$38/mo

"Well, at least I don't make 38 bucks a month and work in a building that could collapse." This was my reply to one of the umpteen dozen people who said, "How are you?" to me today. Was it insensative? Was it a commentary on how lucky I am to be in Canada? Was it a guilty condemnation of Canada because we buy a portion of the clothes that were sweated over in that death trap in Bangladesh? Was it just my way of trying to raise consciousness about a news story that REALLY matters to us all? Or was I just being a smartass? Hard to say really what happens when words go from my brain to my mouth and bypass any editing for political correctness. That happens from time to time.

The cause was just pure disgust over this story out of Savar, a suburb of Dhaka, Bangladesh. It's not newsworthy when some jagoff capitalist buys a five story building and illegally, (because it's unsafe), adds three more floors to it. Did he even pay a fine for that or just grease a local politician? Oh, wait a minute, he IS a local politician! It's not a headline when some jagoff capitalist pays his workers $38/mo., and I'm sure this ain't 9-5 Mon-Fri. I've read the average textile worker in Bangladesh puts in a 14-hour day. IF they get weekends off that works out to 13.5 cents an hour! But they don't. Friday, the Muslim holiday, is the one day off every week workers must receive by law. But often they don't. 11.3 cents an hour IF they get every Friday off!

It's not interesting to us when some jagoff capitalist subjects his workers to horrible working conditions for their $38/mo. It's not journalistically viable that these sweatshop owners were only able to start their enterprises at the behest of wealthy corporations who, let's face it, can't afford to pay anyone much more than a dollar a day to make their product. It's not news that half a year earlier a fire at a textiles factory in another suburb of Dhaka in Bangladesh killed 112 workers and there were promises made, (but not kept), throughout the industry to improve working conditions. We don't read about the factories like this that are reportedly monitored for environmental and labour laws regularly outsourcing half of their work to the "shadow factories" that aren't. None of this makes the news until over 300 people are crushed in a building that was condemned the day before it collapsed, and the owner was informed, but chose to let all the slaves work in all the factories in his building anyway.

And because this was capitalism, not terrorism, this jagoff building owner, (and probably the jagoff factory owners too), is watching his big screen plasma right now saying, "That poor Boston bomber boy! HE's in deeep shit!" They should give every dime they have to the families of the victims but they'll probably receive a little fine and never see the inside of a jail cell.

Bangladesh reportedly has the lowest labour costs in the world and a minimum wage of, you guessed it, $38/month. Even in a poor country where things are cheap like, (fake well), Bangladesh, I'm sure it's not going to be easy to pay the bills on that salary. So we should buy a lot of Bangladesh-produced goods so that conditions can improve! Right? Or are we supposed to just boycott anything with a "Made in Bangladesh" label on it? But then more and more people in Bangladesh will lose the crappy jobs they have now, won't they?

Folks, don't listen to the people who say it is partially our fault for buying a cheap, Bangladesh-made shirt at Walmart. We're only human. Hey, we're not making $38/mo. but we are gonna buy the $10 shirt, not the $50 one. Even if the quality is a bit lower, we're pretty sure it's not 5 times worse than the other shirt, aren't we? And it really doesn't matter how we adjust our spending when we hear this story, the people who buy the shirts and the slaves who make the shirts are the only people who will absorb any losses. If we buy more the factory workers will still get $38/mo. and the factory owners, distributors, shop owners etc. will make more dough. If we boycott products made in Bangladesh, they'll put "Made in Somewhere Else" tickets on the shirts or the eventual retailers will stop dealing with Bangladesh and move on to the country like China or Viet Nam with the next cheapest labour, AND RECEIVE A HERO'S WELCOME!

To be clear, if we boycott the companies who sell the shirts that were being made in the sweatshops in the building that collapsed in Bangladesh, those companies won't suffer, the slaves who work in the sweatshops will. Because even making 11.3 cents and hour is better than nothing. Walmart apparently wasn't connected in this instance but they are the largest customer for Bangladesh-manufactured textiles. And, talk about cheaply attained glory, they are revered for it.

But I read a little article at http://www.globallabourrights.org/reports?id=0042  It's about an NBC Dateline investigative report done in 2005 on the textile industry in Bangladesh with particular attention paid to Walmart. I urge you to read the whole thing. I will try to sum up what Walmart does in Bangladesh, or at least what they were doing in 2005. The article states that things will get worse in the future with wages going down as the cost of living goes up. The people at NBC Dateline knew what they were talking about.

The video showed young women being forced to work 14-hour days sewing garments in Bangladesh factories for 13-17 cents an hour so they were right that wages would decrease. The premise of the report was interesting. Dateline got a long sleeve, large, denim shirt union made, (United Food and Commercial Workers), in Chicago. Materials cost $5, labour was $7.47, and laundry was an extra 75 cents. Total price: $13.22. I have read that the usual markup on clothing like this is 120%, (which I still think is outrageous), so that would make the retail price $31.72. Yet Walmart was able to sell a shirt of slightly lesser quality that had been made in Bangladesh for $11.67. How could they do this? That's what Dateline found out.

They went to Bangladesh and asked how much it would cost to get that same shirt made and got a quote of $4.70. With a 120% markup that's $11.28. Bingo! Um, right? Isn't that how Walmart does it? Well, not quite. That would almost be considered un-corportate-like.

The $4.70 was a quote based on an order of 25000 shirts. With sheer volume Walmart could easily get a quote of $3-$3.25. In that case their price represents a 260-290% markup. It boggles my mind trying to conceive of the kind of mentality that is behind such a markup. If I buy a bunch of chocolate bars for a buck each and a total douchbag who I can't stand wants to buy one from me I am not going to say, "Gimme tree fitty." And he is probably not going to pay.

If Walmart were to pay an extra 20 cents per shirt, their markup would still be an astronomical 238-265%, (that's $8.22-$8.47 per shirt!), and they gave that extra 20 cents to the workers, their salaries would rise to a whopping 39 cents an hour! This would get them out of squalor, starvation and misery and up to poverty! But Walmart NEEDS that extra 20 cents being the struggling company that they are.

The part where I grabbed the trash can in my office and threw up 6 bucks worth of fish and chips I had had for lunch was when I read this,

"We strongly believe that our business—and the wages and benefits we provide, have helped improve the lives of many thousands of workers in many parts of the world."

That's what Walmart "believes." That must be why they demanded exporters to cut prices 12% in 2005. They also demanded that Bangladeshi contractors, (like the sweatshop owners), pay for any duty costs imposed by importing nations. You, me and Walmart all KNOW this was deflected straight onto the workers in the sweatshops. Hence 2013 - 11.3 cents an hour instead of the lofty 13-17 cents in 2005.

But when you bargain with Walmart it's "take it or leave it." Otherwise they'll buy somewhere else, which unbelievably would be worse for the people of Bangladesh. To give you a better idea of the pure evil at work here the article includes the fact that while many other companies signed an agreement to allow 3 months of paid maternity leave for pregnant employees, Walmart flatly refused.

Remember this story the next time you walk into Walmart and see an 11 dollar shirt and think, "Wow! How can they sell it for that? It must be what they call one of them 'loss leaders' to bring folks into the store." I don't think Walmart EVER has loss leaders, or things they sell for a loss to attract customers. The Waltons probably don't know what that means. But this story is not about Walmart or Bangladesh. It's about the whole world. This is how things work. And it has to change. We need to institute global measures here like a minimum minimum wage that's a helluva lot more than 38 bucks a month. Any scumbag corporation that doesn't comply, how about corporate trade embargos. If it works on a country, it'll work on a company. And for the love of God and humanity, we need strictly enforced human rights laws for the entire world!

When I lived in a small town in Korea called Yangju, I met two Bangladeshi men. We just chatted briefly as we met on the street. I ended up seeing one, the other or both quite a lot while I lived in Yangju and I remember two things about these guys: they were extremely freindly and happy, and they always called me "brother." I don't know if it was because I forgot their names or if I kind of liked it but I started calling them "brother" too when I saw them. If only we could truly act like brothers to everyone!

I mentioned last post that we live in a fear-based world. Our greed-based global economy is part of that. Greed is fear. "I am scared that someone else might get what I believe I am entitled to." Master Yoda said, "The fear of loss is a path to the dark side." He also said, "Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering." And my favourite, "Attachment leads to jealousy. The shadow of greed that is. Train yourself to let go of everything you fear to lose." More than anything else it is the greed-based, corporate thinking that is the dark side of our world force and it is the cause of most, if not ALL of our suffering.

Leastaways, that's what Yoda and I reckon.

The Back Page Stories

There are those who would call me a conspiracy theorist. And it's partially true. I try not to just go with the popular ideas without trying to investigate the unpopular ones. I admit to relishing non-conformity more than accuracy on occasion. But I think if more people did ANY investigating or questioning of popular "thinking", they'd find it might not be as popular as we are told it is. I just enjoy alternate points of view. Especially when they involve some controversy. And where there's smoke, there's almost always fire. Maybe not a raging inferno but fire nonetheless.

One of the coincidences I have seen over and over again is apparent diversionary media events when the banks, opinion makers, government, filthy rich, or as George Carlin calls them, "our owners", are trying to slide something past us regular folk. It's to the point now that when I see a media frenzy, even if the story really IS something interesting enough to warrant the attention of every newspaper, internet site, TV station, radio broadcast etc., I start wondering what is happening that by default is NOT the top story any more.

Now I'm not about to say that the Boston bombings aren't a big story. They are tragic and emotional. That's news! I'm certainly not going to even imply that the bombings were orchestrated to coincide with any underhanded politics or violations of human rights that somebody wanted as a secondary or thirddary news story if at all. I would never do that! But I just know I'm not the first to notice that this might be the absolute perfect time to do some unsavoury, unscrupulous, unpopular, unmentionable things with as near to public impunity as can be manufactured.

It seems more than mere coincidence that virtually simultaneous to the Boston bombing media frenzy a couple things happened that I think might be even larger stories. And, hey what do you know, they involve underhanded politics and possible, (translation: probable), violations of human rights. You may not have heard about them.

The first story is the CISPA bill that was quick pitched past the American citizens at the plate just trying not to let the political hurlers rob them of basic human rights. This is the euphamistically named, Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act. A little less than a year ago it was proposed in the American senate and vetoed by the Obama government on the grounds that it lacks civil liberty safeguards and confidentiality. Amazingly, a year later, the same president with the same advisors passed the thing. Was the determining factor the media cover fire laid down by the extensive reporting on the Boston bombings? Who can say?

If it were up to me, I'd let my government see that 90% of my internet time is spent surfing www.hellokitty.ca . Other than my online banking, I don't care what ANYbody sees me doing online. If the government could catch one malicious hacker or even, (oh if it could only be so!), eliminate just one of the 15 passwords everything online requires, full cyber transparency would be worth it to me. But this might be one of my opinions that is not so popular. I'm pretty sure there will be a lot of people who are not so thrilled with the possibility of the government not using the freedoms this legislation affords them solely to protect the people. Spying on the general public is now legal, so why not do it? Now I'm not saying that's going to happen. I'm not saying the government of the U.S. of A. would ever try to bury this story in columns about the Boston bomber's upbringing and school projects or TV interviews with relatives and neighbours or internet chat sites about how long it will be insensative to have happy occasions in Boston or screen movies with explosions in them or have any James Bond film "marathons." I'm just admiring their uncanny timing is all.

The second story you may not have noticed is one that Barack Obama is actually ashamed of. There were some clever political manouevres, manoover, manure, minervas, uh strategies employed by just a few congressmen that allowed an absolutely obvious gun control reform amendment to remain unpassed. The amendment called for more background checks on gun purchasers and a ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines. Now this means clips that hold many many bullets, not the Playboy Christmas issue.

This is a pretty big issue in and of itself. But the HUGE story here is the fact that so many senators, with full knowledge that poll after poll showed the American public around 90% in favour of this kind of gun control reform, voted so as not to piss off the massively powerful, and increasingly extremist gun lobby. Yet another perfect example of the people being forced to settle for fake democracy.

Though the irony would be 100% pure Canadian maple syrup sweet, I am not saying Charlton Heston paid the Boston bombers to create a distraction while about 40 U.S. senators earned their N.R.A. paychecks. That's not what I am saying. But again, timing. Why do you suppose this was voted down April 18th?

Is the story of the Boston bombings being overblown? Is it really the horrible tragedy the media is portraying it as? Again, it is not my place to say. I don't think I had any loved ones involved so I can only imagine how those who did feel right now and mourn for them all. It is certainly tragic and I can partially understand the frustration and anger but there is no way of truly relating. Please don't mistake my levity for apathy or hard-heartedness. I feel awful about the Boston bombings and my heart goes out to all involved. But I will say that there are people in Iraq or Syria and probably dozens of areas throughout the world who on the day of the events might have said, "3 dead? 179 injured? That's not so bad." Almost every day there are so many instances of killing, bombing, torture, starvation and all manner of tragic circumstances that I can't help but think surely the human suffering is more devastating than that felt by the people in Boston right now! I can only be grateful and count my blessings that I have no way of knowing.

Perhaps the greatest tragedy of the Boston bombings was pointed out by my friend Heather in one of her daily Facebook entries. She noted the bloodlust and pure venom being spat in posts and comments all over the internet by people demanding the capture and punishment of those responsible. Some want to "bring back racial profiling," because it will stop things like this from happening. Even the uncle of the two suspects called his nephew losers and wished they had never existed, though at this point it would be almost suicidal for him to say anything else. Heather brought up some verses in the book of Matthew which say that the sun rises and rain falls on all alike. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Even the tax collectors do that! (I just love that part!) The point of Heather's post was that we should love everyone, even those who are our enemies. Or who bomb our cities and people. Easy to say but excruciatingly difficult to master!

I suggested that although I am fully behind the sentiment perhaps it is a little bass ackward. Wouldn't it be amazing if we didn't live in a fear-based, everyone-is-my-competitor world and we could spiritually evolve away from the chaos a world like that creates into a minimal entropy, love-based, everyone-is-my-brother/sister world where we didn't kill or blow each other up so much? In a paradise like that the internet would not be flooded with stories and comments about a few of "US" dying when so many of "THEM" are dying elsewhere. It's so much easier, and sensible, to love each other and PREVENT these tragedies than to do our best to love each other AFTER they take place!

Leastaways, that's what I reckon.

Chicken Hockey

Now that it's almost playoff time and the hockey has turned to soccer because of that old, tired, (and in my humble opinion WRONG), cliche, "defence wins Stanley Cups," I am bangin' away at the remote trying to see as much of the baseball game as I can and keep up with the score, (if any there be), of the hockey game. Don't get me wrong, I am still hugely grateful that I live in a country where that is possible without the aid of NHL Centre Ice or MLB Online or some such service. Still trying hard not to take Canada for granted. But for the love of Gordie Howe, half the teams that played last night, and there were a lot of them, HALF scored 2 goals or one or NONE! Even IN Gordie's day they were scoring more than that.

If hockey weren't broken, and players were allowed to try to win instead of forced, (and you KNOW it's against their wills), to make sure the OTHER team doesn't score, I think we'd have a lot more games being settled by team play and not a bad call, a lucky bounce, a broken stick or a stupid shootout! Games that are played defensively, ( I call it "chicken hockey"), are more likely to be the low scoring, one-goal games we see all too often these days. Games in which players are being "defensively responsible." Games in which offense is offensive. Games in which they slowly exit their end, carefully cycle the puck and wait for an opportunity to safely approach the net. Or better yet draw a penalty and then carefully control the power play so the other team doesn't score a shorty. Games that just barely keep the damn fans awake. Games that after 58 minutes of chess-like waiting for the other team to make the first mistake you then see the great switcheroo: suddenly one team yanks the goalie; or you get 4 on 4 overtime or even the shootout. Instead of putting all your offense into the very end of the game and saying a Hail Mary, why not have some good old up and down hockey, passing to players instead of the boards, defensive pinching, shooting, passing or skating instead of DUMPING it in or out,  shots and even one-timers on the rush, forechecking, chance taking. Otherwise viewers, like me, will switch over to the ball game. Because, if you're like me, the excitement from hockey does not all come from close scores. I'd prefer A score thank you very much. It's just more fun watching a game where you get out of your seat and cheer a goal five times rather than none. Is this rocket science?

And if you look at the standings from last year compared to this, things are upside-down! A lot of the teams have the same, (or almost the same), personnel, yet they are last instead of first in their divisions. Or vice-versa. What has happened? I'll tell you what: games ARE being decided more often by lucky bounces, broken sticks, bad line changes, goalies misplaying pucks, or things that really shouldn't be the difference in the game. But in close games this is what happens. The big change this year has been the STUPID new rules and ABYSMAL refereeing. I'm not just talking about bad calls, I mean EVERY SINGLE GAME I see possible odd man rushes or breakaways being screwed up by a ref or linesman getting in the way of the puck! Every game! That hardly ever used to happen. They are probably too busy looking for guys shooting the puck over the glass or covering it with their hands to get the hell outta the way of the puck.

Combined, these three things alone have been the difference in a hundred games I'm sure. Chicago winning streak? Wrong. The game they played against Detroit at the 21 game-in-a-row point, (or so), was tied and then won because of the puck over the glass rule. Folks it's delay of game. Same as icing. In the very rare case when the player actually IS trying to flip the puck over the glass it is most likely to relieve pressure in his end, (and keep the other team from scoring (eye-roll)), and/or get a line change. So the blatantly obvious punishment is a face-off in the offending player's zone and no line change allowed. The very same punishment for icing. Who are the morons who made it a two-minute penalty and how many games of hockey have they played? More to the point, how many games of hockey this season have they RUINED?

Officials blocking breakaway passes; players being called for hooking, slashing, or tripping a guy with one hand on their stick; covering pucks on the ice, and the old standard - players being pushed by defencemen into the goalie and being called for goaltender interference. ANY of these, or just a plain old blown call can win or lose a game. So why are NHL teams inviting the controversy? Get out there and play the game and odds are these things won't be the difference in the games. And we will all have more fun watching.

The Jays game last night was 10-8. Fun to watch! I'd much rather have watched that than the Yu Darvish 8 2/3 perfect game. I know I'm not alone in that! Watching chicken hockey is like watching a baseball game full of clean-up hitters sacrifice bunting. But if that were happening, (thank GOD baseball sees the wisdom of not being all about defence), the same thing: games would be decided by missed tags, errors, strikes called balls etc. Play the game properly and these things won't have so much of an effect on the game.

NO kid in Canada, Sweden, Russia or any hockey-playing nation is taking shots on his net underneath the streetlight hoping Mom doesn't call him in for supper and making believe he's in the Stanley Cup final BLOCKING a shot! He's scoring a goal, folks, every time. Leastaways that's how I see it.

Canada Customs

The "Bad old days" in Canada:
a couple decades long.
Our dollar was at 68
and merchants sang this song:

"Alas, alack! What can we do?
Life's tough and days are dour!
Our prices must be doubled to
offset low purchasing power."

But "doubled" may have been misspoke.
Inflation factor three
was tonic for Canadian folk
for fiscal recovery.

"We're getting close but need some more.
Don't quit we've come too far.
A cost of living index 4
should get us back to par.

Fantastic jobs, big house, nice car,
our well-deserved fates
we'll surely see when our currency
is even with that of the States."

Our politicians sang the same song
to the lower and middle classes.
Like puppets they all brayed along
corporate hands up their fat asses.

Well here we are! We're back at par.
So why does life still suck?
I can't afford a house or car
and scrape to save a buck.

Our dollar now at 99
is weaker than before.
Osterity our tax, our fine
has made them rich, us poor.

A trip across the border though
can ease our suffering.
Cuz everything is cheaper there.
Absolutely everything!

But ask MP's and merchants how
to deal with all this shit,
and they say, "How? My friend by now
you should be used to it."

Greed: The Dark Side of The Force

There is something known in psychology circles as the "winner effect." It's one of the most robustly tested phenomena in animal behaviour. John Coates, author of "The House Between Dog and Wolf" says it's simply explained by saying, when an animal has won a fight or a battle for turf it is statistically much more likely to win the next one. It is thought to be because of the thrill of winning causing rising levels of testosterone, which increases lean muscle mass, hemoglobin and your blood's capacity to carry oxygen. Any gorilla beating its chest while standing over its vanquished opponent would tell you if it could that winning is like doping. This in turn makes the animal more confident and makes it take more risks. It's not a stretch of logic to assume the animal EXPECTS to win the next contest. You might even say the animal believes it DESERVES to win the next contest.

As an aside, THIS is why I absolutely HATE the modern NHL trend of careful, defensively responsible, no risk, mistake-free hockey. It just dampens the winner effect when it could be all the players need to win repeatedly. Conversely I heard Gretzky, Messier, Lowe and some of the other members from the winning Oilers clubs of the past talking about the massive talent on the current club that is putting up sadsack numbers every year. They agreed they just need to "get used to winning" and they'll be tough to stop. This is the non-university explanation but it's exactly the same.

Since man is just an animal this has been applied to our behaviour too. Interestingly, it doesn't only apply to physical behaviour. For instance traders on Wall Street are more likely to get "on a roll" after making one good investment and raising their testosterone levels. Gamblers and athletes call it a lucky streak or being in the zone but there might be a more physiological explanation.

However, with great power comes great responsibility. There comes a time in the winner effect when it can go to the head of the animal. It begins to see opponents not so much as competitors but as victims of their unstoppable onslaught. Dare I call it the "killer instinct?" They begin to overextend, become reckless, leave their pack and homes unattended. The winner effect actually becomes their downfall. They lose by winning so frequently.

With the recent spate of psychopathy in the news in Norway and even in Canada with the Luka Rocco Magnotta thing I have noticed some very clear similarities in what people believe the thinking, (or maybe lack of it), behind successful winners and successful killers is. Mass murder has also been robustly studied so it is with great mounds of psychological testing behind it that people have come up with the idea of the "Type T" personality which is applied to serial killers. The T stands for THRILL and it is a bigger part of what drives them than we acknowledge according to Dr. Frank Farley, the psychologist who coined the phrase.

Brain scans in impulsively antisocial people showed a combination of meanness and disinhibition and showed greater activity in parts of the brain related to anticipating and expecting rewards. Elliot Leyton, a professor emeritus at Memorial University and author of the book, "Hunting Humans" says, "They are utterly without compassion. Other people are just things they use for their own pleasure." Frank Farley adds, "In the process of anesthetizing himself, he loses any touch with his OWN humanity." But, he adds, they are utterly charming and you can't see them coming.

How many con-running, cheap tactic, kick in the balls, scumbag, suit-wearing, pearly white-flashing scheisters does this bang on absolutely perfectly describe???

But then again, how many absolutely, (as far as we can guage), NORMAL people does this describe? A consumer credit company called Equifax revealed that there was $400,000,000 of mortgage fraud in Canada last year. Experts say this is only the tip of the iceberg. Most of the swindling involves people lying to obtain mortgages larger than their incomes can support. Risk taking, expecting and believing they DESERVE more than they have earned.

Many people are starting to see that this sense of entitlement starts with coddled toddlers getting what they want and is fostered by a society of instant gratification. And from requisite child GPS-equipped cellphones to flashy cars right up to the giant mansion, easy credit is the enabler.

Canadians now carry $1.53 in debt for every buck they make. Most expect to work till the age of 66 and only 30% believe they will be able to fully retire by then. This according to a poll done by Sun Life Financial.

It's like our culture is trying to perpetuate the winner effect, it's just not telling us that we all can't be winners. How many of those tired old cliches do we poison the minds of innocent young kids with? These kids who will be facing the predetory animilistic serial winners on a roll. I'm talking about, "You can do anything you put your mind to," and all that crap. Well, NO YOU CAN'T! Not in today's world peopled by brain-damaged, antisocial, testosterone junkies that will eat you up sooner than give you a fair deal on anything.

When did we get like this? You know even America, where it is, (probably accurately), believed to be the foremost example of what I'm talking about, has only recently sold its soul to Mammon. The U.S. used to be Sweden! They used to be more egalitarian than anywhere else on the earth! In colonial times Americans were free and better off than people in their mother countries. Even with slaves included in 1774 the American colonies were the most equal in distribution of wealth. Only the absolute elite in Europe had more wealth than their counterparts in the U.S. In 1814 Thomas Jefferson wrote a letter in which he said, "We have no paupers. The wealthy know nothing of what the Europeans call luxury. They have only somewhat more of the comforts and decencies of life than those who furnish them. Can any condition in society be more desirable than this?"

How often do we hear American politicians and diplomats talking, (out their asses), about what the founding fathers wanted for America? THIS is what they wanted and do you know what it is? It's SOCIALISM! Nowadays you can talk an American dog out of its bone by telling him it's socialism. The founding fathers would undoubtedly be ashamed of the inequality in America nowadays and it just perfectly illustrates the point of this post that people who have lost all concern for their fellow man, for honesty, for morality, for normality, but are jonesing for their next thrill of victoriously standing over a financial opponent bested and beating their chests will actually conjure up the name of Thomas Jefferson or one of the REALLY great men in their history if it helps them close another dishonest, unequal, capitalistic, corporate deal.

Do you know what the founding fathers wanted? Do you know where that is NOW? BHUTAN! I am not kidding! Most people in the U.S. statistically believe the country is on the wrong track. Pessimism is the order of the day. The average American has an encyclopedic knowledge of drugs, including the endless amounts of anti-depressants. Unprecedented inequality had lead to lower life satisfaction.

Forty years ago the young king of Bhutan made a wise choice: He said that the kindom of Bhutan should pursue "gross national happiness" rather than gross national product. In Bhutan it has been decreed that "We are unhappy if we are denied our basic material needs but we are also unhappy if our pursuit of higher incomes replaces our focus on family, friends, community, compassion and maintaining internal balance." They vowed to avoid the model Americans provided, who they believed suffered from an increasing range of consumer addictions.

"To be sure we should support economic growth and development but that which promotes environmental sustainability and the values of compassion and honesty that are required for social trust."

I AM MOVING TO BHUTAN! Because I doubt there are too many nations with the balls to do what they are doing, i.e. what is unquestionably RIGHT.

What are we eating?

This guy is awesome! I think he makes a whole lot of sense! I remembered him from the documentary Food Inc. and a friend of mine just went to his farm for a visit. She uploaded some pics on fb and I said, "Hey that looks like the Food Inc farmer!" I guess he's written a book now called "This Ain't Right" and is becoming pretty well known. This is a good thing!


Two things he says in this clip that strike me are how we have allowed ourselves to become so disconnected and ignorant about something as intimate as the food we put inside ourselves every day. And the end when he's talking about the people who view the pig as a pile of protoplasmic inanimate structure to be manipulated by whatever creative design humans can foist upon it, (for example combining its genes with salmon to create bigger, more cost-efficient salmon that will be introduced into the wild and kill all the others), will probably view people with the same type of disdain, disrespect and controlling-type mentality. In short, view people as nothing but paying consumers OF that Frankenfood.


Bertrand Russel in his 1953 book, "The Impact of Science on Society" said, "Diet, injections and injunctions will combine from a very early age, to produce the sort of character the authorities consider desirable."


Probably the biggest food bullies of them all, Monsanto, unabashedly said that it is their GOAL to take over the food biosphere of the planet. One of the things they are a little bit known for, (and should be better known), is bovine growth hormone produced by Monsanto to inject into cows to make them produce more milk and thereby more money. This growth hormone was investigated by many countries and disallowed because of dangers. Luckily Canada was one. But in the U.S. kids are reaching puberty at 8, boys are growing playoff beards along with their Dads, and a whole pile of other scary things linked to this hormone are obviously happening but people don't know why. Fox News was going to produce a story on this hormone in milk and a high-priced, Monsanto-hired lawyer sent them a letter stating that there would be dire consequences if the story was aired. The station chief shut it down. This is why Fox News is, well, Fox News.


Then there's the Monsanto Frankencorn that grows its own pesticides. About 85% of the corn in the States is this stuff that is linked to organ failure, sterility, caused lab animals' stomachs to explode... but it's a good cash crop! The corn farmers don't eat the corn they grow. NONE of them! Well not the Monsanto crap anyway. That is all I need to know. Pancreatic cancer, mercury poisoning, brain damage... Because of FRUCTOSE, sugar we get from corn and is in almost everything nowadays, it is estimated that Americans eat 5X the upper limit of allowable mercury.


Why the fructose? It goes back to 1977 when sugar tariffs pushed up the cost of imported sugar so corn syrup fructose became and attractively cheap alternative to the food and beverage manufacturers. As always, it's about the money.


Asparatame is reportedly made from the feces of genetically engineered ecoli bacteria that is fed toxic waste! Now I don't know if that's true but I've had a lot of people tell me to eat shit and die. Maybe I am doing just that! Maybe we ALL are!


Apparently Nazis added sodium fluoride to the water supplies of the labour camps during wartime to make the prisoner population more docile and easier to control. Also it caused sterility. They used one part per million. In some products sold nowadays there are 900 parts per million of the same stuff! And it's legal.


2 cups of flour could have a U.S. F.D.A. allowable 375 insect fragments and 5 rodent hair/feces fragments.


It sure looks like SOMEbody is trying to make us more docile, easy to deal with, and possibly kill us with the food we eat! I've noticed since coming back to Canada that my reflux and stomach constancy has deteriorated. Well they have increased and deteriorated respectively. They both got worse is what I'm sayin. I thought it was just the kinds of foods I've been eating here compared to Korea. Maybe it's the additives IN those foods.


"Chemically treated produce, highly processed foods, and refined ingredients like white flour and sugar cause sickness and disease as well as a host of minor ailments such as digestive issues and lack of energy." Miami Herald


But I'm not all that worried. In fact I think my diet could best be called the opposite of what's supposed to be good for me. I eat eggs and high colesterol butter or margarine all the time. I have plenty of salty snacks on hand at all times in case I feel my blood pressure dropping dangerously low to around what science tells us is normality. Pasta is my friend Atkins-be-damned! I once saw a friend of mine eat an entire loaf of white bread. No jam, peanut butter, butter, just the bread. He is a doctor now. The bread did HIM no harm and I don't think it hurts me at all either even though I eat a LOT. Usually it's not white bread but sometimes... Oil, bring it on! It keeps my coat nice and shiny.


I follow one easy rule at the grocery store: get what's the cheapest. It may be cheap because it is the unhealthily mass produced junk the corporations poison us with, or it may be cheap because the carefully produced, vitimin enriched, low-cal, high fibre, dietary, cholesterol-free, penis enlarging, trans fat friendly, heart-helping, lipophobia-easing, polyunsaturated, hydrogenated, soybean-based, Bulgarian Shepherd approved food requires a little higher sticker price for all that goodness. Not to mention labelling.


Whether food becomes cheaper or more expensive when science, (and the corporate world), starts messing with it is a little too hard for me to ascertain at this time. So I'll take my chances that I am losing years off my life eating what I want. Those years will come off the end of my life when the quality thereof is not so high.


I read some interesting stuff about food in the National Post "Junk Science" week recently. It just made things even more confusing. One of the interesting things written about was the "good bacteria" in yogurt called bacillus Bulgaricus that allegedly prevents mental illness, sexual dysfunction, tuberculosis and scores of other problems including death by heart disease. A lot of this started from a study done by a Russian scientist named Elie Metchnikoff who said that Bulgarian herdsmen, and other yogurt drinkers, lived longer and were free from colon diseases. Even though the health benefits were found to be non-existent, with the help of the media, (and Danone fresh yogurt business), yogurt became all the rage.


It went a bit out of style but has made a recent comeback during this war on fat that has all kinds of political, social, philanthropic, media, corporate, government regulator, surgeon general and celebrity support. I guess a guy named Ancel Keys did a study comparing, again, Bulgarian herdsmen with American businessmen. Overlooking obvious variables such as smoking and stress, Keys concluded that it was high levels of cholesterol that led to so many businessmen dying of sudden heart attacks. So don't quit your job on Wall Street where you rip out your hair and smoke 2 packs every day because of the stress, just have some yogurt and you'll be fine.


You all remember the saturated fat and cholesteral concern that resulted. And you must remember the thousands of products and promotions like "Heart Smart", "Heart Check" and the like. At one point a U.S. government committee had some hearings on diet and killer diseases that included testimony that 98.9% of the world's nutrition researchers believed that there was a connection between blood cholesterol levels and heart disease. Well, in Feb. 2010 there were results published from some better science from 21 lengthy studies using almost 350,000 subjects that conclusively showed no association between saturated fat consumption and risk of heart disease.


The development of this fear-based marketing, and how to create a scientific consensus is fascinating reading! During all of this eggs went from good to bad so many times it's impossible to keep track. Whole milk swung back and forth like the Grim Reaper's scythe too. Margarine was heart-healthy and then artery-clogging. Butter too. Salt once considered essential to human existence is now white death in a shaker.


Polyunsaturated oil was actually considered a health food and Harvard nutritionist Frederick Stare agreed with the Keys "research" and advised swallowing three tablespoons of it every day as medication. But after so many studies TRYING to link saturated fat and heart disease failed, (That's the "junk science." When it's not objective it ain't scientific method. It's amazing how much junk science there is!), he reversed his position and co-authored a book denouncing the cholesterol scare.


The corporate action during this time may be even MORE fun to learn about. The American Medical Association saw a way to get in on the junk science. They supported the movement away from saturated fats but ONLY under, (costly), medical supervision. And long after it became apparent that the cholesterol scare was not based in good science, the AHA actually SOLD the right to use its "Heart Check" symbols to food companies. They got $2500 from Kelloggs for each of its products that sported the symbol including the heart-strengthening Fruity Marshmallow Krispies, and $200,000 to Florida citrus fruit producers for EXCLUSIVE rights to use it. Like only Florida oranges fought heart disease. California oranges were artery cloggers! The AHA got 3.5 MILLION bucks from ConAgra, like Monsanto, one of those companies that nobody knows about but you are probably going to eat one of its products today. You may be eating one NOW! Then in 2000 they introduced a "Heart Healthy" diet that got them an estimated 15 million in endorsements.


Nowadays there's supposed to be a child obesity epidemic. I see a lot of the same tactics being employed here. There's money to be made! The big target seems to be sugary drinks. In New York City they proposed to ban the sale of any sweetened drink in servings bigger than 16 ounces in places like movie theaters, fast food restaurants, sports arenas etc. I smell a rat. Anybody knows that buying more smaller containers will cost more.


Other cities are proposing taxes, like Richmond, California, of one cent per ounce on big drinks. For the good of the kids, of course!


How about one PUSH-UP per ounce? It seems to me that all of this illustrates that people will go pretty far out of their way to avoid two things: 1) lowering stress by maybe sacrificing some work/money and 2) exercise. Kids play more video games than they used to. Parents BUY more. Kids aren't allowed to go outside unless they have a full set of armour on. Even then they could get kidnapped or killed. Kids aren't less active than they used to be, they are KEPT less active. This has more to do with the obesity than what they're drinking. At least that's what I reckon.

Errrrverybody eats more when they exercise less. Sit in front of the computer for an hour and see if you don't think of food. I've been thinking of food the whole time I've been writing this. Or watch TV. Better with a bag of Doritos, right? Now go outside and take hockey shots or play catch with the frisbee for an hour. Bet you won't think of food so often. I love how exercise is mentioned parenthetically in all these discussions about obese children and what they are eating. I think most kids could eat almost anything if they exercised more. Take away all their portable electronic exercise inhibitors and boot them out the house! That's my parenting advice for the day.

But in sedentary societies where kids are obese a more popular refrain is, "Let's just give 'em DRUGS!" There has been talk of screening kids for, you guessed it, high cholesterol levels. Before puberty. Alan Cassels, a drug policy researcher at UVIC and author of the book, "Selling Sickness" says this is just silly. Yeah silly all the way to the bank for statin drugs like Lipitor, Zocor and Crestor that claim they are safe for use on children, (without any scientific research). He explains that most people who have heart attacks have normal cholesterol levels and they are in their 60's or 70's. And he brings up that cholesterol is a substance essential for life. Much like salt being good for you, this fact seems to get swept under the carpet, or thrown over the shoulder.

Like every drug you see being flogged on TV, statin drugs are expensive, huge sellers and they have a list of risks that to any normal person should outweigh the benefits. Usually listed in a few seconds at the end of the commercial by an auctioneer speaking under his breath about anal leakage or semi-permanent heart stoppage or whatever. Kidney failure, cataracts, muscle pain, weakness, and liver damage are more likely effects of statin drugs on kids than reducing obesity. Cassels says that giving kids statin drugs is like drinking Big Pharma's Kool Aid.

So in the end, what do we really know about what we eat? Probably less than we THINK we might know. CERTAINLY less than we are told. I think I'll just eat and drink what I want and what is cheap. If somebody tells me I shouldn't be eating/drinking it because it's bad for my health, I'll just wait ten or fifteen years until science/economics reverses the modern trends and say, "Hey remember that egg I was eating 10 years ago? I TOLD you it was good for me!"

Hedonic Adaptation/Dai Fing and the Delicious Wine

Well... ha ha ha ha haaarrgghh!

If you go right back to the first entry in this, my new Canadian blog, you will understand the joke in that first word. "WORD" was actually a pretty good post. That was a year and two months ago. I've been in Canada well over a year now and it's time for me to take inventory. Am I doing what I promised myself I would do?

For me it was very important to do as many things as I could that I COULDN'T do in Korea, or at least things that were difficult to do or riDQlously expensive. Hah! No DQ in Korea. Been there, done that back in Canada! That's one example. I golfed several times last summer in Smithers and in Victoria. Already golfed once THIS year too! Broke 70 for the first time! I would not have been surprised if I had died an old man, (golfing right up till the bitter end, (in fact expiring on the golf course after getting my first hole-in-one at the age of 90)), never having shot a 69. But that ain't gonna happen! Got a 69 at Mount Douglas Golf Course. Now, it's a short and VERY forgiving course. I pulled several balls not one but TWO holes left and still had a shot to the green. And the par is 62, not the usual 72. So 69 is 7 over par instead of 3 under but I don't care a lick! I got a 69 dude! Golfing is something I told myself to do a lot of since it's even cheaper here than in THAILAND. So I'll give myself a check on THAT account.

As I write this I am enjoying a carrot muffin and a cup, (two cups and two muffins to be precise), of Red Rose Tea. Check and check. Yes, I'm muffin toppin' a bit back here in Canada. It's all this "hedonic adaptation" avoidance I swear! Carrot muffins and carrot cake were tough to find in Asia. I even BAKED a carrot cake since returning home! And as for the Red Rose tea, we all know it's "Ewnleh in Canader eh? Piteh!" I had to drink Lipton in Korea. And it wasn't always easy to find.

A recent study at the University of Missouri, one of a great many that in my opinion are done to verify the obvious and give it a more sciency sounding name, showed that we don't appreciate what we have. Well DUUUH! Glad they spent a holyshitillion dollars researching THAT little nugget of scientific fact! And what they came up with is called, "hedonic adaptation." This is the phenomenon of getting used to, and eventually, (or maybe not so eventually), taking for granted things that you once really appreciated. The cure, these grant-grabbing Missourian researchers tell us, is to appreciate what you have. "Get the most out of what you have before moving on to the next thing," says Kennon Sheldon, one of those jam sandwich researchers. That's a phrase I'm going to coin right here on my blog, folks. Use it frequently! It's a person who is researching something, (and being paid well to do so), that is unnecessary to research. Like those lucky folks who were, (and I'm not making this up), actually given government funding to see if a piece of bread with jam on one side actually DOES land face down when it's dropped more often than jam-side-up. They found that it DOES. Notwithstanding the Mythbusters having busted this as a myth, I still believe it and I still believe it to have been one of the more useless wastes of research money ever. "Jam sandwich research." If this goes viral and becomes a part of the parlance of our times my life will not have been wasted.

Appreciate what you have. I guess that's way too hippie or spiritual or abstract for a lot of folks. They need a good old concrete, factual, double blind study before the idea can be given credence. And much like our friend Mr. Christian, the jam sandwich researchers probably KNOW their studies are the exact opposite of why they became scientists, but what the hay, there's money to be made.

Anyway, this couldn't have been a spiritual truth. No, that's just kindergarten nonsense for the less intelligent. What happened was in my uninformed, unscientific ignorance I fortuitously, (not to say "randomly"), stumbled upon this hard scientific logic before it was researched.

Well, whatever. It was a goal of mine. And I think I'm doing okay. I still stop and smell the freshly cut grass and the million and one different species of flower we have in Victoria. I marvel at the fact that those two cups of tea I just had, (thinking of moving on to Chianti now), were made with water right from the tap. You probably have to do a little traveling before you can appreciate THAT again. If you live in Canada and never leave it you may not know what a privelege that is. The fresh air is something I relish pretty much daily. That's not in danger of hedonic adaptation. The lack of humidity, the different smell of the air, I have definitely not stopped appreciating the weather. Even though Victoria has too much rain and too much wind, I won't complain about the weather here. I haven't had the stifling heat/humidity that makes even naked people wish they could take off a layer of skin. And I am thankful for that every day I don't experience it.

You know what I'm gonna do here? I'm switching in mid blog entry. I was planning to talk about how hard it is to raise kids here in Canada, (I mean without the government forcing you to overprotect them), then say how I am so glad not to be doing it, but I actually lived a little bit of a Taoist allegory while typing this. I've been blogging about how I am trying to take pleasure and joy in the suffering life sends our way. This was going to be a largely positive, pleasure and joyful blog entry but I am just not destined to ever have one I guess. So now in the ilk of some of the greatest stories I've ever read, here is Dai Fing, (my Chinese name), and The Delicious Wine.

Dai Fing was a poor and honourable man. He was a member of the municipal guard. He worked most days at a marketplace in the city of Feng Tran in the prefecture of Bei Shi. Every day while he plodded along the perimeter of the marketplace patroling for man-eating tigers rumoured to be in the area, and climbed the 1001 steps to the top of the twin towers on its outskirts to spy approaching bandits so as to give market-goers early warning, he saw noblemen and wealthy women purchasing goods that would require at least a year of frugal rice rationing for him to buy. Here a man bought a fine golden hair comb for one of his concubines, there a nobleman's wife bought a length of silk redder than beet juice and with a thread count higher than the number of soldiers in the Emperor's service.

Dai Fing was happy in his station, but he often wondered at the cavalier nature with which a man, who in outward appearance was nowise superior to himself, could purchase such precious treasures. Could it be, he pondered, that even the finest Hunan noodle and oxtail stew could grow tiresome? Would even wine from the foreign vinyards to the south not scintillate the tongue after a time? Dai Fing purposed to find out for himself.

One day Dai Fing saw the wealthy land owner Lao Tsu on the market. He approached Lao Tsu carefully and with great respect did not say anything until asked. "What is the reason for your stalking, guard?" "Apologies Lao Tsu. I am a poor man seeking information that is beyond my station." Lao Tsu was pleased at Dai Fing's flattery but feigned annoyance. "And you think a humble man such as myself might help you?" "It is my hope," replied Dai Fing. "Very well, a humble man as myself will help you find what you seek though I fear I will not be of assistance," lied Lao Tsu.

Dai Fing was a lover of wine. He had tasted some of the local vintage and had made some swill of his own but that was all that was available to him. He longed to expand his palate. "What," he inquired of Lao Tsu, "is the most delicious wine in the land that I might buy some and taste of it?" "Guard, I fear you will never find what you seek. Oh find it, you may, but to taste of this wine I despair would require either payment beyond your means or thievery beyond your morals." Dai Fing said, "I thank Lao Tsu for this positive characterization, still may I impose on him to relate to me the name of this vintage?"

Lao Tsu gave Dai Fing the name of the wine. "Shian Ti" it was called. Distilled from the grapes of a far off land it was delectable, particularly with fava beans. After 17 months of careful rationing Dai Fing was able to buy a bottle of Shian Ti. His spirits soared as with half-closed eyes and carefully studied non-chalance he stroked a finger through the air as if chalking it up, then tabled the money while looking almost entirely away. Though the hawker of spirits knew Dai Fing and was aware of his occupation, Dai Fing sensed a superiority over him during the transaction that he had never experienced before. Many onlookers who had witnessed his purchase moved out of his way as he departed. Dai Fing felt the effects of the wine before he even opened it. It was surely a worthwhile expense!

At home Dai Fing found his corkscrew and carefully peeled away the cork covering and twisted the screw deep into the cork. He pulled and the corkscrew came out of the bottle. But there was a click instead of a pop. His locally manufactured corkscrew had snapped approximately a third of the way down the screw so that two thirds of it remained in the cork. The cork had not budged. This did not deter Dai Fing. He went to his box of tools and produced a screw with a Lo Fhat San head and twisted it into the cork. He pulled and the screw came out with small amounts of crumbled cork. He tried again with a more diagonal path of screwage. This time a larger chunk of the cork came with the crumblings but easily 4/5ths of the cork remained in the bottle. Dai Fing decided to try to work the broken corkscrew into the broken cork as far as it would go. It was a success. He pulled as carefully as possible and got another fifth of the cork. The broken piece of the corkscrew was exposed so Dai Fing got some plyers and tried to pull the cork out. This caused great strain on the glass bottle mouth since Dai Fing was using it as a fulcrum for the prying. The bottle mouth shattered on one side sending slivers of glass down to the cork and onto the kitchen floor. Dai Fing shook all the cork and glass out of the yet unopened bottle and into the trash. He tried the corkscrew and the screw several more times to no avail. Then he decided to use a longer, larger spike screw. It went into the cork pushing the corkscrew metal through the bottom and into the wine. The bottom of the spike screw went all the way through the cork and into the wine. When Dai Fing pulled on the spike only cork crumblings issued from the cork. He tried to pour the crumblings into the kitchen sink and a small amount of wine came out. There was now about 2 or 3 fifths of the cork remaining in the bottle. So Dai Fing reckoned, not incorrectly, that if he just pushed the cork down with the spike he could get the wine out of the bottle. It was a success!

His first glass of Shian Ti had cork crumblings around the edge of it. Dai Fing used a spoon to scoop most of them out. He then tasted the wine and it was indeed superlative! He enjoyed the entire bottle and never regretted the purchase.