Alton Brown is my new Hero

I have been a fan of Alton Brown since I discovered GoodEats. It’s like… cooking for geeks. It is loaded with all kinds of great geek humor. And he spends time explaining the chemistry behind the cooking. You don’t just get a recipe walk-through; you also get history, and deep, fundamental background as to how and why it works the way it does. It is the kind of information that can be applied to other cookery projects.

Alton Brown gave me the confidence to depart from just following recipes, and create my own culinary concoctions (Not that I am a cooking superstar. I am purely hobby, but I do enjoy the adventure).

 

And recently he became my hero.

With the potential Crohn’s diagnosis and the related symptoms came a rather drastic change in diet. When you eliminate all the potential Crohn’s triggers, you are basically left with chicken, turkey, fish (which is prohibitively expensive when you live in the middle of the mountains),  most fruits, lettuce, celery and yams. Pretty much everything else is a potential trigger. I went on this very restrictive diet in an effort to get symptoms under control, with the plan to reintroduce foods and monitor results, in order to determine what my specific triggers were.

Several weeks into this, I was having a particularly dreary day, specifically bemoaning the absence of pasta in my life. I love pasta. I’m not especially picky about it. I don’t care what the noodle is. Pasta is about the sauce. I love to make sauce. Mostly tomato based sauce. I could eat spaghetti two or three times a week. And this doing without pasta was cruel and unusual punishment in my book.

Anyway, on this particular day, I was feeling particularly sorry for myself over this when I sat down to watch an episode of Good Eats with summer squash as the subject. One of the recipes Alton presented was a "pasta salad", using Zucchini as the pasta. As he described how to accomplish this, and why it worked, a small spark of hope was ignited. Surely these Zucchini noodles could serve as the platform for pasta sauce as well. 

We happened to have a couple Zucchini, from the last Bountiful Baskets. So I talked my wife into giving it a try one night. After the peeling and salting, she rinsed them, and tossed them in the microwave for a few seconds to warm them up.  When I got home from work, they were plated and smothered in Sauce. It was darn close to Spaghetti, with a slightly thicker noodle. The texture was good. The Zucchini taste was present, complimentary, but not overpowering. My favorite food was back on the menu!

So Thank-you Alton Brown, for saving my spaghetti. You are my hero!

Recipe: Turkey Breakfast Sausage

Diet  restrictions (Basically limited to poultry, fish, fruits, and veggies), led me to create this recipe so I can have a more enjoyable breakfast experience....

Turkey Breakfast Sausage

2.5 lb ground turkey
1 tsp ginger
1 3/4 t salt
1 1/14 tsp rubbed sage
1 1/2 tsp black pepper
1 1/2 tsp anise seed
1 tsp fennel seed

Combine spices, mix thoroughly into ground turkey.

Spread into an 8" square baking pan.

Bake at 350 degrees (F) to an internal temp of 160 degrees (F).

Drain grease (unless you want the extra calories, in which case, let it sit, and the turkey will soak most of it back up).

Cool sufficiently to handle, remove from pan, cut in half, then cut the halves into 1/2 to 3/4 inch strips (so your dimensions will be approx 4"x 1.5" x .5").

Freeze for later use. (I place a strip of wax paper between each, to prevent stick-age during freezing, and then wrap in butcher paper.

Reheat "links" in a frying pan and enjoy.

Chicken Tomato Cabbage Soup

I invented a new soup tonight. I kinda made it up as I went, so I am trying to recall the ingredients after the fact, but here goes.

Chicken Tomato Cabbage Soup



2 lbs chicken breast, cut into pieces (about 1/2" to 3/4" cubes).
1 onion, chopped
4 or 5 carrots, chopped
4 cloves garlic, minced
5 or 6 medium tomatoes, diced
32 oz chicken stock or broth
1 read bell pepper
1/2 head cabbage, chopped
1 Tbsp oregano
1 Tbsp thyme
1 Tbsp celery Seed (I would have used celery instead, but I didn't have any)
1 bay leaf
olive oil

Fry the chicken in 1 Tbsp of olive oil.

In a stock pot, saute the onion, carrots and garlic in a Tbsp of olive oil, just until the onions are beginning to go transparent.

Add the tomatoes, chicken broth, oregano, thyme, celery seed and bay leaf. Bring to a boil.

Reduce heat. Let simmer approximately 5 minutes.

Add the chicken, bell pepper, and cabbage. Continue to simmer until the cabbage and pepper are softened a bit.

Enjoy.

Kings revisited

In a previous post, I discussed the benefits of a dictatorship, concluding that in spite of those benefits, it was a bad idea. But how are we at identifying dictatorships? Perhaps more importantly, how good are we at recognizing a burgeoning dictatorship?

Obviously, a leader who declares himself “king”, “supreme ruler”, or “president for life”, is a likely candidate, though at that point, probably already well-established and difficult to remove from power. The ideal would be to identify the threat of impending dictator-dom, and prevent it from occurring.

Using history as a teacher, we can look at the classic example of a rise to dictatorial power - Adolf Hitler – and gain some insight.

After a failed attempt at a forceful grab for power, Hitler returned from prison and became involved in the democratic process of 1925 Germany. He identified two enemies – Jews, and Communists – and began a subtle propaganda campaign against them. In 1930 Hitler capitalized on a period of financial crisis, and political extremism. The great depression left many without jobs. Also at this time, German politics had become much divided between the right- and left wing extremes. Hitler used these as leverage points to gain popularity for his party.

In time, this led to his position as a political figurehead, meant inspire the people, but without any real power. From there he managed to obtain control over the various governmental offices and in 1934, with the current president died, he and his supporters approved the merger of the presidential role, and the chancellorship (his position), establishing him as head of state.

There are several important lessons to be learned from this…

The First is division. Hitler leveraged the division between left-wing and right-wing political groups to obtain power for his organization.  The people were so busy being members of their respective political parties that they forgot to be members of their country. Does that sound a little like Republicans and Democrats? (I wouldn’t be too cocky over there, constitution/green/libertarian/etc… party members. It was a lesser known, third party that he rode to power).

Second is misdirection. The Jews weren’t the enemy of Germany, nor were the communists, yet Hitler vilified both, blaming the Jews for many of Germany’s economic woes, and accusing the communist party of acts of terrorism, including the burning of the Reichstag (German parliament building). He gave the German people nefarious enemies to hold their attention, directing scrutiny away from his own suspect activities.

Humans have an excellent capacity for finding patterns and similarities in things.  It is a useful capability, which allows us to classify things which we have never before seen, based on things we have seen before, and (generally) establish an appropriate response to said new thing. Unfortunately this capability can also work against us. Through clever marketing, incomplete or inaccurate research, or spurious observations, we can misattribute incorrect qualities to a particular group. We can be distracted easily with a few partial truths. 

Prevention of this requires constant vigilance. Fact checking, and rechecking, peer review and complete transparency are crucial. As Nicolo Machiavelli, author of ‘The Prince’ states, “….men are so simple, and so subject to present necessities, that he who seeks to deceive will always find someone who will allow himself to be deceived”.

Finally, I mention consolidation (this one could be a post by itself). Hitler slowly and carefully gathered power over time. He didn’t become supreme dictator overnight. In fact, his position as chancellor was originally meant to be a relatively powerless position. But slowly, power was consolidated under him, or those loyal to him. Many people found it easy to justify granting him increasing power, after all, hadn’t he worked hard for it? Hadn’t he demonstrated the particular leadership qualities that justified him having that power? He got results. He was charismatic. It was, in a way, “Divine Right”.

As with misdirection, prevention requires constant vigilance. “We the people” must be constantly on guard to ensure no individual or group holds or exerts too much power, no matter how convincing their argument or how well-meaning their intentions.

Another good read on this subject is George Orwell’s ‘AnimalFarm’. It tells the story of the rise of totalitarianism on a farm, where the animals revolted against the tyranny of farmer Jones, and set about to establish a utopian society, only to end up oppressed by another tyrant (The book is a parable of the failed attempt at communism in the Soviet Union. It is a good read, based on the authors personal experiences, and is as entertaining as it is enlightening. I’d recommend everyone give it a thorough thumb-through).

The founding fathers established the government – a loose joining of largely autonomous states - to prevent this. We need to ensure this structure is not corroded by those who hunger for power, fame, or fortune, or who believe through “Divine Right” that they are “destined to lead the masses, for the greater good”. It is crucial for “We the people” to also be mindful that this threat comes not only from established government, but from any relatively small group who gains significant power over our resources.

P.S.

After reading the last paragraph, you may conclude that I am against all governments, all corporations, and all forms of leadership; you might assume I am an anarchist. If that is the case, please let me correct this perception...

In chapter 9 of ‘The Prince’, Machiavelli points out what ultimately are the only three forms of government… 

“Because in all cities these two distinct parties are found, and from this it arises that the people do not  wish to be ruled nor oppressed by the nobles, and the nobles wish to rule and oppress the people; and from these two opposite desires there arises in cities one of three results, either a principality, self-government, or anarchy.”

I am firmly in favor of the second option. Self-government is the hardest to achieve and maintain. It is also the only system which can provide real freedom. It requires the constant, diligent, rational participation of everyone if it is to survive.

Three Sisters - Wrapped up

The three sisters project has come to a close this year. We harvested and froze three bags (1 gallon each ) of corn, and had fresh corn on the cob nearly every night for a couple weeks. (Probably close to another half gallon.

We managed a couple meals of green beans - A rather embarrassing turnout, really. But the Zuchinni made up for that.

We had close to a dozen harvests like this one. Some ended up as bread, some were shredded and frozen, for later use in bread. Some went into salads and spaghetti sauce. Some were sliced and fried. And some became compost. The new application (which I have greatly enjoyed) is to slice them thinly, dry them to crispy, and use them as a replacement for chips in chips and salsa.(I recommend a little garlic salt before drying). Who new chips and salsa could be health food, right?

The pumpkins did very well also.

Too bad nobody in my house likes pumpkins. Oh well, they make great decorations, and will add to the compose pile. I might try to harvest an roast the seeds this year (though we will replant some as well). I am tempted to give pumpkin soup a try. What else can you do with pumpkins?
Here is one last look at the garden.

And here is a few days later after my sons Anakin and Yoda demolished the trade federation  corn troopers with their light sabres.

Pretty thorough, those two lads...




So, the experiment is done for this year. Lessons learned?

If I were to do it again, I would do pits rather then mounds, to reduce erosion, and to keep my watering efforts more controlled. I might also double plant the beans, to improve likelihood of success (that, or start and transplant). I would also wait an extra week or two on the pumpkins/squash, to ensure the beans had a good head start. Once the corn and squash start to fill out, if the beans are well established, they will get choked out and starved for sunlight by the other two.

That said, I probably won't repeat next year, for the following reasons:

1. Harvesting the beans is a pain,you have to step in and around the pumpkin vines, and hunt through the corn for them.
2. I don't have deer or racoon problems, so I don't really need the pumpkin vines to protect the corn and beans.
3. I can achieve the same (or better) weed control as provided by the pumpkins around the corn and beans, by planting a low growing green manure after the corn/bean plants are established (something like a red clover). Many green manures also serve the function of nitrogen fixing.
4. I can get the same soil building benefits by using crop rotation techniques. Plant a neat, tidy row of beans one year, and a neat, tidy row of of corn in that same spot the next year.

Nonetheless, it was a very enjoyable experiment. And it looked pretty cool too.

Taxing the 1%

I have recently seen several pictures on the web of individuals holding signs claiming they work two jobs, pay their way through college, etc… ending with some comment to the effect that the wall street protesters should quit whining and get to work, or that the few who claim to be part of the wealthiest 1% of the population, and who are more or less demanding that the government tax them more, should shut-up.

The core of their argument - as I read it- is that the wealthiest 1% of the American population already carries 50% of the tax burden, and since they are the hard working, chief job creators of the country, they and their money should be left alone, so they can use it to create more jobs and thus fix our economic woes (or at least prevent them from getting worse).

That argument is visualized in the following image. Poor Mr. 1% having to bear the same burden as the other 99%, all by his lonely self….

Looks pretty unfair, very progressive (in case you’ve forgotten, a progressive tax system is one in which the percentage of your income which is taken for taxes increases as your income increases [i.e. if you make  $10 you pay $1, if you make $20 you pay $5]. A regressive system takes a larger percentage of your income as your income decreases [if you make $10 you pay $5, if you make $20, you pay $5]. The midpoint between these two is a flat percentage [such as everyone pays 10% of their income]. The US tax structure, ignoring all loopholes, provisions etc..., is designed to be slightly progressive [the poorest pay nothing, the middle class pays a small percentage, the wealthiest pas a slightly higher percentage]).

There is a problem with the above picture however. It lacks context.

You see taxes are not a burden placed on the public, but a portion of resources (wealth) taken away. The number that really matters is percentage of income.  

Solid numbers on income distribution are difficult to come by. Percentage for the top 1% is claimed to be 50%, 80% and everything in between. Now, the lower end claims (50%) all appear to be based on 2007 numbers, and appear to include total wealth, not just income.  Numbers for 2007, income only range from sixty to seventy-five percent. Every report I could find was in agreement that the top 1% have experienced an increase in income over the past several years, while everyone else on average has experienced no change, to a slight drop in income.  So, income distribution looks something like this, (using the 70% value).

Let’s use some numbers now to see what’s going on (these are completely made up numbers. It is the percentages which are crucial here).

Let’s say there are 100 people in America, and a total wealth of $100,000. 

Then 1 of those people (we’ll call him Bill Buffet) owns $70,000,

and the remaining 99 people each own approximately $303.

Now, let’s assume a total tax burden of $20,000. 

As previously stated, Bill is paying half of it, or $10,000, 

which means his tax rate is approximately 14.3%. 

The remaining $10,000 is paid by the other 99 people, and amounts to one third of their income! 

A tax rate of 33.3%!!! 

What appeared to be very progressive is in fact regressive. Even if we assume the lower value of 60% for income distribution, then Bill is paying 16.7% and everyone else is paying 25%.

In the real world, you also have to consider that some percentage of those 99 are paying nothing (yes, some are lazy bum’s. But there are also many who are just having an extended “bad day”, whether it is medical woes, a recent job loss, and difficulty finding a new job…), which means the percentage goes even higher for the middle class.

This isn’t a matter of unfairly increasing the tax burden of the wealthiest. It is a matter of getting them to pay their fair share. Certainly, I agree with the sentiment that lazy people shouldn’t get a free ride. I don’t want to subsidize some deadbeat sitting on the couch eating Cheetos all day, but I also don’t want to subsidize Bill Buffet’s personal Jet.

 (Oh, and by the way. Wealthiest 1% don’t create most of the jobs. More than half of the jobs created are by small businesses. The middle class (Again) is carrying the bulk of the burden, on their ever shrinking share of the pie.

Chicken and egg, meet behavior and gene...

I recently read “the Genius in All of Us” by David Shenk. An interesting and thought provoking book, which challenges commonly accepted ideas about how genetics works.

In it, he mentioned two particularly interesting bits of research.

The first involved mice, and diet. The original paper on this research can be found at http://chd.ucsd.edu/seminar/documents/Morgan.08.pdf. It reads like a Scientific Journal paper (most likely because it is a Scientific Journal paper), but the interesting bit is that the authors observed that by feeding a yellow mouse a specific diet, her offspring would have brown fur. And more interesting still, this genetic alteration would continue through future generations.

The second bit, from Washington State University was similar, and involved exposing rats to a couple agricultural chemicals (pesticide and fungicide). The result of this was a reduced fertility in the rats, and the next four generations of offspring (http://www.americanhealthcarefoundation.org/fibromyalgia-md/ArticleE.cfm is a nice, relatively non-boring summary).

There appears to be some debate about how significant a role epigenetic inheritance plays. It nonetheless causes one - upon hearing news that scientist have discovered the “anger gene” or the “alcoholism gene” or the “gay gene” or the "sociopath gene" or… - to ask oneself “Did the gene trigger the behavior, or did the behavior trigger the gene?”