industry are unique in their requirements for unionization but there is another type of company where unions are popular: large blue-collar corporations that provide essential goods, especially in regulated industries.

The theory goes like this: since everyone must buy water, why shouldn’t the guy pumping it be well paid? That’s why unions are prevalent throughout airlines, auto manufacturers, breweries, energy companies, power companies, telephone companies, and the like. None of which need the administration of benefits (since they provide long-term employment) or the training to certification process (because they are non-trade occupations). So these unions exist primarily for the purpose of collective bargaining. Bargaining which ensures society maintains a middle class.

Unionized workers plus non-union government employees (e.g., management) represent 30% of our workforce. Add in regulated white-collar industries (like, banks and insurance companies) and you see why most Canadians live well. Plus, these groups affect non-union wages. For example, computer programmers in industry are compensated along the same line as those working for government. It’s like gov unofficially regulates white-collar wages, while unions do it for blue.

Summary

Most of today’s unions act as minimum wage for the middle class. Decent wages, good benefits, and pension plans. Tenets that illustrate some of our advancements over raw capitalism. And though some argue that unionization of the manufacturing industry has led to jobs being shipped overseas, that isn’t true. The general reasoning behind globalization has a lot more to do with it. 

In the end, we’ve arrived at a point where we have rich people, who do great; a large middle class, who live well; and minimum wage for those who make us hamburgers. Hey, it works.

Muslim Countries

There’s an argument going on over the religion of Islam and its cultural effect on Muslim countries. Since intellectuals never wish to paint large things with the same brush, here’s what you need to know:

  • there are 1.6 billion Muslims in the world (2.2 billion Christians)
  • there are 50 Muslim-majority countries

Muslim-majority countries

When you say Muslim countries, you really mean Muslim-majority countries because they host people of many religions—just like us.

Muslim-majority countries include: Indonesia, Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. These countries are politically and culturally different. For example, seven of them have had women serve as presidents (e.g., Indonesia and Turkey), while some have just recently given women the partial ability to vote (e.g., Saudi Arabia).

Fundamentalism

Islam has the same types of religious people as us: fundamentalists, progressives, and lights.

Many Muslim-majority countries are also poor with low rates of literacy and large social problems. A common byproduct of a country’s low economic standing is that many of its people follow strict religious beliefs. And fundamentalism can be both good and bad, depending on who’s pulling the strings. Bad leaders take advantage of the simple-minded by using twisted interpretations of scripture to pursue political ends. Good leaders use the exact same scripture to bring hope and comfort.

In Christian countries, bad leaders have used “the word of God” to talk us into burning witches, suppressing women’s rights, suppressing gays, and warring against people of other faiths (plus other Christians) all in His name. But non-religious countries, like China, have also brainwashed their public into warring through nationalism. So is religion really part of the problem or is it just one of the ways to control people?

Modernization

A modern country is a modern country regardless of their majority religion. And most countries continue to move towards greater modernization. When Canada legalized gay marriage in 2005, wasn’t that an act of social modernizing? And now that we’re about to legalize marijuana, isn’t it also the same thing?

Saudi Arabia recently (2015) allowed women to vote in municipal elections—it’s progress. China hasn’t done the same thing yet for men. And is Turkey any more controlled by religion than the US? Many would say yes, but not by much.

It took years of educating Canadians to arrive at where we now are. Education is the impetus behind any society becoming modern. And education is being forced upon any country choosing capitalism so you can’t stop it.

Saudi Arabia is the one exception because it has both money and a theocracy. They’re a country of 20 million with another 8 million guest workers, who bring the educational talents. And only because of their great oil reserves are their leaders able to have their cake and eat it too. But the economic reality for most countries is either to embrace capitalism or face starvation.

Summary

There are a number of points to make:

  • You can’t say “Muslim countries” because there are 50 of them—all different. You can’t even generalize because Indonesia and Turkey are much different than Saudi Arabia or Pakistan.
  • A bad leader’s twisted interpretation of Islam isn’t much different than a bad leader’s twisted interpretation of Christianity.
  • Economic modernization requires an educated society, which brings with it social modernization. And even today’s modern countries are still evolving.

The argument

Sympathizers say fundamentalist interpretations of Islam in order to achieve political gain isn’t to blame. Countries with unstable environments are hotbeds for extremism without the use of religion, and the problem lies more in poor economic conditions and bad leaders. And that absent of religion, these leaders would simply find another way (like, nationalism). Opponents feel that fundamentalist Islam is much worse than fundamentalist Christianity, and the real issue is that so many Muslims are under its spell. And in a world of nuclear bombs, we must desperately hurry these countries along.

Most agree there’s a problem. One that’s dangerous for whatever reason. And I doubt the solution lies in criticizing Islam. I feel a better approach is to get these people listening to country music, eating Domino’s pizza, and watching baseball. Then I’m sure we’ll all get along.

Note: For further discussion, see: Bill Maher with Sam Harris and Ben Affleck, MSNBC with Lawrence O’Donnell and Sam Harris, CNN interview with Reza Aslan, Conversations with Great Minds with Reza Aslan, and The Young Turks discussion between Cenk Uygur and Sam Harris. 

Left is for Liberal

The problem with politics is we use definitions contrived back in the 1700s. Then rather than make up new ones, we update the old to arrive at terms like classical liberalism and neo-conservatism, which nobody understands. Here’s what you need to know.

England wrested away control from its monarch in 1688. So rather than have a king tell us what to do, we now had elected officials. Initially there were two political parties: Conservatives and the Whigs. Back then, only wealthy people could serve in parliament (since you didn’t get paid) and only the wealthy could vote (because the masses were considered illiterate). So in essence, you had two conservative parties. What happened next rests on four pillars:

  • advent of social liberalism
  • advent of economic liberalism
  • separation of church and state
  • the progressive movement

Classic liberalism is the belief in liberty—both social and economic. Early proponents include John Stuart Mill and Adam Smith. Prior to, people thought rights were something given to them by the government, but documents like the US Constitution say that rights are inalienable (can’t be taken away) and it’s the government’s role to protect those rights. That’s how we got things like habeas corpus (innocence before being proven guilty).

Mill & Smith

John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) was a political philosopher who coined the notion of social liberty. He championed individual freedoms over unlimited state control and advocated that people be allowed to better themselves and their situation, as long as they didn’t harm others or society at large. So if somebody isn’t hurting anyone, leave him or her alone.

Adam Smith (1723 – 1790) was a pioneer of economics. He said that, left to its own devices, a free market will maximize outputs through the invisible hand of supply and demand. So again, to get the most out of your economy, leave it alone.

Separation of church and state

The church was always involved in running any country. Kings, queens, and the like, relied upon clergy to implement any social change. They themselves only had sole control over the economy. This separation took hundreds of years but it persevered in most countries. Part of the reason was diversity—people were now subscribing to various belief systems (at least, Catholic and Protestant). And even after the separation, faith continued to play a significant role within culture.

We must also recognize the contribution made by fundamental religion, particularly Christianity, to the development of the West. The principles of hard work and “love thy neighbour” spawned not only ethics and charity, but also the credit system. Unfortunately, there is also a negative side that libertarians wanted to get away from. Old Testament norms that relate to the inferiority of women, harsh and cruel punishment, and naming homosexuality a sin, turned off many. So another form of liberalism became freedom away from the Bible.

Progressives

At the outset, governments only did four things:

  • defend the shores (military)
  • defend people’s rights (law courts, sheriffs, and police)
  • create a federal currency
  • deliver the mail

But in the late 1800s, a labour movement emerged that began to change things. Based on worker uprisings and the global threat of communism, governments started adding public services to their plate. They arrived at what we now call the welfare state.

Modern day liberals sprouted from this movement. For example, in 1859, the Whigs joined with two small groups to form Britain’s first Liberal Party. Six years later, John Stuart Mill joined them as an elected member. Many conservatives agreed with these notions, which caused a split (or schism) in the party. These new conservatives called themselves “progressives”—a label adopted by the Conservative Party of Canada in 1942.

Social liberty

Today, we have two major political parties that are continually being evaluated by their ideology, which has two main components—social and economic.

Both sides agree with Mill’s idea about forwarding the rights of the individual. There is no qualm here. The social contest only comes between liberals, who’ve slipped away from the confines of the Bible, and conservatives who got stuck with it. It’s not like conservatives ran around convincing people to start believing in this stuff—they already believed. Actually, up to 100 years ago, most of us would be considered religious fundamentalists. The liberals just started to break away, which added a second component to social liberation.

So everyone agrees with freedom. The difference sits when it comes to the Bible. Cons are more willing to keep Biblical law within real law and Christianity in culture. Liberals are the opposite. They say laws should be based on reason, not on what some good book says. Then when it comes to economics, everything reverses. Conservatives are more like Adam Smith. Yes, progressives are fine with the prospect of a welfare state but other than that, they wish government to stay out of business. Liberals on the other hand are more comfortable with government playing a larger role within the economy. (And hardline conservatives don’t even like the idea of a welfare state.)

Now let’s be honest, liberals are good at this social stuff. I’m sure that recreational pot, legalized prostitution, euthanasia, nude beaches, and removing fidelity from marriage will all come to be. But does any of this have to do with political ideology? Shouldn’t social issues be decided by people and not parties? And aren’t these discussions to be held primarily between the elderly and the young? In many respects, social issues are like managing a kid’s bedtime. Parents let them make their own decisions when they are ready. If you deny them at 8, you’re justified. At 12, you should be giving some leeway. And if they don’t have their own way by 24, they’ll revolt.

Summary

On social issues, politicians’ personal opinions shouldn’t matter much when it’s majority rule. The government’s job is to ascertain whether we (society) are ready for the next step. Economically, we’ll continue to talk about things like the size of government and what it should and shouldn’t do, along with the distribution of income (in terms of taxation). That’s enough to fight about.

This whole thing has washed out to liberals being in charge of social liberties while conservatives tend over the numbers. As one Tory said, “They can sleep with whomever they like, as long as they don’t screw with business.” And this will be the topic of another article.

Note: In America, the Christian component is still a big part of the conservative party—and we still see some in Canada. Stephen Harper, considered strong economically, slipped into his platform that “marriage is only between a man and a woman,” and removed the word, progressive, from the party’s name. The party then removed the slight against gay marriage after he retired.

The Core Diet

Most diets agree that we should eat as little crap as possible. This means less junk food, donuts, cookies, baked goods, chocolate bars, candy, french fries, pop, ice cream, etc. (all the things that make a good party). And almost everyone agrees that a certain group of foods are good for us (e.g., fruits and vegetables).

If we take this consensus and merge it with what we’ve learned about elements, we arrive at what I call the core diet.

Foods that should be at the core of your diet are:

  • Beans, fish, and white poultry
  • Fruits and vegetables
  • Water

Just think of it—this makes total sense. Beans, fish, and white poultry are the lowest-fat forms of protein. Beans, fruits, and vegetables are loaded with fibre, vitamins, and minerals. And water gives us something to drink.

This doesn’t mean that you can’t put sugar on your strawberries or noodles in your soup. It simply means that the core foods should be the ones you eat most. Eat only these six items and you’ll be Twiggy in no time. All other foods can now be divided into two categories: Tier II and Tier III.

Tier II foods

These are the foods closest to the core. Since eating only a core diet may be somewhat boring, we’ll borrow from this group for the sake of variety (and besides, we like being bad). They are:

  • Dark poultry and lean red meats
  • Some eggs, a few nuts, and a little cheese
  • Most starches
  • Fats for flavour
  • Low-fat milk and a little fruit juice

Dark poultry and lean red meats (e.g., most ham, extra-lean beef) are close to the core diet in terms of being low-fat, low-cal sources of protein. They’re not as low, but they’re close.

Eggs are great except they’re high in cholesterol. Nuts are filling but high in calories. And cheese is filling but high in both cholesterol and calories. So, eggs, nuts, and cheese have benefits, but we have to be careful with them.

High-starch foods like bread, cereal, rice, pasta, and potatoes are fun to eat. Even though they carry higher caloric loads and are unnecessary for proper nutrition, they can still be eaten (in moderation) for the sake of fun.

Since a little dietary fat is recommended, let’s use fat to flavour our meal rather than as our meal. We have to include low-fat milk since water on cereal sucks. And a mouthful of fruit juice here and there isn’t going to kill you (but you shouldn’t be drinking it by the glass full).

Tier III foods

Tier III foods are the ones furthest from the core diet. They’re all the crap that doesn’t provide us with any nutrition or fill us up. These are the ones lowest in caloric-fill and caloric-nutritional value. They’re also the ones everyone agrees should be reduced in or eliminated from your diet. They are:

  • Fatty red meats, fatty cold cuts, sausages, and hot dogs
  • Crackers
  • Excessive and unnecessary fats
  • Most condiments and sauces
  • Junk food and greasy appetizers
  • Donuts, cookies, and baked goods
  • Desserts
  • Chocolate and candy
  • French fries
  • Ice cream
  • Pop, most fruit juice, all other sweetened drinks, and excessive alcohol

Fatty red meats like ribs, sausages, salami, and hot dogs contain way too much fat (and therefore cholesterol and lots of calories) to be eaten on a regular basis. There are so many ways to enjoy beans, fish, poultry, and lean red meats that fatty red meats are completely unnecessary.

Crackers are usually starch made with high concentrations of fat, so they’re bad for us.

Fat for flavour is fine, but too much fat is fattening. Examples of excessive fat include putting too much dressing on your salad and using butter on your bread.

Most condiments and sauces are simply flavoured sugar. High calories—gotta go. But there are exceptions, like mustard and relish.

Junk foods are starches fried in oil. Most appetizers like chicken wings, zucchini sticks, cheese sticks, and nachos are also deep-fried—so they’re bad too.

Donuts are starch fried in oil. Cookies, baked goods, and desserts are typically starch (flour) mixed with sugar and fat. Now I ask you, “Is this what we should be eating more of?”

Most chocolate is high in sugar and fat, and candy is sugar. French fries are another starch fried in oil, and ice cream is sugar mixed with fat again.

Pop, fruit juice, chocolate milk, pink lemonade, etc., etc. are all sugar in water. Sure, fruit juice has vitamins, but you don’t need them when you eat right. So it turns out to be sugar in water as well.

Beans and Fruit

Everyone knows about the benefits of vegetables, water, and low-fat proteins, like chicken and fish. Let’s complete the picture by talking about beans and fruit.

Beans

“Beans, beans, the magical fruit. The more you eat the more you . . . toot.”

I can’t believe how many people bypass the beanery. Sure, there are plenty of jokes out there but man, get over it. Every culture in the world enjoys beans on a regular basis except for ours.

We either don’t like beans or can’t get enough of them. Advocates think they’re a magic elixir, and abstainers figure a forkful will blow a hole in their pants. Don’t fear the barbarian. Get over the complex and eat beans on a regular basis. (They’re yours to discover.)

Check out the soups, salads, pasta, and dip recipes at www.firstyoustealachicken.com

Frozen, canned, or dried

Most times you can’t get good fresh fruit, so screw it—go for frozen, canned, or dried.

Frozen berries are good left to defrost in the fridge and placed over top cereal or yogurt. They can also be added frozen to hot oatmeal. Canned peaches, pears, and pineapple are awesome. And dried fruit is a great way to get more mango, apricots, and even cherries into your life.

The trick to getting all your vitamins and minerals is to eat a variety of fruits and vegetables. So enjoy them all ways—fresh, frozen, canned, or dried. (You’re going to be so healthy.)