politics and politicians
See other politics and politicians Articles
Title: Libertarians smarter?
Source:
Conservative News and Views
URL Source: https://www.conservativenewsandview ... ial/talk/libertarians-smarter/
Published: Feb 5, 2012
Author: Terry A. Hurlbut
Post Date: 2019-08-10 14:33:23 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 18525
Comments: 138
Are liberals really smarter than conservatives? Or are libertarians smarter than anyone else? A recent column in The Daily Mail suggests so. True or not, it shows that “liberal” and “conservative” are not the only two extremes of opinion. In fact, they are special cases of a far more general political landscape. By tradition, “conservative” and “liberal” (formerly “progressive”) stand for two different sets of freedoms on one hand, and entitlements on the other. This linear graph of left-of-center v. right-of-center dates from the National Assembly of Revolutionary France. The only thing that defined the “left” and the “right” then was change. The “left” wanted sweeping change, and the “right” wanted to keep things as they were. But neither side necessarily stood for more freedom than did the other. Instead, those things that a liberal wants to entitle some people to, a conservative does not. But: many of the things that a liberal wants people to be free to do, a conservative does not, either. The reason: a conservative favors a different set of entitlements that are not economic. The conservative would entitle most wives to expect their husbands to stay married to them, and not seek enjoyment elsewhere or end the marriage whenever they saw fit. “Moderates” are more likely to grant more entitlements in some areas, and more freedoms in others, than either side. But this line is a very special case. In fact, the possible mix of entitlements and freedoms should have at least two dimensions, not merely one. Michael Hanlon of The Daily Mail came close to recognizing this: The problem here is how we define ‘left’ and ‘right’ thinking, what this means socially and politically. A moment’s thought shows that the fault lines are not only blurred but they are legion, criss-crossing across traditional political strata and have changed through time. The square political leanings grid, from OnTheIssues.org. True, but incomplete. Many theorists, from Rand to Rothbard, have recognized two different “freedom scales” with which to chart one’s attitudes. One is the economic scale. Zero on this scale is a complete command economy, with input-output analysis dictating who produces what, and with Five-Year Plans, government stores, collective farms, the whole nine meters. At this end of the scale, everyone is entitled to a minimum economic standard but are free to do nothing to break out of that standard, or to take on any task unless the authorities approve. One hundred on this scale is total capitalism, with no role for government in production, distribution, or exchange. At this end, people are free to do anything but entitled to nothing. Whatever they want, they must work for. The other scale is the social scale. Zero on that scale means: throw homosexuals in prison, punish criminals severely, forbid immigration (that is, membership is by invitation only), etc. One hundred means to let everybody in, take all comers, let roommates (same-sex or opposite-, whether they share bed or not) form whatever contractual unions they care to form—but also recognize freedom of association (including the freedom not to associate), and the right of self-defense. Hanlon loses sight of one thing: many “social liberals” are damnably hypocritical along this line. They will not recognize freedom of association. They do not recognize a right of self-defense. They do not recognize any of the flip sides of increased tolerance of homosexuality, adultery, or criminality. As an example, they want to leave two men (or two women) free to be intimate, but then want to entitle this roommate pair to rooms, or an apartment, in any dwelling, whether the would-be host wants to offer them those rooms, or that apartment, or not. Once again: one person’s entitlement is another person’s loss of freedom. A libertarian, by contrast, would respect that host’s freedom. A libertarian would ask that the government leave those roommates free to be as intimate as they please, but not entitle them to rooms or apartment wherever they wish. For those, they must still make a voluntary arrangement with a host or landlord. If one plots his attitudes on the economic and social freedom scales on a square grid, instead of on a line segment, and orient this grid like a baseball diamond, then that grid will yield five different positions, not three. Home plate (zero, zero) is populism, or the Communism of the old Warsaw Pact, or Nazism in Germany. Conservatism lies at first base (100, 0). Liberalism or left-wing-ism lies at third base (0, 100). “Moderate-ism” is at the pitcher’s mound (50, 50). And Libertarianism is at second base (100, 100). So the old left-to-right line passes from third base to first, across the infield, allowing more freedom in economic areas, but insisting on more entitlement on the social, as it goes. Here is what Hanlon noticed: intelligence tracks with moving straight up on the political grid, and then tending toward perfect libertarianism. Lower intelligence tracks with falling straight down on the political grid, toward total populism. With the horizontal movement along the traditional left-right line, intelligence does not change. The implied result: Libertarians are smarter than everyone else. Purely abstract intelligence might track higher with libertarianism. That makes libertarians smarter than liberals or conservatives on that scale. A smart person (unless he hungers for power) wants to be free, either to make a living or to associate (or not) with anyone he pleases. But does common sense make libertarians smarter? Not necessarily. Abstract libertarianism works fine—for a voluntary association of voluntarily consenting adults. It does not work well for children. A child is an inherently dependent, even helpless person. Common sense demands that a society entitle a child to food, water, shelter, and education, that the parents, not the government, should give it. The parents are more likely to have the child’s best interests at heart than faceless bureaucrats would. But in addition, that same society also entitles the parents to a minimum level of “good examples” from other adults. That is why a sound society does not authorize two same-sex roommates sharing bed to adopt children. It is also why a business that caters to “the prurient interest” is not free to locate near enough to where a child might stray within sight. It is why a sound society classifies certain kinds of pastimes as “for adults only,” and recognizes a class of citizen or resident called the minor. As in: Sales of cigarettes to MINORS are FORBIDDEN by law. We support this law. Parents are urged to help prevent violations. The pure libertarian recognizes no such thing as a minor. That’s the equivalent of expecting a cub in the wild to fend for himself before he is ready. As any wildlife biologist knows, that’s not very smart. But in matters of pure economic policy, libertarians might be smarter than most. A sound society does let its children imitate the adults in one key area: business. Whether this business is selling lemonade from a front-yard stand, or offering lawn-and-garden services to his neighbors for a fee, a libertarian would have no problem with this. Nor would a conservative, so long as the child is doing something that he or she has already safely done at home. But a liberal won’t allow this. A liberal wants to entitle a perfect stranger to sell lawn-and-garden services, usually for a higher fee, without having the neighbor’s boy (or girl) compete with that service. The same seems to hold for selling lemonade, though that is even harder to justify. This makes both conservatives and libertarians smarter than liberals. They are smart enough to know that some entitlements have no justification, but only excuses. Are libertarians smarter? In some areas, yes. In others, no. But conservatives are smart to engage libertarians in a debate on how a society ought to run. Liberals haven’t done very well. Libertarians and conservatives might each be able to teach the other something.
Traditional political labels
Are libertarians smarter than everyone else?
Summing up
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 137.
#60. To: Deckard (#0)
I am not sure if they are smarter, but they take bath less frequently. My sense of smell tells me that.
You sniff a lot of libertarians? Rand died in 1982, Rothbard in the mid-Nineties. So you haven't sniffed those two in quite some time.
I worked with two (in IT, they were quite competent), and I had a neighbor next flat (he was a biochemist). They all smelled from a distance. Also I read that Ayn Rand was not so great about her personal hygiene. Perhaps as greater and smarter individuals, they were above petty customs and rules. ;) "Objectivism taught that intellectual parity is the sole legitimate basis for romantic or sexual attraction. Coincidentally enough, this doctrine cleared the way for Rand—a woman possessed of looks that could be charitably described as unusual, along with abysmal personal hygiene and grooming habits—to seduce young men in her orbit."
Maybe you just have a sensitive nose. Or they were single or lived with someone who had gone nose-blind to their body odor or they themselves had a poor sense of smell. I recall reading articles about the Hollyweird elite, that many of them are accused of non-bathing. One of the more notorious is Johnny Depp and his wife. Supposedly they can go weeks without bathing, co-stars begging him to take a shower because he stand so much on those Pirates movies. This info was found on a lot of websites. If it was libel, it was major libel. They also included his wife in the stinker category. I'm not sure why everyone always seems to believe that we all have exactly the same identical abilities to hear, see, smell, sense, etc. I know that I, for instance, don't have a strong sense of smell but I have exceptional hearing and always did. My skin is very sensitive to infrared heat. I know everyone is but my heat sensitivity is almost like a radar. I know that most people don't have that. I have a friend who has an almost frightening sense of smell. He knows when women are menstruating, up to a block away if there's a breeze. He has a super nose. To me, it doesn't sound like much fun. I always thought being a dog would suck because then you'd know just how bad the world smells. There is also a thing in recent years where some people are abandoning soaps and antiperspirants altogether. Including some doctors and science types. I Stopped Using Soap & Shampoo Six Months ago. Why you Should too. And it isn't unheard of here among LFers. Vicomte told us he gave up using these products years ago (unless he gets really dirty, like car grease kind of dirty). Maybe he wants to chime in. He was very early on this trend which is now becoming almost a movement. The No-Poo people who avoid shampoo has been around for a while now but the No-Soap and No-Antiperspirant movement are still growing. You'd be surprised how many videos you can find on this at YouBoob, how to transition to bathing with water only, how long until your body adjusts. It's familiar material for anyone who recalls Vic's posts on the subject, going back to several years before LP closed up. He's never gone back to using soaps or shampoos, thinks they're bad for his skin. Some people say their skin gets more oily and subject to blemishes using soap because it scrubs away natural oils which makes the skin go nuts trying to produce more oil, making the skin more oily than ever and subject to blemishes or even real acne. Supposedly it takes a little longer to get your hair to adjust to no-poo than it takes for your skin to adjust to no-soap. Apparently it does take weeks to get your body to adjust to no-antiperspirant but they claim their body odor is less once they get away from antiperspirant. They don't claim to 100% odor-free but they think they smell less without antiperspirant than they do if they use it, especially on a daily basis. I know that I have curtailed my own use. I will use a little antiperspirant if I'm going out, especially in summer. Otherwise, I really try to avoid it. I try to avoid really soaping up my body and have a very lightweight liquid soap with tiny abrasive particles (Men's Dove) which I use a half-dozen drops on a loofah to scrub with. I am a lot more gentle about scrubbing my face and try to avoid using soap since I think it does make my skin more dry which then makes my skin more oily as a result of my skin trying to cope. And your skin producing more oil means more chances for blocked pores, leading to blemishing (even tiny blemishes you can barely even see). Most of the no-soap/no-poo/no-antiperspirant types are very rigorous about daily showers with water. They claim that, other than sweating in warm weather, they have no problems and feel and look better. They say they like their hair and skin better or that they've solved some longstanding problems caused by using these products or at least overusing them. Look at YouTube, you'll find a lot of videos on this topic. And it is a lot harder to make money on YouTube selling people on the idea of using no products than it is to monetize videos by recommending the latest and greatest brand-name products. Yet the no-soaps movement just keeps growing. Maybe these stinky libertarians that you know just aren't diligent enough with their daily shower routines. Or they're trying to get away from soaps and haven't mastered their routine yet. I notice you don't mention liberals or conservatives or communists or fascists who smell bad to you. Are you saying that only libertarians smell bad? Are you saying that every libertarian you have known smells bad? BTW, how do you know that you don't stink to (some) other people? Are you that sure that you don't?
Aren't all normal people "rigorous" about taking daily showers with water, at least? Who can even wake up in the morning without showering? Wake up, drag self to bathroom. Sit down. Pee. Poo. Turn on shower, brush teeth while it gets hot, get into shower, and wash from nose to tail with water, hands and nails. Shave under the running water (no gels or shaving creams, just a disposable razor and the running water to wash the shaved hair away. No need for a mirror. Just feel your face with your hand, and shave anything you missed. Keep going until it's smooth as a baby's behind. Turn off water, dry. Iron shirt and put on. Iron pants and put on. (Underwear is useless.) Put on belt and cinch it. Put on socks. Slip on loafers (shoes one must tie are a waste of time), go get eggs (with black pepper) and rye toast (with butter) and steamed spinach (with butter), and drink water (with a couple of slices of lemon in it). That is how the day begins for everybody, isn't it? Who out there DOESN'T shower ever day?
I know. Especially during warm weather. The funk builds up so much faster in summer. In hot weather, two showers a day isn't a bad idea. And some people need it more than others do. I've read a few articles by doctors who say they don't shower every day in the colder months. It sounds like they do shower every day during hot weather, any time they've perspired. As for deodorant, do you think the product actually produces armpit stains on clothing from sweat or are those stains left by deodorant use as it is carried out of the armpit by perspiration. Some people say that they don't get sweat stains on their clothing nearly as much if they don't use deodorant. Deodorants - modern aluminum-based ones - essentially try to plug the pores in your underarms so you can't sweat as much so you are blocking your body's attempt to cool itself and to give that part of your skin proper respiration. So do you get sweat stains on the armpits of your summer shirts or has stopping deodorant use left your shirts with fewer sweat stains on them? How long did it take for you to transition from using deodorant before you noticed a reduction in the ranker kind of perspiration that most people seem to get if they stop using modern deodorants. Anyway, I get the impression that many people think they perspire more and stink a little more for 2-3 weeks after they give up deodorant. And most people are now saying that the natural non-aluminum deodorants you can buy in the yuppie boutiques or make for yourself don't work and actually makes them stink of the natural deodorant mixture they use. I know I'm being nosy but I have the feeling you're not shy on the subject. You didn't comment on the cold-showers people yet. So are you gung-ho for cold or cool or warm or hot showers? Do you think there are health benefits to cool or cold showers?
I sweat a lot. Always did. When I get hot, or I have the sun in my eyes (I'm designed to live on a glacier, not in sunny climes), the sweat starts to pour. Doesn't matter if I'm fat or skinny. Sweat pours on my. So my whole torso - chest, back, pits, plus crotch and ass - everything gets sweaty. When it dies, there's a white residue of salt on my clothes, and if I don't change them, that will make my armpits raw and give me terrible chafing down between my legs. The only way to stop that from happening is to get in a pool or wash off with lots of water, and change into clean dry clothes. Cotton is better than anything else. Synthetic fibers is worst of all, because that not only accumulates the sweat and damp and accelerates the chafing, but also starts to reek. Cotton is best. Synthetic is worst. Silk doesn't breath. Linen is heavy. Obviously, the BEST thing to do when it's hot is walk around naked, but you can generally only do that at home when the kids aren't around.
If I'm hot enough, I sweat heavy like anyone. But I don't sweat as quickly as others do in heat and I don't sweat as much doing the same amount of work. Probably there's a limit to the value of comparing an ectomorph like me with an endomorph like you. And genetics play a huge role, no doubt. Much of our physical being and potential is dictated from the moment of conception. There is no assembly line, turning out blank human clones, all identical copies. We all have significant enough differences in heritage that we can't pretend what works for one will work for another. Yet we so often think that there are universal answers. Even so, I obviously found your remarks on hygiene interesting enough to recall them after this long. And your diet ideas are interesting too though you go further than I would (like fasting more than 5 weeks). I would say that at my weight, trying to fast for 40 days would be reckless. Or your fondness for the more acrid foods like the old Nordic and French cheeses or sardines. I don't doubt they are probably good for you though. I think we can all agree at least that American cheeses are an abomination. I'm not a huge cheese fan but I think I should be able to buy unpasteurized cheeses. Certainly, with basic food precautions, they are far far safer than buying whole raw milk and drinking it unpasteurized. America needs to allow unpasteurized cheeses. They are not any more dangerous than, say, putting fresh mayonnaise in potato salads during warm weather. And that can make people sick. But only if they are careless about food safety. I'll bet you can find some shocking jars of old crusty mayonnaise in people's refrigerators but it doesn't seem to make anyone sick to allow mayonnaise made with eggs to be sold widely.
I don't worry about food hygeine. If it's not gross to me, I won't get sick. And I really never do. I have a set of routine foods that I circulate through every week. I live by the Sound here, so every week I have a dosen fresh local oysters. Most days I have a plank of Salmon - I know the Alaska wild caught stuff is supposed to be "better" but the quality Atlantic farmed stuff from Scotland and Norway, is so much richer, that's what I eat - raw with soy, olive oil and dill. And scallops. Two nights a week I'll pan fry sea scallops in coconut oil - no breading. Spinach and collard greens, salad and broccoli, Grapefruit and black berries. Eggs and rye toast for breakfast. I've pretty much singled out all of my favorite foods and eat them over and over. With all that good food, I'm still too fat, but this is a fuction of calorie intake exceeding output. I think the best weight loss program - something I'd set up somewhere if I had millions, was a place where the food was simple, and served to everybody, and the physical activity was sex, all day, at will. Obviously avoiding disease and all that would be a major undertaking, and the place would end up being a fat farm version of Epstein's little island. Still, that would be a very enjoyable way to lose weight and get exercise. I'll call it "Lucifer's Far Farm" The only dairy will be unpasteurised live-served human milk. Mmmmm mmmmm good. _Objection, your honor!' - Lucifer
I've never lived anywhere near the fresh fish markets on the coasts. I'm not wild about fish but I do wish I had had more opportunity to buy quality seafood. I'm sure you know the stories about how much fake fish gets sold in America. I think the feds know all about it and just don't enforce their own laws. The full brunt of those laws must be brought to bear on Amish guys selling a little raw milk though. But you can reprocess tilapia and sell it as shrimp or lobster or salmon and no one ever goes to jail. But those Amish don't vote generally and they don't make political contributions like seafood company execs do. I was upset today, wasn't careful, lost my appetite and ate nothing. And got a sinus headache. Sometimes I wonder if I have more of these days than I realize or recall. It's a real problem if you find yourself forcing yourself to eat. Grapefruit and other citrus tends to give me painful acid stomach. I like broccoli most any way except cooked to death and turned to mush (the only way it was served to us as kids). I like spinach leaves in salads but don't recall eating spinach cooked ever other than some kind of rancid vinegary mess that looked like cat vomit that my mother cooked a few times when I was a kid. Tasted just awful. As with her cooking of sauerkraut a few times, I took my plate and went outside so I wouldn't have to smell it. The whole house just stunk IMO. I can't imagine you are eating anything as gross as that. You mentioned boiling spinach and collard greens. I can't even picture that as anything other than a soggy mess with too strong a taste. But maybe I've misjudged it simply based on bad food prep. Yet I know my mother's family, German and Norwegian types, did their own kraut and horseradish and pickled stuff when she was growing up. So she certainly knew what was considered standard fare for kraut or spinach dishes. And it was all so overcooked, like so much food back in the day. It was only after I grew up that I started liking some of these foods because I never knew when I was a kid that they could be prepared as anything but overcooked and distasteful dishes.
When I want Pacific Salmon, I order it from my favorite supplier in Alaska (Vital Choice). When I want salmon caviar, I go to our Russian Market ("Made in USSR") and I buy a big tub of Siberian salmon caviar, a kilogram of it for about $120. Then I'll just scoop a few tablespoons out of that tub everyday. It's malossol (lightly salted) so it keeps in the fridge for as long as it takes me to eat it (about a week and a half). No way to fake that stuff - there's nothing like it. As far as the Atlantic Salmon goes, because it's all farmed, and I like to eat it raw - and you can only eat fish as sushi if it has been frozen (sushi is NOT an "ancient Japanese food" - the Japanese did not start eating sushi until the invention of freezers) - I get the absolute healthiest Atlantic Salmon around. Whole Foods has a whole set of fish standards that are much higher than the USDA norms, and they have their own Blue Ocean mark whose salmon comes from just two farms - one in Iceland and one in Norway - where the standards are impeccable. No dye. No land-animals in the feed. No antibiotics. The feed is pellets made from the same stuff wild salmon eat. The pens are constructed in state of the art ways to avoid various things. They have other species of fish in the pens do, that do things like eat parasites. It comes frozen, about $22 for pack of 6 four ounce salmon steaks. Nothing looks like that fish. It's pristine. It's buttery with good fat. You can cut it with a fork. Tilapia could never be reworked to look and smell like that in a million years. I toss a steak in the fridge so it will thaw and be cold. Then at night I come home, take my ceramic filet knife and strip the skin off the back (you just have to get it started, it pulls right off). I'll peel away any thin layer of blood line on the fish, and then do one of two things with it: Slice it into sashimi strips, sprinkle organic tamari soy sauce on it, followed by a drizzle of Extra Virgin Olive Oil, and I shake dried dill on it. Then I eat it raw. OR I take the frying pan, melt some French butter in it, heat it to smoking hot, and just flip-flop sear-fry the outside of the salmon in the pan, so the outside is cooked, while the inside is still cool and pink. Then I'll put that on the plate and pour the melted butter on it and eat it just like that. Either way, I want another piece. But I have to watch that, because the dozen blue-point oysters I eat every Wednesday night - right out of the Sound from beds right here in town - SO very fresh! plus the sea scallops pan fried in coconut oil are not mercury free. Salmon isn't either. 12 oysters, 10 sea scallops, and 20 oz of salmon come in just under my weekly mercury limit. And so, alas, I must limit myself to four ounces of salmon. I could eat 20 ounces a sitting. Love the stuff. Where you live, there is Whole Foods, and you can get the good frozen Atlantic Salmon, frozen sea scallops. I'd pass on frozen oysters, but canned smoked oysters (King Oscars) are cheap, and they'll do. Forcing myself to eat? No, that never happens. I love food, of all kinds. Food and drink, women and song. As with all things, one must moderate one's appetites if one does not wish to become massively obese...or have one's brains clubbed out by the wife. Spinach. It's tender. You have to be kind to it. You need to boil it for at least one minute (to get the oxalates out) but no more than two (to keep the potassium and Vitamin C content). Then you pour off the water and either steam it for a little while longer, or just serve it with melted butter. Collards are tougher, so you have to boil them longer, and there's no oxalate issue. Frozen chopped collards are kind of bitter, but if you get the whole leaves an boil them for five minutes, they're essentially cabbage. Eat them with butter and salt. Butter and salt are the key to all stiff vegetables (boiled carrots, boiled rutabaga). Don't want to salt spinach, though, there's already quite a bit of sodium in it. If you use salted butter you don't have to use the salt. Uncooked spinach is too bitter for me. Broccoli - same as collards or carrots: boiled or steamed, with butter and salt. Good! Sorry that citrus upsets you. That's definitely a bummer. Citrus fruits are my second favorites, right after blackberries. Plums and apricots and pears are pretty acceptable. Does pineapple disagree with you?
I just noticed that some of the Atlantic salmon stocked in Walmart is farm-raised in Peru. I've been considering one of those yuppie seafood supply sites that offer to ship various seafood flash-frozen, total tracing of all fish to the ship that caught them, standards for the ships used and nets and so on, and a minimum requirement for how much the fishing crew will make from its catch. The idea being food safety and making sure that the people who risk life and limb catching those fish get paid decently. I can't decide if they're worth it. About $8-$9 for a small salmon filet from Alaska, your choice at that price of which kind of salmon to buy. That's not a bad price in the salmon market. I like the description you give of simple quick preparation too. I tend to neglect cooking if it gets complicated or gets every pot and pan in the house dirty just to prepare it. You make it sound easy and quick but satisfying. Invite me over for a sample. LOL [Don't worry, I'm never close to CT.] Where I live, the nearest Whole Foods is about 250 miles away. I thought they opened one only about 130 miles away but now I recall that was a Hyvee. Hyvee is the next best thing to a Whole Foods store when you're out in the sticks. It would take some planning to buy and transport frozen foods that far. I'd do better just to get it shipped freight in dry ice, I think. You think it is better boiled briefly than just to eat the spinach leaves as a salad? I've adopted an approach of eating vegetables as raw as I can and avoid cooking or even heating them. Well, I sometimes microwave some cheese on to broccoli or cauliflower just for variety and because I like cheese, even crappy American cheeses. I like the spinach leaf salads pretty well but then I tried Wallyworld's newish blend of Kaleslaw recently and was shocked how much I liked it. It had broccoli and red cabbage and kale and carrot strips and some Italian-sounding lettuce. Wow, was that good. Best kale salad I ever tasted. The other kale dishes I've had just taste crappy to me. But the dieticians do tell us that kale is the best source for insoluable fiber so I'm trying to get with the program. I recall cooked spinach that looked and tasted like some cat coughed up a green hairball. It looked bad. It tasted even worse. But then, kids don't like a lot of strong-flavored stuff. And I've never eaten cooked spinach again. For one thing, no one I know of even serves cooked spinach any more. You're the first one I've heard talking about cooked spinach in some years. My experience with collards is very limited. I'll have to look but I don't think they grow it anywhere in my region. It's all shipped in but I think I've seen it for sale here. I know it is popular with the healthfoods set. I'll have to look around and see if they have a small bag of it for me to sample at the local grocery. Maybe it'll be like the kale and I'll find I really like it. Damn, that kaleslaw mix is good for the price. One of the cheaper salad mixes but good flavor, easy chewing, works well with a wide variety of dressings. It sounds dumb but, if you get a chance, pick up a bag of it sometime for a change in your salad routine. If it can get past my taste buds, it will probably please most anyone. Citrus always makes my stomach acidy if I have it on an empty stomach. It can make me acidy even if I just drink orange juice after eating a full breakfast and I'll have heartburn all morning. Needless to say, I'm not fond of citrus even if I do like the taste. I just hate having a sour growling stomach over a crappy little glass of OJ. Pulped or not, it just doesn't agree with me much even with the sugar they put in it. And a really sour citrus like grapefruit, well, I don't think I ever ate more than a bite or two of it in my life. My dad called it rabbit food and thought it was only for women. I didn't understand why the women would eat it because I thought it tasted blandly bad and sour. I do like pineapple and it doesn't usually sour me but there aren't a lot of pineapple dishes I like. I did really enjoy a yuppie restaurant my brother took me to where they were roasting whole pineapples on a portable grill and then would cut big slices and serve them directly on your plate. That was the best pineapple dish I ever had but I can't imagine grilling pineapple at home. I also can get acidy from tomato. I love Heinz ketchup and rich marinara spaghetti sauces so I like tomato flavor, just not the raw product. But if cooked, I love tomato soup or chile or most any cooked tomato sauce dish. And I don't get sour stomach from a cooked tomato product. It's almost embarrassing to see how much spaghetti I can down with a rich marinara sauce with spicy Italian sausage. People stare if I eat it in public. Then I have to walk out looking like an anaconda just swallowed a small goat. But I love the pasta dishes and treat myself now and then.
With fruit, I just eat the raw fruit. Not juices - there's more in the fruit, and it's m and it' and it's m and it's much more filling. Fruit's perfect. As far as spinach goes, calorie for calorie, it's the single most nutritious vegetabl vegeta vegetabl vegetable. Calorie for calorie, Sockeye salmon is the single most nutritious meat. Calorie for calorie, salmon roe is the single most nutritious egg. And in truth, except for two micronutrients, one could meet all of one's daily re requi re requirements eating just salmon and spinach. But sockeye doesn't taste as good as Atlantic salmon. And raw spinach has a lot of oxalates in it, which can cause kidney stones in pe people who get them, which is why you boil it for a couple of minutes (no lo longer, and pour off the water: the oxalates come right out of it.
Took me a long time to figure that out. I did already switch to fresh fruit. I just got home with some fresh black grapes from Mexico. They look deeeee-lish. I've heard that before. Offhand, do you know if cooked spinach is better than just eating spinach leaves as a salad? Not that I'll go buy any right away. I just bought some kaleslaw and it's my current fave. I did notice various collard greens there at WallyCommieWorld, several grades of produce. Prices weren't too bad but I already had grabbed my kaleslaw. Maybe next time. The collard greens remind me of those dandelion salads. That stuff always reminds me of the hundreds of millions of similar weedish-looking plants that I used to spray and kill. I'm kind of a serial killer of certain species. Never had the Sockeye, going to try the Alaskan in my first online order I think. And I've read that salmon aficionados do prefer the stronger flavor of the Sockeye. I have read that before. From actual dietitians, not salmon/spinach industry promotional ads. Never seen it, never heard of it. I guess this is the caviar of mama salmons? Surprising you don't prefer the Sockeye. Everyone talks about the stronger fish flavor and given your predilection for mackerel-snapping and sardine-gobbling, I thought that would be your fave. I hope it doesn't happen with the spinach leaves for salads. I think those are pre-washed and ready to eat. I buy the boxed stuff usually and they say it is ready to eat and pre-washed. I know people who think those pre-washed greens are a little acidic or the flavor is just a little off from the wash they use.
The oxalates are a natural part of the structure of the plant. When you cook the spinach, even for a short time (2 minutes), the tissues break and the oxalates are released into the water. so you can pour them away. Of course, if you don't get kidney stones, I suppose you don't have to worry about them. I've always liked spinach, right back to popeye as a little kid, so I'm partial to it, cooked. I don't know if I would get kidney stones or not, but I just like it cooked with butter in any case. I really don't like kale. The hard crinkly aspect of it reminds me of thistles. Of course kale and collards are just two different kinds of cabbage, as is bok choy. My favorite cabbage is, well, just plain cabbage, boiled all to hell, with butter and salt and a little mustard. Truth is, my daily vegetables are about a half pound of cooked spinach at breakfast, and a pound of romaine and arugula with blue cheese at lunch. I prefer Atlantic Salmon to all of the Pacific Salmons because the Atlantic Salmon is the fattiest, and the meat is just silky smooth on account of that. It's...unctuous. I like that.
You and me both! And yet I still grow it for my wife (she's a health nut). I grow a variety of Tuscan kale, also known as dinosaur kale, that gets it's name from "the hard crinkly aspect" you describe. Too bad you aren't closer. I'd send a steady supply of collards your way. The leaves are the size of elephant ears. First year to try them and I'm hooked. My main crop is carrots. I grow hundreds of pounds of Bolero storage carrots that are kept in the ground until the last possible moment (ground freeze or snow). What my family doesn't eat will be traded for hay for my cows.
Grow blackberries. You need at least two bushes so they cross pollinate. The champagne of berries. So healthy, so good.
#138. To: Vicomte13 (#137)
I do! They aren't exactly native to Maine. I grow Prime-Ark Freedoms in a greenhouse and this year is looking good for berries.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest"Many theorists, from Rand to Rothbard"
#61. To: A Pole (#60)
I am not sure if they are smarter, but they take bath less frequently. My sense of smell tells me that.
#62. To: Tooconservative (#61)
(Edited)
You sniff a lot of libertarians?
#63. To: A Pole, Vicomte13 (#62)
I worked with two (in IT, they were quite competent), and I had a neighbor next flat (he was a biochemist). They all smelled from a distance.
#77. To: Tooconservative (#63)
Most of the no-soap/no-poo/no-antiperspirant types are very rigorous about daily showers with water.
#79. To: Vicomte13 (#77)
Who out there DOESN'T shower ever day?
#86. To: Tooconservative (#79)
#89. To: Vicomte13, A Pole (#86)
(Edited)
I sweat a lot. Always did. When I get hot, or I have the sun in my eyes (I'm designed to live on a glacier, not in sunny climes), the sweat starts to pour.
#109. To: Tooconservative (#89)
#114. To: Vicomte13 (#109)
I have a set of routine foods that I circulate through every week. I live by the Sound here, so every week I have a dosen fresh local oysters. Most days I have a plank of Salmon - I know the Alaska wild caught stuff is supposed to be "better" but the quality Atlantic farmed stuff from Scotland and Norway, is so much richer, that's what I eat - raw with soy, olive oil and dill.
Spinach and collard greens, salad and broccoli, Grapefruit and black berries. Eggs and rye toast for breakfast. I've pretty much singled out all of my favorite foods and eat them over and over. With all that good food, I'm still too fat, but this is a function of calorie intake exceeding output.
#121. To: Tooconservative (#114)
It's a real problem if you find yourself forcing yourself to eat.
#122. To: Vicomte13 (#121)
As far as the Atlantic Salmon goes, because it's all farmed, and I like to eat it raw - and you can only eat fish as sushi if it has been frozen (sushi is NOT an "ancient Japanese food" - the Japanese did not start eating sushi until the invention of freezers) - I get the absolute healthiest Atlantic Salmon around.
It comes frozen, about $22 for pack of 6 four ounce salmon steaks.
Where you live, there is Whole Foods, and you can get the good frozen Atlantic Salmon, frozen sea scallops. I'd pass on frozen oysters, but canned smoked oysters (King Oscars) are cheap, and they'll do.
Spinach. It's tender. You have to be kind to it. You need to boil it for at least one minute (to get the oxalates out) but no more than two (to keep the potassium and Vitamin C content). Then you pour off the water and either steam it for a little while longer, or just serve it with melted butter.
Collards are tougher, so you have to boil them longer, and there's no oxalate issue. Frozen chopped collards are kind of bitter, but if you get the whole leaves an boil them for five minutes, they're essentially cabbage. Eat them with butter and salt.
Sorry that citrus upsets you. That's definitely a bummer.
#126. To: Tooconservative (#122)
#130. To: Vicomte13 (#126)
With fruit, I just eat the raw fruit. Not juices - there's more in the fruit, and it's m and it' and it's m and it's much more filling. Fruit's perfect.
As far as spinach goes, calorie for calorie, it's the single most nutritious vegetabl vegeta vegetabl vegetable.
Calorie for calorie, Sockeye salmon is the single most nutritious meat.
Calorie for calorie, salmon roe is the single most nutritious egg.
But sockeye doesn't taste as good as Atlantic salmon.
And raw spinach has a lot of oxalates in it, which can cause kidney stones in pe people who get them, which is why you boil it for a couple of minutes (no lo longer, and pour off the water: the oxalates come right out of it.
#131. To: Tooconservative (#130)
#136. To: Vicomte13 (#131)
I really don't like kale. The hard crinkly aspect of it reminds me of thistles.
#137. To: watchman (#136)
Replies to Comment # 137. Grow blackberries.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 137.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]