Just a few quick opportunities to comment or send letters letting the newspapers know that even though they praise all the early work of the new administration, it still comes down to destruction of wealth regardless of their wishing or the fact that it was done by their favorite pragmatic politician versus the previous bunch of pragmatic politicians.

The newspapers seem to have an answer to the statement, “Bush had a stimulus and a bailout package and they aren’t working.” Their answer is, sure he handed out money, but there was no oversight, no federal controls on the recipients of the money. First this is false, there were controls. Second, and most importantly, government controls and regulations and other meddling with the economy are the primary cause of this mess. So their idea is that to make the economy work we must become more efficient at destroying wealth.

Here are a couple Inquirer and Daily News stories that are praising the destruction of wealth and productivity as good things:

• Will billions fix what ails us?
• Editorial: Greenhouse Gas Emissions

We are setting up for a perfect storm. Inflationary policies caused the dot-com bubble, the solution was of course to redouble the easy money policies to get out of the emergency which has caused the housing bubble. The solution to this is now apparently to deal with the emergency by looting even more money to spread around and solve the problem. Combine this with the arbitrary assertion of global warming, or climate change if you prefer, and the government will not only steal every dollar produced by our businesses but also make it illegal for them to produce because it is allegedly destroying the planet.

The answers are not hard to come by, just apparently hard to accept. The government exists to protect individual rights, and that is it. When it tries to cure any, let alone every, social and economic problem it necessarily violates some peoples rights in favor of others.

The January 21st New York Times article, “How Green is my Orange?” reveals the environmentalists most holy sacrament.

The article shows giants of production, like PepsiCo, are sacrificing their time and ability calculating and reducing carbon emissions in an attempt to avoid being a victim of governmental mandates.

You may wonder at the nature of the atrocity committed by PepsiCo that would require governmental retribution and demands such atonement. They are cowering in fear because they have committed the only mortal sin recognized by environmentalists, they produce life sustaining nourishment for man. While their efforts at reconciliation are to be applauded, they are insufficient.

The highest virtue and grace of environmentalism can only be achieved by the complete sacrifice of man and his values to the pure untouched wilds of nature.

Listening to a story about the SEC persecuting Apple because Steve Jobs is in poor health on the WSJ daily read, They compared it to a situation with HP where a director resigned. According to the article, “Under securities laws a company needs to disclose the reasons if a director leaves over a disagreement about company policy.”

Is the persecution of a company about a sick CEO or for the specific reasons behind a high level persons resignation an example of the “atmosphere of deregulation and deference to industry” I’ve been hearing so much about?

After seeing lots of information from smart people. I decided to challenge some nutritional ideas I had implicitly accepted. One major step on that road was reading Good Calories, Bad Calories by Gary Taubes. He does an excellent job exploring the evidence and reasons behind the idea that saturated fat leads to heart disease. He also puts forth a compelling argument against the use of refined carbohydrates in the diet.

Based on my research I have decided to refine my eating habits and have decided the following general rules.

• When in doubt eat meat (BACON!) and vegetables, protein and fat are good.
• Make a special effort to eat high quality food. ¹
• Avoid Refined carbs (sugar, grain, tastycakes, Pez, ColdStone)
• Avoid most vegetable oils (olive oil is good stuff)
• Mostly avoid artificial sweeteners (I had been consuming quite a bit daily)

These “rules” came out of research and out of experimentation that started in late September of 2008. The first observation that came from avoiding refined carbs was to avoid the energy roller coaster. Although this term doesn’t quite capture the feeling I had. I had never felt like I have had too much energy, the extremes I felt were enough energy to survive, and I can’t keep my head up. After a few painful days at the outset where I dealt with headaches and a general feeling of disorientation, I have noticed a good general level of energy all of the time. I have run many experiments and spent time finding foods I enjoy, and seeing the effect on my mood, energy level, and stomach. This was the time I came up with those rules. And then I decided to apply them rigorously in 2009 starting on the 5th.

The most noteworthy result is in that time I have lost 6 lbs, have been to the gym once, and have eaten as much as I wanted. This can’t be overstated. I am experienced at weightloss and I have never lost any without feeling hungry and dissatisfied at the end of most of my meals, having frequent headaches and suffering through frequent boring repetitive workouts.

I have noted a few other immediate benefits as well. I have discovered a whole host of foods I really enjoy. I have saved some money by packing my lunch more frequently than usual. I have surprisingly and quickly reached a point where I don’t have the emotional desire to eat sugary foods. And best of all, I feel good, and I can see that I will start to feel even better when I get my workout integrated into my routine.

I’ve recently enjoyed reading a few posts and resulting comment conversation on parenting methods using positive discipline techniques. Discipline Update, On Positive Discipline, and Positive Discipline and Rational Self Interest.

One of the most useful thoughts in there is the recommendation to, “assume positive intent.” Meaning that the child is not being difficult as an act of malice, they are trying to fulfill some need of their own.

The other idea I really clung to is, “obedience is not a virtue.” I like to look at parenting as training my replacement. They start out small and helpless, and parents need to do everything for them. But the goal from the outset is for them to grow into full independent people capable of selecting and achieving their own values. This is part of the reason I am a maniac on the answering of “Why?”

The other new tool I have been experimenting with for months now is “Thinking on Paper” as presented by Jean Moroney. I’d recommend it to anyone who needs to accomplish vague goals in any aspect of their life, or in David Allen’s words, people who need to “make it up and make it happen.” The benefits explained here:

“Thinking on Paper” is a general purpose thinking tactic you can use to help you:

• concentrate
• hold in mind the wider context
• guide thinking purposefully toward the goal
• quickly return to a train of thought after an interruption
• stay calm and in control, even when the subject seems overwhelming

I’ve found it particularly useful as a quick tool to deal with interruptions. When working and a co-worker comes in, with full marching band in tow, to trample your thought process. I ask them to wait one minute, I dump my state to paper or an editor. Typically this is writing 2 or 3 full sentences about what I am thinking or what exactly I was planning to do next.

Now I can give my full attention to the new problem of herding everyone out of my office as quickly and efficiently as possible. When I return to my work, I can regain my prior mental state by simply reading the sentences I had written. It beats groping blindly, for all the scattered threads of thought, by a mile.