Much Ado about Diet

[I think I'll dispense with the original title of this post, which was "Wacky Way to Save Money #7: Eating Cat Food" (Betcha thought I'd have abandoned this whole wacky way thing back in November...nope...I'm way too stodgy and Germanic for that...I've also had my sense of humor surgically removed without my knowledge, says my husband. Oh, no, it was bred out, says I...long about the time the Reformation hit).

The post in a nutshell was going to say, go read the ingredients in your pet's food bag, realize that those are actually the cheapest and healthiest things in the market, and stock your pantry with those. Well, I was wrong, so let's move on (Whew! Dodged that one!).
So--on with the actual post!]

Our cat is fat.

So fat, in fact, that every person to visit our house in the last year, be they friend or family member, has remarked, almost without variation in diction, "That is one fat cat." My response is usually something like, "Oh, we've tried to put her on a diet..." to which one friend of the family deadpanned, "Too late." Well...what is she eating?

I checked the bag: Chicken, chicken by-product meal (yum), corn meal, corn grits, chicken meal, dried beet pulp, dried egg product, natural chicken flavor, sodium bisulfate, potassium chloride, fish oil, DL-Methionine, brewer's dried yeast, choline chloride, calcium carbonate, vitamins [list of vitamins]. Yeah, that's the reaction I had. Not much of an article. Then the whole idea got shelved for awhile, 'cuz life got busy (as it always does). But there's nothing like chronic pain to get your attention.

I thought it was just the typical late-winter cold. Heck, I might even have had the flu. I certainly wouldn't have noticed the difference. I just felt old. Stiff, sore, creaky, cranky, perpetually fatigued, with sore places in my teeth, back, and knees. Now granted I wasn't doing anything to help my health. I was staying up late on the Internet, eating all the calories I could get my hands on (to feed the baby), and just trying to get my work done around the house. And while I'm not overweight, I sure felt bloated, even after a BM. Constipation had become my constant companion, and with the onset of seasonal allergies, I felt like I had been hit by a truck. Then one day the chest pain hit. Oh, crap, I thought. What the heck is this pain?

It bothered me so much, I parked the kids with sweet Rachel (who is surely some angel sent from God, in the form of a friend), and went to urgent care. They took blood, did a chest x-ray and EKG. Everything turned out normal. We discussed gall bladder disease (since my husband had had that, and the pain didn't start until I ate a loaded-with-hydrogenated-fat turnover from the store), which tends to hit women after they've had a few kids.. But I can't say I was convinced. Perhaps this was some kind of stealth angina. It surely wasn't in my head. I felt like I had a box on my chest, and the feeling didn't go away in a few hours or a few days.

The one person I hadn't talked with yet was my midwife (the one who says I gave Tom the milk allergy. Why's she always telling me things I don't want to hear? Like..."Push!"). She said my labs had always been normal, and poo-poohed the idea of gallbladder disease. "With all the allergies in your family, you might have a wheat allergy," she said. What? She then went on to describe how she and her epileptic husband had felt soooo much better on a wheat-free diet and he had even stopped seizing. Yeah, right, I thought. We had a good conversation, but I didn't give any credence to the wheat idea until the next time I sat at my computer and Googled "gall bladder disease." I read for about an hour but nothing clicked. The next day, I thought about how Mary had been right about the whole allergy thing and felt like a heel for doubting her. So I googled "wheat allergy," and then narrowed it to "food intolerance". What I found blasted my socks off, but as usual if I post all my newfangled ideas in one breath, as it were, I might phrase it the wrong way, or sound too credulous. So I'll think about it a bit more while I brew up my findings.

***

So now I've had time to think and, while I would prefer to get my thoughts down in a traditional, organized, scholarly fashion, I do most things on the fly nowadays, so here goes...

Food is important. I think everybody agrees on that. I mean, people in third world countries are starving because rice (and wheat) is so expensive now. And I think it safe to say that we rely on grains more than any other food source. After all, it doesn't take much space to plant a bountiful vegetable garden (at least, a square foot garden). And we would all benefit from having a fruit or nut tree in our yards. But who can grow wheat by themselves? I mean, don't we need wheat (and corn, rice, dairy cows, and soybeans) to live? Well, it's an open question.

Alert readers may have noticed me touting a three-to-six month emergency food pantry to economize on grocery bills. And while this all seemed like common sense to me, I didn't take into account varied diets and the importance to health of a variety of fresh food. I really don't want the lawsuits of people who've followed my advice and lived on shelf-stable canned food and flour that was at least three month old. There's more to this issue than saving money--however that might go against the (tightwad) grain.

After I had my pain episode described above, I found a particular diet on the Internet that helped me. And while I don't want to tout the benefits of one diet guru or philosophy over another, I found a high likelihood that food allergies were causing problems for more people in our family than just my son Tom. This particular diet requires the consumption of more fresh, whole foods, as do others that endorse whole foods, raw foods, sprouting/fermentation along with the shunning of all processed (read: shelf-stable) food that you buy at the grocery store. Which presents us with a problem.

What do you stock your pantry with, if you're dependent on whole/fresh/raw/otherwise perishable foods? My aim here is not only to minimize cost, but to maximize nutrition, as well as to provide a measure of security in tough times. Can any of these foods be stored? For how long?(This is just brainstorming here, so if you have experience in this area, please give me your suggestions):

1. Dried fruits, vegetables, and meat: Many whole natural foods can be successfully preserved by dehydration. Consider buying a dehydrator if you have abundant garden produce or a fruit tree.

2. Pickled or canned preserves and vegetable relishes (home canned, store-bought if necessary): Look for low/no sugar and no preservatives. Includes sauerkraut or other pickled greens. Organic would be great.

3. Whole grains: brown rice, wheat berries, whole oats, barley, lentils, and beans may be stored in a cool, dark, dry place, such as a root cellar. Soak overnight in warm water, then cook gently.

4. Frozen meats and stocks: Assuming you have an extra freezer, you can preserve many kinds of food, including raw nuts and seeds, extra loaves of bread, or specialty flours.

5. Certain fresh vegetables of the winter/root variety can be stored in the ground or in a cool, dark cellar: Such as potatoes, sweet potatoes, onions, turnips, rutabagas, carrots, squash. I read somewhere that you can pack them in sand as well (A root cellar can be a waterproof garbage can half-buried in the ground and covered with leaves).

6. Specialty products: Such as powdered goat/cow milk, soy/rice milks in shelf-stable containers, baking mixes, spices and seasonings, chocolate, sweeteners, tea and coffee, etc.

Whew! That's a longer list than I expected. It seems that building a food pantry makes sense no matter what diet you're on.

One more thought about the higher cost of "healthy" food. Nobody wants to pay less for their food than me, I assure you. I've spent four years creating the ultimate tightwad-from-scratch kitchen. But are potential health problems worth it in the long haul? Were my food policies harming my family? Perhaps. By buying only what was on sale, clearance, or markdown, I was always buying the oldest of the old. I thought it couldn't be unhealthy because I was always cooking from scratch (or because I grew up on processed cheese and canned tomato soup). But since then I've widened my view...it makes more sense to pay a little more now for the highest quality food you can find, rather than risk ill health, reduced quality of life, and higher medical bills later.

Wacky Way to Save Money #6: In the Mattress

It is a fact that banks fail.

In fact, banks are failing all over the place--Bear Stearns is just the one currently in the news. So why is the Fed (in the form of a $2-a-share JP Morgan buyout) bailing out Bear? Why is this such a big deal?

[Granted, this is a complex subject. Technical analysts, hedge fund honchos--try not to laugh at me. My job is to simply give the best "housewife" analysis I can, to try to cut through the crud and tell you how it's gonna affect your family's bottom line. The stupendously detailed analysis is going to have to give way to a quick-and-dirty this time. You can thank me in the combox;)]

The deal is, our whole banking system is shot. You think you have money in the bank. Your statement comes in the mail or you call and the bank tells you you have thus-and-so. You go to the ATM and pull out $20 or $40 at a time. You go buy groceries and swipe your card. Your employer sends your "paycheck" over the wires--and it's supposed to land (chink-chink-chink) in your bank "account". Theoretically you could go and ask for the whole balance and they'd have to hand you a stack of cash. Right?

Uh-oh.

If people started doing that tomorrow, the scene down at your local branch would resemble a mill strike more than It's a Wonderful Life. Fact is, the money's not there. How can a bank that is billions in debt hand you your measly thousands? Maybe they could do it for the first couple dozen people. But the vaults would quickly empty out. What then?

That's basically what happened to Bear. Its creditors (other banks and private investors) saw the blood in the water...they called and tried to get their money out. As word got out, the tide kept going out faster and faster...until on Friday Bear Stearns suspended its redemptions, which can only mean it's going broke--it's "vault" was practically empty. Now it's Sunday night, which should be a dead zone for financial news, and the wires are lit up with news of this Fed buyout/bailout. What does it mean for you?

Banks have been allowed, since the 1990's (thank you Mr. Clinton), to sweep out deposits on a nightly basis and lend them out for profit--and in at least 241 cases, rampant speculation. They don't have to keep any of the money on hand that you supposedly have access to. That's the big swindle--"fractional reserve lending." That's why you have $300 daily withdrawal limits at the ATM. You may think you have X amount in the bank but the truth is, what would you do if your debit card no longer worked and the ATM's were down?

What about FDIC? Mish thinks deposit insurance is a moral hazard. It makes every bank seem equally safe, and people just pick the ones that offer the highest returns. Trouble is, a bank that chases yield often makes pretty risky bets. If the Fed isn't big enough to bail out Wall Street, is the FDIC big enough to bail out Main Street? If bank failures increase from a trickle to a flood...the short answer is no.

You should consider hiding a wad of cash somewhere just for emergency running money (maybe not in the mattress). Just stuff it somewhere and forget it. One of the last real deals in "banking" is to get free withdrawals ("cashback") when you buy something. Discipline yourself to pull $20 extra when you go to the store ('cuz of your tightwad ways you have a little extra, right??) and stuff it in an empty can in the pantry. Or tape it to the underside of your bedframe. Or put it in a fireproof safe in your crawlspace. Point is, don't trust your family's daily/weekly operational budget to a bunch of hacks who couldn't care less.

There is only one pharmacy in town that can mix the drug that my son, Tom, needs to keep from throwing up. I went there to pick it up and the gal behind the counter launched into an apologetic speech about how their debit card reader was down...until I pulled out cash. "Oh, you are an angel," she said. No, I'm just a mom who wants to make darn sure my kid gets his medicine.

Not to be paranoid here, but all anybody needs to do if they really want to mess up the world is to create a virus that disables debit card readers. Our vulnerabilities are really frightening, if you stop and think about it.

***

Your money is only as good as your currency. A country's currency is kind of like its "stock." If the country's in good shape, balance sheet's in the black, factories are humming, and people are investing...it shows. Its currency will rise on the world market, and pay more interest to those who invest in it. The downside is, it costs more to borrow a strong currency, and the exports of a strong-currency country are more expensive in weaker currency countries.

If you've heard the dollar is losing value, you've really had your ear to the ground. But it's more likely that you've only just felt it...like looking out on a sunny day, but it feels cloudy. Everybody says they want the dollar to be strong. But you go to the store to buy a loaf of bread...and instead of 1.39, it's 1.79. Milk and cheese cost more. Braces cost more. There's sticker shock at the gas pump almost every day. Wages continue to dwindle, while everything that matters--meat, medicine, gas, heat--goes through the roof. Yeah, you can still get a cheap gadget at Wal-Mart...but for how much longer?

Some economists call it "stagflation". Some just call it deflation. What it means is that you're poorer than ever...while things cost more than ever. And it's all coming down so fast--what happened? We had a strong currency in the late 90's. The strongest we've seen in this country since Nixon took us off the gold standard (the mongrelized gold standard). Then, in order to head off what seemed like a serious recession following the tech boom...the Fed cut interest rates--i.e. they cheapened the dollar--and encouraged banks to lend money like crazy to keep people spending and head off a recession. Well, guess what? They did. They bought houses and cars and big-screen TV's and every stupid thing you can imagine. And the dollar went down...and kept going down. It's hard to measure, but according to some estimates I've read, you could have bought 30% more with a 2001 dollar than with a 2008 dollar. Cheap imports from China disguised the loss in value...but $110/barrel oil and $1000/ounce gold tell the story.

So what do you do? If you've been diligently cutting your expenses and paying off your debts, you might have a nice start on your 6-month emergency account. Take the trouble to protect it from a fall in the currency. It took some quick action on pur part last fall to avoid the 10% haircut we've taken in the dollar in the past six months. Only 1/3 of our emergency account is left in the bank. One third is in gold and silver. The rest is in foreign currency.

You can pick a "safe" money market (like Vanguard Prime Money Market Fund--supposedly "bulletproof", according to Money magazine). You can seek out a good, solvent bank that offers at least a 4% interest rate on deposits or CD's (good luck). You can buy silver dollars at the junk shop. My advice is to just spread it around...dig around and look for things that will keep pace with or exceed the inflation rate, which is around 4%. I feel pretty stupid for keeping so much money parked at WaMu for a measly .24%. But I can't really get around the fact that I need to have some money in a place where I can go and make a wire transfer or write and deposit checks. That's basically what banks are good at--moving money around. Too bad they're butterfingers when it comes to lending and "investing" it.

One caveat...do your homework. Don't put money where you're not confident you can preserve it. If in doubt, just keep it in the bank--but don't go over the FDIC limit. While you're at it, gather all your valuables and important documents and just get a little dinky safe from Wal-Mart and keep all that stuff in there. Fireproof is best, but secure and portable has its advantages. I personally don't want it to look like I have Fort Knox in my basement.

***

Realize that currency isn't money. "The long-term value of all fiat currencies is zero," says Bill Bonner, the very Catholic editor of The Daily Reckoning. And whatever I may think of his religious leanings, he's been proven right by history. When Jesus walked the earth in Judea, the Roman empire was being rocked by currency devaluation. It always causes social unrest and economic hardship. It's always the refuge of a panicked, insolvent empire on the verge of collapse.

"There's a war on the middle class," you might hear--on Fox News or elsewhere. What does that mean? When your wages are stagnant or falling, and your taxes and expenses keep going up while your savings, stocks, and real estate are going down, you're being bled. Someone is getting the money...but it isn't you. Somehow you find enough to live on, but it seems like less every year. That's because it is. The numbers all seem right, but it doesn't add up. That's the curse of inflation. Everything's just fine, say the government, banks, and advertisers. Go ahead and buy...no interest, same as cash. Lowest mortgage rates in years. They say that because they're the first to benefit from a devalued currency. But there's a trickle-down effect. By the time inflation trickles down to the little guy, his income might have risen a little bit...but his expenses have risen more than his wage. The stock market seems alright, but when you price it in gold, it's going straight into the toilet.

A paper currency is only an IOU. It's at the mercy of a central bank that can raise or lower interest rates at will, strengthening or weakening the currency as they deem the situation requires. You are better off with a weaker dollar, they say, than with a recession. Your wages may be smaller, but at least you still have a job. You may, as a taxpayer, have to bail out Bear Stearns...but that's better than enduring the financial winter that may set in if all the big banks fall like dominoes.

Gold and silver have always been the only real money. Up until the 60's, in this country, our coins were 90% silver and a dollar bill said "silver certificate" instead of Federal Reserve Note. Once upon a time we had American gold coins, that clinked and chinked in people's pockets along with their peace dollars and Indian head nickels. A sound monetary system--that's what our prosperity was built on. Not fixed interest rates and Federal Reserve notes. We had real prosperity because gold was a demanding mistress--she demanded we balance our budgets and pay our debts. And she threw us out on our ear when we didn't. People decided this last part was just a bit too painful. But I wonder what they would say now.

There are many ways to own precious metals, depending on what you're comfortable with. This isn't a technical guide so much as a philosophy (for details and further research, you can check out American Gold Exchange). It isn't too late to own gold. But plunking down $1000 for an ounce is a bit intimidating at this stage in the market. I wouldn't recommend that. First, I would just say, learn a little bit about money and the history of money. Bill Bonner, Mish, and Michael Hodges know a little about it. Do your darnedest to save and cut expenses. The more cheaply you can live, the better you will fare if things really get bad (how many people will drive an hour to work at a $10 an hour job if gas hits $5 a gallon? $6?).

Consider investing in a few silver dollars here and there (they may seem expensive, but you're spending "play money" and getting real money). You can find them at pawn and junk shops. There are places on the Net that sell "junk silver," old coins from the '20's, '30's, '40's, and '50's. If you have a chunk of change you need to park somewhere, consider Everbank and their MarketSafe CD's. They've been offering 5-year CD's tied to the price of gold and silver, that are FDIC insured. If you're into stocks, the gold ETF (GLD) has been doing very well. Mining stocks are still undervalued, if you're after bigger gains. But these are more speculative. I think, for the housewife who's just trying to take care of her family, the three-to-six month food pantry is an excellent investment on its own. After all, you can't eat gold and silver coins. These are just things you can do if all your other bases are covered.

Even as we contemplate all the places we can store wealth, let us remember to have a spirit of poverty. That wealth is ostensibly there for your family's security, not to buy new furniture or take vacations in retirement. The more money we have, I hope the more we would give. The more secure we feel, I hope the more joy and generosity will shine out. If we sleep soundly at night, I hope it is in the peace we find after praying the Rosary, not thinking about the Ben Franklins taped to the bed. My focus is practicality, but my only peace lies in prayer. A blessed Palm Sunday to all.

California=Bizarro World

Over yonder, at JimmyAkin.org, Tim Jones has a post up on California's week-old homeschooling crisis. One hour after we discovered this post, we found a phone message from my sister urging us to go to this web site to sign a petition to de-publish the ruling. Done and done.

Assuming you don't know anything about this story, the Jimmy Akin post is a good place to start, because several commenters have left links, relevant Church documents, and clarifications.

Story in a nutshell:

"In a stunning decision affecting thousands of families in California, the California Court of Appeal has issued an opinion finding no legal right to home school. "Parents who fail to [comply with school enrollment laws] may be subject to a criminal complaint against them, found guilty of an infraction, and subject to imposition of fines or an order to complete a parent education and counseling program," wrote Justice H. Walter Croskey whose opinion was joined by the other two members of the appellate panel. The opinion was issued February 28, 2008, in a case titled In re Rachel L., which reversed a Superior Court Judge, Stephen Marpet, who found that "parents have a constitutional right to school their children in their own home."

"The parents of Rachel L. enrolled her in Sunland Christian School, a private home schooling program. In his opinion, Croskey, 75, described what he called the "ruse of enrolling [children] in a private school and then letting them stay home and be taught by a non-credentialed parent."

California Homeschool Network has a synopsis of the situation as well as several informative links.

Here is the comment I left on Jimmy's web site:

"Spent an hour reading up on this last night.

Since posting the above, I came across some more info that clarifies the family's situation. They are NOT child-abusing wackos, they just spanked their kids, is all (which is a prosecutable offense in California, apparently). They have eight kids, and father Philip declares he will not have them in public schools being taught gay propaganda and what-not.

Also Sunland Christian School is an accredited homeschool-type curriculum, which is considered a charter school under the laws of California, but operates much the same as any pre-packaged homeschool curriculum. So Mom is OK with teaching the kids.

Moreover, the genius judges who decided this case did not invite any testimony from the school or any home schooling advocates. By referring to this homeschooling situation as a "ruse," the 75-year old senior judge on the panel is accusing homeschooling parents of fraud-- betraying either his complete ignorance of how homeschooling is supposed to work, or the fact that he knows about it and is dead-set against it.

I wish it didn't look this bad, but the more I read, the worse it looked.

Relevant links may be found by Googling "California homeschool news".

I am no lawyer, but I sure hope this gets thrown out by the CA State Supreme Court, and I think it will--but it will take a long time and keep a lot of parents in trepidation.

My advice for Californians who want to have any say in what happens to their kids at this point is...walk. Vote with your feet. Maybe when California is left with only immigrants and welfare recipients will they finally get a clue."

Diligent archive divers may have already discovered that I think this situation is a Blaine shame.

Other than that, the only thing I have to add (in financial parlance) is SELL CALIFORNIA. Sell your property, sell your bonds, get the heck out of there and don't look back:

*property has nowhere to go but down
*unemployment has nowhere to go but up
*cost of living's going up
*taxes are going up
*gas is going up
*wacky rulings like this
*spanking is prosecutable
*teaching gay stuff to your kids is mandatory
*whatever disaster's next in this bizarre state

I predict Church persecution is next, but who the heck am I? Oh yeah, I'm a person who's leaving the coast for the midwest.

The future of food Inflation...and what to do about it

This just in from my investment newsletter source (s):

"Food prices will rise 3-4% in 2008, predicted the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s chief economist Joseph Glauber yesterday. Should his prediction come true, that would spell a whopping 8% inflation rate for food since January 2007.

"While the ethanol boom can be expected to bring higher incomes to farmers and reduce government outlays for farm programs," Glauber suggested at the USDA annual outlook conference, “it will also contribute to higher crop and livestock prices… Overall retail food prices for 2008-2010 are expected to rise faster than the general inflation rate."

"There's going to be real food inflation in this country," added C. Larry Pope, CEO of Smithfield Foods. "I think we need to tell the American consumer that things are going up. We're seeing cost increases that we've never seen in our business."

Chris Mayer, one of my investment guru guys, wrote:

"Grain consumption is at record levels, as I’ve written to you before. We’ll need record harvests to stop draining the world’s declining inventories. And as that margin grows thinner, we risk having actual shortages. So far, we’ve seen large prices for many grains. But what we could see beyond spikes in price are actual shortages.

"Yesterday, the CEO of Nestle gave a similar bleak outlook on finding scarce food-related commodities. Peter Brabeck said that the food industry would have to fight the biofuel industry over access to arable land. “We will not find sufficient water to produce all the crops… there will be a fierce fight for arable land.”

"Another telling move is what’s happening to import duties. Normally, import duties on food protect homegrown producers from outside competition and make the local consumers foot the bill. But governments around the world are suddenly slashing tariffs and import duties on wheat, rice and cooking oil."


You can believe these guys, or not. As I figure it, I'm up 10% on the value of my three-month non-perishable food pantry stash (about half of which we've eaten). In fact, it's saved me so many trips to the store, I think with the added cost of gas and time, I'm up over 15% in three months--that's a better return than the S&P 500 or the Dow has returned so far this decade, especially when priced in gold:





What do you do after your pantry is packed? Try growing your own.

The Feminine Future

"She'd done well to make commander so soon even with the Fleet's steady growth in the face of the Havenite threat, for the life-extending prolong process made for long careers....She'd known and accepted from the start that those with less competence but more exalted bloodlines would race past her. Well, they had, but she'd made it at last. A cruiser command, the dream of every officer worth her salt!"

I'm trying not to hate this book. With all due respect for my husband, who eats up these kinds of novels like little leftover Halloween candy bars--Honor Harrington: On Basilisk Station seems like the kind of book that will give me enough of a rash to sit and write a ten-page critique on it, and then inflict it on my few readers in the form of a blog post. Since I'm short on time and long on sympathy, I'll try and compress my main beef with this genre in a quick rant.

My problem with science fiction that attempts to place women on par with men in a tech-oriented far-flung future is that these characters aren't really women--they're men with boobs and vaginas (and guns). The author stumbles all over himself (or herself, as was the case with Cordelia's Honor) to appear forward-thinking by extrapolating current social and technological trends into the future. The problem with this approach in writing an imagined future history is that trends are just that--flashes in the pan that don't last and are mostly written off to the dustbin of history.

The things about men and women and society that last--for example, the fact that societies not based on the family as basic social unit ultimately fail--seem to be lost on these writers.

This kind of future is far from a feminist one; in fact, it is masculinist in the extreme. There is no place for the feminine in this future. No one nurtures (except the Nanny State). No one is soft. No one makes curtains and cans tomatoes. No one cleans the smudges from a child's face and puts band-aids on boo-boos. What's left is a simply horrifying vision of what happens when the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics meets Brave New World run amok. No wonder the people in these books are always fighting wars and struggling under totalitarian governments. No wonder that whiz-bang technology serves as the replacement for the soft tissues that formerly supported new life. No wonder everyone sees a military career as the apogee of female achievement. Barrenness reigns supreme: and a queen is the overseer of all!

Adding to the absurdity of this form of long-rage extrapolation from what is essentially history's latest fad (feminism), is the fact that you can see from the quote above that the author includes a classist and ageist bias to his future society. Also, no one believes in God (apparently), but everyone uses blasphemies in their everyday speech. These are supposed to add a gritty, realistic tone that today's reader can relate to. On the other hand, gender bias--which has been with us as long as the earth revolves around the sun and is one of the things that EVERYONE can relate to--has been magically resolved.

Ugh. I can't go any further with this. And don't bother to argue about equal rights for women in the combox, because I'm not against that (look to Ladies Against Feminism for a thoroughgoing critique of the failed platform of feminism). I was just starting to think that I was some kind of cave-dwelling fuddy-duddy for preferring Jane Austen movies and homemaking blogs. Dwelling in the past, I thought--and not even a realistic one. But compared with the futures of Honor Harrington, and Cordelia, et al., I far prefer my lavender-scented cave.

This is what I want: stories that don't have an agenda to throw at me about politics, religion, or social issues. I want stories with a fully-fleshed woman character who is strong AND feminine (or at least, doesn't treat her femininity as a weakness or a weapon). I want a future that is positive for women and children. I want a world that offers options for all. True, such a world offers danger and conflict. Our characters must find their way through it. But it has to be more tasty than just a literary can of SPAM.

"It's pulp!" yells my husband in exasperation. "Just live with it!"

*sigh* I know. I'm so hard to please.

(John C. Wright has more meaty discussions of this nature on his LiveJournal.)

We fill the creche after all...

Whew. I never thought I'd be writing this post sitting here with a baby, but here we are. Little Philip Joseph decided to come early...after a bout of gastrointestinal flu that held up the gravy train just long enough to convince the little guy to give up on me, I guess.

Mary says that can happen sometimes. And 37 1/2 weeks was just long enough for her to feel comfortable with having the birth at home. Last week when I had a touch of early labor, she said we'd have to go to the hospital if it didn't stop. She said I should have bed rest for 2 days, but whaddayaknow? My husband got the stuff next, and it laid him up so bad (along with the kids), that I had to be up and about caring for everyone.

So when I started getting more contractions yesterday I just lay still and told Dean I couldn't get up. He tottered around and did his best taking care of the kids while I lay in bed staring at the clock. This went on from early morning until about 2. Finally, the contractions were intense enough so I had to brace myself on the nightstand and breathe through them (although they weren't coming along as regularly as I expected). I picked up the phone and called Mary.

"I'm going to have to get on the toilet," I explained. "I'm starting to have to moan through these contractions."

"How far apart are they?" she asked.

"It's still irregular," I said. "They'll be ten, seven, four, then ten minutes apart. They'll be weak one time and then really strong the next."

"OK, I'll be there in 30-40 minutes."

Funnily, the contractions were a lot slower if I sat on the toilet. As soon as I realized Mary was coming, I thought of a few things I had to bring out and organize, so I got up and started to move. Then--wham--I would have to brace myself every two minutes as wave over wave started to come over me. I looked around. No birth tub. We hadn't had time to get it yet, what with everyone being so sick. Where was I going to give birth to this baby? Laying in bed was not a good position, Mary had said. And there was no way I was going to use that medieval birthing stool again!

I prayed. I told Jesus that He would have to do this birth through me, because I really didn't feel up to it. I told Him I had confidence in His will. His timing was perfect. And He had put everything together for this birth to give me exactly what I needed, so I pushed fear aside. This wasn't a one-time thing, mind you. We are all weak, and I was afraid of the pain without the tub. I had to push the fear aside again and again. And as it turned out, that is the key to the whole process.

With every contraction I would feel the fear rise, and then I would push it away, push it down, down, down. Compression of breath. Sensation. I squeezed my rosary in my hand (trying to relax everything else), because the points of the crucifix digging into my palm distracted me from the relentless pressure going on around my cervix.

You do get tired. I think natural birth without a birthing tub is the most tiring thing there is, because you have to squeeze something or brace yourself or hang onto something to feel anchored enough to get through the contractions as they get stronger. With the tub you can float and moan, float and moan. Then you can hang onto the side and stretch out and the water supports you. Without it, gravity mostly works against you. And my midwife was fond of the squat position, because it opens up the pelvis. I was terrified of the squat position--how many times had I had to squat through that 36-hour labor with my first son? Too many times to count.

But I was stuck. No tub. Mary showed up, and my friend Rachel with the needed birth supplies and groceries. Dean perked up, I heard a lot of talking. Mary hauled all her cases upstairs. She dresses for a birth as if she were going to the theatre. She had on a pretty ruched burgundy top and gauchos and high-heeled boots. That was one of the things that had made Mary stand out, of the midwives I interviewed. She was the only one who didn't have a sort of "tired" aspect to her. She seemed to have some juice left. She had pert opinions, a perky haircut, and jazzy clothes. And 25 years of experience.

"Well..." she said with a little laugh. "I guess I'd better check you." Ugh. I hate this part. Even though she checks as little as possible, I always dread it. So I got up on the bed and opened my legs. "Four centimeters," she pronounced. "You're in active labor." Whew. At least this whole party wasn't for nothing. "Now there's no need to try and slow things down. You've got a healthy baby there, and you just need to get in your zone, your birth zone."

I wanted to laugh. I imagined birth happening as it might in an Olympic event, with all the athletes scattering before the starting shot in order to repeat their mantras, or visualize their success. I had successes to visualize. But I couldn't foresee how this birth was going to go. Where was I going to have this baby? "You might try squatting through some contractions," suggested Mary. "Your cervix is still posterior. It needs to come forward. I want you to visualize that cervix coming forward and opening up, just like a beautiful flower."

I got some pillows and kneeled beside the tub. By hugging the side of the tub and kneeling with my legs far apart, I got through some contractions. Here I had what I felt had to be a God-given insight. As I was squeezing my rosary and visualizing those huge, blooming roses they have over in Portland, I heard a thought: "The contractions are going to reach a peak...and they won't get any worse. The only thing that will happen is that the baby will move down. Nothing's going to happen to you. Just relax through it and let the baby move down." I squatted and visualized through more contractions. Soon, it seemed, a tingling sensation was gripping the side of my legs with each contraction and I could feel a slight burning sensation inside me, my cervix probably. I told Mary about it. "Good, good!" she cheered. "That's what we want to hear."

By then, all the midwives had shown up. Mary's assistant was her daughter, Emily, who had three children of her own. There was also a Japanese midwife, who had been hoping to observe a waterbirth. I was dimly aware of a constant flow of conversation in the background. "Oh, I never leave a multip who's at four centimeters. This one time..." "Do you think we should try and call her?" "I hope she gets here in time..." "Is this how they do it in Japan?" The house seemed full of people, but I was deaf to everything but my own struggle to stay on top of these contractions.

"I want you to try and not breathe so deeply," said Mary at one point. "You're hyperventilating." It was true. I was lightheaded, and felt tired. The last thing I needed was to pass out while trying to have this baby. There was a quick search around the house for a paper bag. I breathed into the bag between contractions, but still gulped air during the contraction. "Try to have more normal breaths during the contraction," Mary said. "I don't know..." I said, confusedly. "I don't know any other way to do this." I had always gotten through by gulping air and moaning for all I was worth. The compression of breath does wonders for pain.

But I was resolved to obey everything Mary said. It was like it was a condition. A deal between me and Jesus. I had been having a real struggle with obedience lately, even if I felt I had my reasons. But this was the deal, I felt. I would trust her and do everything she said. If she told me to breathe normally during the contractions, then there must be a way to do it. So I tried it. The contraction intensified, reached up as if it were going to engulf me, then I drew the breath out in a weird, moaning laugh: "huh-huh-huh-huh-huh-huh-huh" After a bit, it worked. I broke out in a sweat, but felt more alert.

But I was also feeling more intense pressure. I had to find a new position. My arms were getting tired--and without the tub I knew I was wasting energy just by holding myself up. I needed to focus on getting through the contractions while letting my lower body open up and relax. I asked for a certain mattress we had that folded up into the shape of a chair. The chair was almost worthless as something to sit on--but I draped myself over it and hugged the back, and it gave support to my belly and legs. By now the contractions were at their peak intensity. The tingling in my legs and hips was wild--my cervix, a ring of fire. But that mantra kept occupying my head: "It's not going to get any worse...let the baby move down." I could actually feel the baby's head doming and stretching and moving through the cervix.

Suddenly there was a knock at the door, and more voices. Mary came back up. "I need to check you again," she said. "The birth tub is here and it'll take 20 minutes to set up. We need to know where you are." I had no concept of time. Had I been doing this for 30 minutes? Or 3 hours? "Don't check me," I gasped. No fingers. No more pressure. Don't ask me to change position. "We have to know if we have time to set up the birth tub," she said. Her next few words faded out as I felt a sudden shift within me and an uncontrollable urge to push. "Too late," I gulped. "I'm pushing!" "OK then," she said. "Too late!" I heard her yell down the stairs. Later I learned that Elisa from Waterbirth International had volunteered to try and drive the tub up to us in time for my birth.

Then there was a whir of activity--pads laid on the floor, pans and cloths brought out, gloves being pulled on--and Mary said, "Where do you want to have this baby?" I looked around frantically. "You could go on your hands and knees," Mary suggested. I looked, dubiously, the next contraction imminent. No way I could hold myself up. "You could squat at the end of the bed," she said next. The bed. We had acquired a stately, humongous cannon-ball type wooden bedstead from my dad, which had a footboard with an enormous turned wooden bar across the end of it. "I could hang onto this," I said tentatively, not sure how. "Why don't you squat in front of it," she said. Ugh. Squatting. But the contraction was coming. Hurriedly I whipped off my bathrobe, squatted down in front of the footboard and hung my arms over that bar. Reaching down, I just felt my fingers lock in some grooves that were carved into the footboard when the contraction hit.

Then we were off to the races! Pushing is nothing like the more passive process of trying to relax and wait out the contraction. It's active, and immediate. You can finally do something. It took me a couple of contractions to remember which muscles to use, however. You only use these muscles when you're giving birth. It's like trying on the ice skates in the back of your closet. "You should stand up and rest between each contraction," came Mary's voice, seeming far away and irrelevant compared to the tsunami building up inside me. But she was right. Dean was there, now. He helped me up. Then down again, plunged into the roar of the waves, my moans rising to screams as I felt the roundness of the baby's head just inside the opening.

The screaming is primal. Its source isn't simply pain--it's partly the unstoppable impulse of nature (asking a woman to stop pushing at this stage is like spitting into a hurricane), partly the panic of realizing there's a baby in your vagina and the physics seem impossible, and partly the fact that all your muscles are rock-hard...and your throat is just along for the ride. "Pushing" is really an abysmal descriptor for what's going on.

Still, I pushed. Each time I pushed with all my strength, because I felt I was at the end of my strength--suspended on that bar between heaven and hell. Finally I felt fingers, Mary's gloved hand reaching in, feeling around for a moment, then pulling. Plish! There went the water sac. My water never seems to break until Mary breaks it right before the head crowns. But it meant we were almost done! Wearily, I stood up. Then down, gathering everything for the last two pushes, the head straining, almost out...will it go? Screams rising into shrieks as the head stretches, stretches, gloved fingers pulling at me one moment, pushing on me with a warm washcloth the next--then out! No time! The next thing, an impossibly large, bony pressure, a huge contraction, more shrieking (was that me?), more fingers pulling, another huge thing popping, then sliding bbblblllllllblldldddddthumpwhoosh...

And then crying! Little gray limbs flushed with pink, a red mouth, wiggling arms and legs. My baby.

"It's Philip Joseph!" someone (my husband) cried.

Immediately, I was calm. "Oh my baby," I said in a husky voice, sinking to the floor. I don't know what Mary did in the few seconds between when he came out and when she handed him to me, made sure he was breathing OK, I suppose--but as soon as he was in my arms, heaven began. [Oh, but there was blood everywhere! Just like with my first birth. Messy messy. With the birth pool, it was so clean, everything just washed off into the water.] I was helped up and into bed, the warm blanket and the tea were brought, my baby snuggled in my arms as I was able to finally lay down and relax my whole body, the terrible pressure gone.

After that, a kind of party atmosphere prevailed. I looked at the clock: ten minutes to six. "How long?" I asked. "From the time I got here and first checked you, it's been 2 hours nine minutes," said Mary. Emily and Akiko bustled about, gathering up the pads, pulling out towels, packing up unused supplies and unneeded equipment (Mary always came equipped with oxygen, Pitocin, IV, stitching-up supplies--"I never use it," she told me once). Pictures were taken, the kids came and went, the placenta came out, food was brought. Dean lay down with me and checked the baby out, but couldn't get too close for fear he was still sick. Then the poor guy went back to babysitting duty. I got to cut the cord this time, and settled Philip down to nurse. He latched on immediately, and everyone left me alone for a while.

***

A little later Mary came back to examine the baby. He was found to be hale and whole, all 19 1/2 inches of him. She checks the spine and the palate, the hips and testes, traces the fontanelles and pushes gently on his tummy. Emily took down notes as Mary dictated them. He was 7 lbs 4 oz, the same weight as his brother Carl was. "Well, he's not a preemie," she pronounced.

***

Later that night, lying next to Philip, I kept re-living the birth again and again. It's such a mind-blowing thing. You wonder how you ever did it. I looked over at the crucifix on the wall, and I thought No, I didn't do it. You did it, just like I asked. Then I realized that for women, the inevitability of childbirth had always been the corollary to the cross. It is how we share in Christ's suffering. And I know we share in his suffering in all kinds of ways (every suffering can be connected and offered with the sufferings of Christ)--but there's something about birth, the nature of it, and the risks women have always taken. For those moments when we are in labor--when we are pushing for our lives, so to speak--we hang between heaven and hell...between death and life. We hang onto our cross, and find ourselves with Christ.

I'm saying all this because I realize natural birth isn't an easy sell. These days when women cry for their epidurals as soon as they hit the hospital bed and the doctor stands by with his scalpel at the ready, why do birth the old-fashioned way? I've talked up the benefits of giving birth in a birthing tub, but can there possibly be any benefit in the trials I've described here? I leave that to your own judgment, dear reader. Granted, there are cost savings. There are certain benefits to health (fewer interventions=less risk of surgery, quicker recovery). But these mean nothing to a woman when the fear and uncertainty surrounding birth looms large in her mind.

Media depictions of birth don't help. Even a "natural" childbirth, when it happens in hospital, seems frightening--a last resort, when there's nothing they could "do." Birth is seen as scary, painful, uncertain, and dangerous. Women fear it. Men try to control it. People take drugs to prevent it. People kill their babies to prevent it.

It's just not true. Birth is difficult, yes. But it is also wonderful, transcendant, triumphant, and empowering by the realization of a few facts.

1. We are designed for this.

2. God is in control.

3. Babies are good.

I've written about this birth in such detail in order to show that it is a process, one that need not be fearful or unduly painful. It can be understood, it can be breathed through, talked through, and thought through. It can be experienced instead of avoided. It is something special about being a woman that, in all the furor over equal rights, has been misjudged and sold short for too long.

"It builds character," pronounced Mary, when I mentioned this blog article to her. "How are you ever going to get through anything difficult in life, any hardships, if all you've known is comfort? And labor pains...they only last one minute. You can do anything for one minute." She described how an epidural-free birth is better for the baby, helps the initial nursing/bonding period along and speeds recovery for the mom. We talked about the hormones that go cascading through the woman's body during labor and birth, amounting to natural pain relief.

I would also add, as a final note (whew!) that great joy only comes with some suffering. We can spend our lives grasping for pleasure and avoiding pain, like the animals...or we can appreciate the facts of our unique nature as human beings and as women. The ability to carry life and to give birth are great gifts...and should be treated as such. In the Catholic Church, women are far from being treated as second-class citizens, as some believe. The Church has always recognized woman's unique role as life-giver and nurturer. Humankind cannot survive without it. This role, moreover, appropriately mirrors the role of the Church. Souls are given new life through baptism, are nurtured and sustained by the sacraments, are "grafted in" to the Body of Christ and given an entirely new life. This is why the Church is often referred to as "the Bride of Christ." What an honor to be able to live this reality in our bodies!

"You don't need to fill the creche, honey"

Just a quick note to let anybody know that blogging will be thin for the next month. I mean, if I get an energy spurt and a piece of note paper I might go on a real tear (my next target is the banking industry), but the fact is I've got a sizeable wriggling watermelon in my abdomen that pretty much dictates what I get to do with my day. Basically, when the kids are down, I sit. I sit and knit, or sit and talk on the phone and knit, or sit in front of the Internet (if only I could knit).

My midwife says I need to take walks. I try to stifle my incredulous laughter. Even after walking the short distance to the mailbox, this baby feels like it's about to drop out. The due date--Jan 6--approaches. But it feels too far away.

Preparing for a third baby is a lot different than the first one. Where to put the baby is a principal concern. This child will be lodging in our (pretty big) walk-in closet for a time, until I can get the boys to share a room (Tom doesn't always sleep for his nap, while Carl does). I cleared off the changing table, weeded out some ragged diapers, and rounded up enough plastic pants to last me several months (thank you, Rachel!). The dresser had to be cleared off, the birth kit refurbished. I need to stop by medical supply and pick up a few things. Then the birth tub will be paid for and picked up.

This is going to be a home birth.

While this idea has become comfortable for me, it scares a lot of people. So I don't mean to advocate it unconditionally. My experience with Tom in the hospital has given me a lot of faith in conventional medical care, and were I to need their services, I wouldn't get a spike in my blood pressure about it. However, the road less traveled in birth--at least by most Americans--deserves a look. It offers advantages that some women might prefer:

1. You're in control.

2. You can avoid unnecessary medical intervention.

3. You can avoid unnecessary and inflated expenses.

I don't know how it happened, but there's a subtle conditioning at play that says, you're not safe giving birth anywhere except in a hospital bed with a doctor catching the baby and the OR and neonatal unit located just down the hall. When I was about three months from giving birth to my first, somebody asked me whether I'd ever considered home birth, and I was stunned. "You mean, people still do that?" was my reaction. But then I went home and Googled "home birth" and my education began.

Not only do a substantial number of moms give birth at home, but they enjoy lower mortality rates and much lower Cesarean section rates than the rest of the population. Outside the US, where midwives and birth centers (not hospitals) are the norm, outcomes for moms and babies are even better (we're talking industrialized nations here, not the third world).

Not only do home birth moms enjoy better outcomes, they reap incredible savings. While the average vaginal birth in hospital can cost upwards of $8-$10,000 (and you meet parents of toddlers who are still "paying on the birth") a home birth can be as cheap as free. Not that midwives don't request compensation--fees vary considerably--but our first two births were covered completely by insurance.

How's that again?

The typical medical codes and charges submitted by our midwife were reimbursed as if we had given birth in a hospital--which we hadn't--so our midwife's very reasonable fee was fully covered from what they reimbursed us, and she returned to us all that we had paid her on deposit. It doesn't always work out so well. Now we are on a cheap insurance plan with a high deductible. But here again--thank the Lord for home birth! Because the premiums on our current insurance are super-low, we can afford to pay the midwife out-of-pocket and not pay any more than what the premiums under the old plan would have been.

Of course, you must do your homework if you plan to pursue a home birth. I interviewed four midwives with a two-page questionnaire before I found my midwife, the one that seemed more friend than anything and inspired my confidence. I am not suggesting that any mom take risks with her health or her baby. High-risk pregnancies are why we have hospitals. But I do believe that many risks are exaggerated, and pregnancies which would have turned out just fine if left alone are turned into medically-managed "conditions" that scare the crap out of the parents and cost them thousands. Even if I had a so-called "high risk" pregnancy, I think I would consult an experienced midwife before I sought conventional medical help. I've spoken to midwives who've caught 3,000 kids apiece and believe me, they've seen it all.

But how do you get through a labor without pain management? Hmmm. While I am not the be-all, end-all expert on pain (and I hope never to be!), I can offer a few thoughts from my own experience. After having read Dr. Dick-Read's Childbirth Without Fear and a LaMaze manual, I thought I was prepared for the birth of my first. "I've been through boot camp," I thought. "This'll be no sweat." Whoa, was I wrong. Not only was the labor really long (36 hours by my count--Mary's was somewhat less), but the pushing was very hard and I was exhausted by the time the kid came out, bloody wet mess everywhere--about as medieval as you can get. Sounds terrible, right?

But here's the silver lining. Despite the endurance test and mess of that first birth, I may have avoided a host of medical interventions that could have left me with a Cesarean scar and an admonishment about future births. I would have left the hospital with a baby, for sure, but also with a lot of trauma and trepidation about the birth process (not to mention a huge bill). This experience is all-too-common for first time moms, unfortunately. No wonder they swear they'll stop at two.

The funny thing is that after that birth, I felt empowered. I was thrilled with my baby, amazed at my own accomplishment, and (I confess) a bit proud for having done it "my way" (my midwife thinks I was nuts for not using a birth tub). I recovered quickly and was so thrilled about being a mom that we voluntarily got pregnant again nine months later! I just don't think I would have felt the same way about it had the whole thing gone down in a hospital.

But we were talking about pain...I think contractions are more painful when the mom is tense, or afraid. It's not like breaking an arm. There is sensation, pressure...you breathe through it as long as you can. Then you start moaning. Your brain squirms around in your head trying to make sense of everything, and distractions become incredibly irritating. Then you can't think in words at all. Time sort of stops. It's just you and that massive force building up inside you. You moan louder. A weak, downward pushing seems to help. For me, sitting on the toilet seemed to help. Most women feel pain because they tighten up in fear, in fear that the contractions will just get stronger and stronger until they can't handle them anymore. But Dr. Dick-Read was right: they reach a peak of strength and just kind of stay there awhile. But if you can work with them up to that point, slowly, you can manage them (not having nurses running in and out of the room sticking their hands in your vagina is also nice).

Hot water helps.

The second time we used a birthing tub. This is simply a portable hot tub that was set up in the guest room after the labor started. We were caught a bit off guard by Thomas, since I hadn't had a period and we didn't have a sure way to set the due date. But everything came together quickly and the labor was obviously going to be much shorter. Instead of 36 hours this time, the whole thing was done in about 6.

You float in the warm water, and breathe. The midwife shouts into your tin ear, "The baby is moving down! Everything's normal!" You feel the urge to panic a little bit, then someone suggests you change position, grunt a little more. Surprisingly, it works. You can feel that baby moving down. But the contractions are oh-so-powerful. Something else is taking over your body. You have to give in to it. You have to give yourself over to God. This, I think, is the secret to natural childbirth. You gotta have faith in the process, that it is a process that was created by God, and it's natural and normal. Just a few more pushes and--amazingly, incredibly, with a thubbity-bubbity-whoosh--deliverance. Then I brought the baby--still underwater, and whisper-soft--up into my arms, where he immediately drew his first breath, turned pink, and opened his eyes for the first time. Everyone was laughing and crying and we were singing hymns.

As wonderful as my births were, I have to recommend home birth for the aftermath, as well. Instead of a cold tile hospital room with paper sheets, I was wrapped in a warm blanket fresh from the dryer, tucked into my own bed, and brought a cup of strong, sweet tea while the midwife examined the baby and my husband cut the cord. The baby was placed in my arms, where he was urged to nurse immediately. The placenta came out when it was ready, and I was packed into a diaper, on top of a waterproof pad. After I urinated (this part is important to make sure there's no damage to the bladder or urethra), the midwife left for the night with a promise to be back tomorrow. Then...sleep...oh wonderful sleep, that terrible pressure gone, gazing on the face of my new little one, who was allowed to sleep as well (no force-feeding all night).

So there's my apologetic on home birth. Is it for everybody? Probably not. If a mom (or her husband, for that matter) are simply too nervous, then don't bother with it. It's something you have to look into and decide about for yourselves. And I don't advise a woman to go against her husband's feelings on it. Birth is a really touchy-feely thing and everybody needs to be on the same wavelength in order to support the mom. But it can be a true liberation, if learned about and pursued with a proper perspective--in Dr. Dick-Read's words: "a monument of joy."

Mr. Bonner admits he's a Christian...well, almost

As I think I've shared with ya'll, before, I've read most of Bill Bonner's ouevre by now and am convinced the man is a Catholic. However, he's never directly acknowledged the fact, never used the words "Catholic" or "Christian," and never mentioned the name of Jesus, although his indirect references to God and the Catholic faith fly thick and fast in his writing. So I've been keeping an eye on this guy for more direct references--a soulwatch, if you will.

Because I want to believe Bill Bonner's soul is saved.

Maybe it's because he's the same age as my dad. Maybe it's because he's a good writer. Maybe it's because, in his world-weary pose as a cynical, contrarian, "metrosexual" ex-pat living mostly in France, he reminds me of a modern-day Erasmus--in secular drag. And yet...I haven't been able to really believe he was a Catholic who lived his faith...until today:

"The more man gets; the more he wants. If he can communicate via Internet…or via airplane…he'll do both. The Internet Revolution was supposed to reduce the demand for fossil fuel. Finally, man had conquered distance. You no longer needed to commute to the office…or half way around the globe. You could have your meeting, and do your work, without ever leaving home.
But what has happened? Now people work from the home…and the office! And still they travel. They want it all - bigger houses, more stuff, more vacations…and they want to work harder too.

"Work…work…work…consume…consume…consume…

"But something went wrong with this model in America. In the last quarter of the last century, people worked harder than ever. What did it get them? Nothing. Nobody realized it, but they had reached an era of declining marginal utility of work."

This is just a sample from one of his columns--which he churns out daily--and proves why I just love this guy. No dry analysis here...every statistic comes with a story. Every financial crisis has a face. In fact, the 'Daily Reckoning' often veers into personal territory, especially at the end:

"Last night's repast was organized by our friend, the reverend Peter Mullen, rector of St. Michael's Cornhill in The City. Peter is chaplain to the London Stock Exchange and an activist.

...

"We must do what we can to reverse what I call 'secular terrorism,'" he said. "You know, this didn't come from nowhere. A small group of intellectuals - notably Herbert Marcuse - got together. They said they needed to infiltrate our institutions and conduct a program of 'secular terrorism.' Marcuse used that expression. And that's what they did. Now, we have a situation where it is practically illegal, in Britain, for a teacher to tell his class that he is a Christian. And God help you if you dare to suggest that one religion is better than another. Even our own priests and ministers don't really believe in Christianity anymore. Many Church of England priests never even open the prayer book. They're victims of secular terrorism; they no longer believe their own faith. Instead, they believe all religions are equal…and all ideas are equally valid."

This is something I'd expect to read on a self-proclaimed Christian site. You could imagine he was Anglican or even an Evangelical for a moment. But then Bonner adds his own slant:

"We had a hard time concentrating. In front of us sat one of the most exquisite women we had ever seen. 'Yes, there is a God,' we said to ourselves. She had long red hair…and the kind of face you see on goddesses painted by Italian dreamers. She was probably in her 20's…so innocent and so lovely. And when she spoke, the tones came out like dessert.

"But what was she doing there? She was surrounded by middle-aged men, all of them grumping about the government, the intellectuals, the schools, art…finance…and all the other bad habits of our times…while recalling how much better things were 50 years ago. Her presence seemed so improbable, like a wedding cake in a machine shop. But it had a good effect on the old fellows. We sat up a little straighter and tucked in our shirts. Instead of yakking to one another with our typical boorish insouciance, we pulled in our stomachs and began making speeches. Now we had an audience…and a purpose.

"We are not the first to be in this position," began one Old Boy near us. "Since the days of Rome, we Christians have been a persecuted minority…not always…and not everywhere. But often. It's part of what makes us what we are. We have to be willing to accept martyrdom. That's what it's all about."

Aha! Gotcha, Bill! You're not just some cynical old nominal Catholic who glances balefully at the Church through bloodshot eyes while keeping a tight grip on the world, the wine, and your wallet. Neither are you a milk-and-water minister's man, with theology that goes only as deep as your boot soles.

No...this is a flesh-and-blood Catholic worldview that fully acknowledges original sin, man's faculties and frailties, and the beauties and pleasures of this life--while holding it all in an eternal perspective.

For a guy writing in secular finance, this is amazing.

Read the whole thing here.

Wacky Ways to Save Money Part 4: Dump Divin'

Today while washing dishes, I contemplated the fact that if all American families lived like we do, thousands of consumer-oriented industries would go under. There would be no "Cosmic Coffee" houses or "Pizza Planet" restaurants. Niche fashion boutiques would cease to exist, and nail salons would be unheard of. In fact (the mind boggles) even the vast secondhand market that I so depend on would soon dry up without the daily infusion of "old stuff" being moved out to make way for "new stuff."

If that sounds extreme, then check out this factoid: consumer spending accounts for more than 70% of GDP!!

That's right folks. Our economy depends on our secular spendthrift neighbors' continuous use of credit cards! If people just stopped spending money, except on bare necessities, our country would grind to a halt overnight. Mish keeps warning there's a severe consumer-led recession in the offing, but I don't think people realize just how bad it would be if we had one. The GDP figure above tells one side of the story. The facts on debt tell another. The third thing to consider is that more Americans rely on service industries for employment than ever before in our history. As spending slows, more and more consumer-oriented companies will announce lower earnings...their stock will plummet...they will scrap expansion plans and shed workers...which will lead to less spending as the pool of retail, food-related, and other service jobs dries up--and so on and so on.

The only thing to end a recessionary cascade like this is some prop consumers can cling to to shore up spending. In the '90's it was the "wealth effect" of rising stock and house prices, accompanied by credit card debt. After the recession of '01-02, the housing bubble created a refinance boom, and people pulled cash out of their houses, and piled on more credit card debt. Now with the stock market at a wobbly peak and housing in freefall, there is only one prop left--credit cards. With foreclosures and credit card defaults on the rise, it's clear the American consumer is tapped out. If he loses his job as well, the downward spiral has only one place left to go--bankruptcy. And as more and more people seek relief via bankruptcy, there is a bigger push to change the laws and so tie the consumer to his debt forever.

What happens to an economy when the recession is so long and so deep (and the debts are so staggering) that all the government spending in the world, along with the lowest interest rates in the world, don't do any good? Nobody really knows. Japan is still dragging itself out of a deflationary depression that has spanned 15 years and counting. But their people never stopped saving money. They had a trade surplus. Nobody knows what would happen if the US were to slide into a deflationary death spiral. The Daily Reckoning guys have made a stab at it in books like Financial Reckoning Day:Surviving the Soft Depression of the Twenty-First Century, The Demise of the Dollar, and Empire of Debt: The Rise of an Epic Financial Crisis. We find clues in bankrupted "Banana Republic" type countries or the dusty records of ancient Rome. But no country in history has ever carried so much debt for so long.

The sheer madness of it is staggering. If you want to see America digging its own economic grave, just take a drive to the dump. There you will see discarded hoards of consumer junk arriving by the truckload. Now, with my wacky title I am not suggesting you get out of your car and start digging through the dump. Nor will you need to squat on the edge of it, as impoverished people often do here in our own hemisphere (doubtless it's illegal). Neither do I advocate completely shutting yourself off from society and homesteading it (although some people have managed this, and I admire them for it).

I am suggesting three main survival strategies:

1: Stockpile necessities.

2. When shopping, see things for their utility and functionality.

3. Learn to hoard raw materials and supply some of your own needs through self-sufficiency.

As you can see, this will hardly require the cessation of all spending. In fact, if you like shopping, this strategy works best the more you shop. The trick is changing your mentality from a "spending" frame of mind to a "buying" frame of mind. If you are a housewife, you are likely the chief "buyer" for your household. The household needs certain supplies, tools, and raw materials. The household does NOT need Dish Network Satellite systems, extraneous gewgaws and gadgets, or a new set of decor for every season. One has to learn to see through all the marketing and advertising hype and ask oneself a series of questions:

"Do we need this?" "For what?" "For how long?" "Is there some other way to fill this need?" "If not, is the price of this thing reasonable?" "Will it last?" "How much space does it take up and are we willing to store it?" "What kind of maintenance will it require?" "How will we eventually dispose of it?" "Will it have been worth it?"

This mental flow chart will certainly slow spending--it might even slow your intestinal tract for a few days. However, it soon becomes second nature as the rate of accumulation drops and you begin to see the utility in things you already have.

What does it look like in practice? I shop a lot of clearance sales. In fact, my husband is used to hearing me say, "I'm going on a clearance crawl, honey," or disappearing in the middle of a large store because I spotted a fire sale somewhere. I shop secondhand stores. I scan recycling bins if I'm on a walk or a drive on trash day. And garage saling, I'm told, is an art in itself--one I hope to get more into as the kids get older. In our garage is a storage room with old particleboard shelving on which I store everything from canned goods to light bulbs to oddments of tools and hardware I've bought on clearance. Then when I need something, I don't have to make a special trip and pay top dollar...I can just go to my "store."

You can "trash-pick" on the Internet as well. My friend Rachel is a regular on Freecycle. She's always talking about something she posted there or got from there. Some people are incredibly skilled with sewing, or fabricating with raw material like wood or metal and can make lots of things out of scrap. Others are great with tools and can fix anything. I can't say we're like those people, but if you have a skill like that, it's money in your pocket whenever you can supply a need for yourself rather than being at the mercy of current pricing.

One more thing. Like compulsive eating, compulsive spending is a habit you can get into purely because it satisfies some part of you that is emotional in nature. The most intoxicating thing about acquiring new stuff is usually the first rush of newness--opening the packaging, taking out something that is perfectly clean and shows no wear, that works (or is supposed to work) perfectly, that distracts you from your worries and your to-do list for a few hours or days.

Remember that first real clothes shopping trip to the mall when you were a teen, with a friend in tow and a wad of discretionary cash in your hand? Trying on the clothes, pulling out the hangers, carrying those big bags around and pulling off the tags after you got home and performed a little fashion show for anybody who would notice? New stuff distracts us for a moment...we can forget about all the things we have that need cleaning or repair, all the unfinished projects or little niggling worries that have no solution at the moment. We can pretend that we are starting over...just for the moment...and that life will be better this time. Maybe if we just find the next great sale or the perfect bargain we can "make a killing" on something we wanted...something that replaces something else in the past that we didn't get. Or regret. In the end, consumer economics is more psychology than science. The clearer your head, the better you can play the game.

Let's not forget...and perhaps we should have taken this as our starting point, that we are completely naked and impoverished before God. No matter how much "stuff" we have, we'll never take it with us. I speak as somebody who really likes "stuff," and I definitely could cut back (even on my secondhand hauls). I have to constantly remind myself to adopt a spirit of poverty. Even if I could find something that I wanted at an acceptable price, that doesn't mean I should go and get it. I always ask myself, "Could I live without this?" Deep inside the answer always is, "Yes, you can."

UPDATE: After discussing this topic with my best friend (a history/social studies/economics teacher), she asked in frustration, "Why do people spend all this money on ridiculous stuff?" This topic begs the question, which I was then forced to think about. Why do people spend instead of save? There are several reasons:

1. If the Fed keeps interest rates artificially low (say, to stimulate the economy and "save" us from a recession, as they did in '01), then it lowers the cost of borrowing for banks, which then turn around and advertise lots of "great deals" on mortgage rates, home equity loans, credit cards, you name it.

2. At the same time it pushes down the rate of return savers earn on the money they keep in the bank. Aggressive advertising, "low low payments" and sales-of-the-century induce people to part with the cash--because they figure they're never going to see a deal this good again, and they might as well get it if they want it (hey, times are good, right?).

3. The price of the consumer's house keeps going up, which induces him or her to refinance and cash out their equity, or buy a bigger, newer house because mortgage debt appears as an asset, not a liability.

4. However, the same inflation that boosted house prices means that any money saved today will only be eaten away in the future. So why save? People just look at all the credit offers flooding the mailbox and start playing a shell game with their debt, figuring that the easy money will always be there, as long as they can afford the payments.

The result is the highest rate of consumer indebtedness in history. There is no money left to spend. The trouble is, when you borrow money you don't have, you're not borrowing some other money out there that used to belong to someone else. You are borrowing money from some bank who borrowed it from the Fed who created it out of nothing. Trick is, you have to pay it back with real money that you earn with your sweat and your blood.

If all the creditors came calling at once, the shell game would be up for good. This is the reason why so many banks are in trouble. They borrowed money (which did not exist) in order to make risky bets (which did not pay off) and now they are facing margin calls from investors who are expecting to be paid in real money (which there's not enough of). The length and depth and breadth of the "credit crunch" can only be measured in terms of how many banks can keep their "creditors" (the investors) at bay long enough to find the money to pay them enough to keep the game going.

Hint: there's not nearly enough.

But doesn't frugality hurt the economy? As I hope I've demonstrated, it only hurts in an economy that runs on debt. In a well-ordered economic system, there is enough incentive to save and for savers to invest their capital in good businesses, in expansion of production and technical progress--an environment in which competition thrives and prices are driven down through innovation in manufacturing and the delivery of goods and services. This is an economy in which no one need fear to save, to invest, or to spend--provided interest rates are set by free market forces which give accurate information about the value of money to the consumer and producer.

Quickies

Here's a couple of articles on Marketwatch covering similar territory to this series:

Not so wacky ways to raise cash, especially short term: including raiding your Roth, taking loans against your 401(k), sending the kids to work and selling the new car to buy an older one.

A second look at the mutual fund industry: most moms-and-pops don't even bat an eye at the burgeoning scandal in this massive industry that sucks up our life savings year after year.

More on investing, Roth IRA's, 401(k)'s, and mutual funds will come later in my wacky little series...

Dad, Housing Ain't Gonna Bounce Back

Along with religion, politics, and your early sex life--you can add money to the list of "things you can't talk about with your parents." Just when it seemed my dad was about to succumb to the lure of paid work, my stepmom let it slip..."until we can get back into real estate again."

GAHHH!

My father is an incurable entrepreneur. In his mind, he has made and lost a thousand fortunes. He's had scads of business ideas, plans, and schemes. This is not to say that some of them weren't smart, or on the level, or had potential...it's just that entrepreneurship is a risky career, and few people have the chops to pull it out. My dad isn't one of them. He's always a step behind the curve, one of the millions of dreamers who decide to plunk money down on a "sure thing" just when the smart money is running for its life. Despite his stated intention to make a million before he leaves this earth, I suspect I'll bury the old bear penniless.

But I can't say any of this to him.

Even when I see charts like this.

Or read stuff like this:

"The idea that housing doesn't go down turns on its head when you actually calculate in the real-world costs of interest, taxes, insurance, etc. For instance, before those costs are counted, it looks like 16 out of the 17 top real estate markets in the 1990s were in the black. Once you add them in, however, it turns out that not one of the top property markets went up. They were all negative.

"In the 2000s, up to May 2007, you get something similar…three markets that, in unrealistic terms supposedly shot up 18%, 33%, and 36% during that period, are all actually net losers…down 10.5%, 13.4%, and 28.2%. As in negative. The gains were phantom stats from the fantasy world of no-cost property ownership.

"Running through the rest of the list, the other major markets did still make money. But instead of the astounding triple-digit gains property owners love to point to as proof that this bubble was the real deal, you find out that only two of the markets - net of costs - actually crossed the 100%-gain mark (instead of 10 markets). And annualized, only two markets were even a little above 10% gains in property values.

"Not bad, but not a miracle by any stretch.

"Two more of those top markets just barely squeaked past the annualized 8.5% gains in the S&P 500 for the same period. All the rest of the top 17 markets looked at in this article did worse than the S&P. During what was supposed to be the biggest property boom of all time.

"Again, this isn't to say there wasn't a bubble. Just that it truly was an event completely devoid of sanity."

Mish caps it off with:

"The excesses of the current cycle have never been greater in history. The odds are strong that we have seen secular as opposed to cyclical peaks in housing starts and new single family home construction. With that in mind it is highly unlikely we merely return to the trend. If history repeats, and there is every reason it will, we are going to undercut those long term trendlines.

"There will be additional pressures a few years down the road when empty nesters and retired boomers start looking to downsize. Who will be buying those McMansions? Immigration also comes into play. If immigration policies and protectionism get excessively restrictive, that can also lengthen the decline.

"Finally, note that the current boom has lasted well over twice as long as any other. If the bust lasts twice as long as any other, 1012 just might be a rather optimistic target for a bottom."


Sigh...

WW3: Live in a Bus

Ordinarily, nobody in their right mind would willingly go out and buy something that was more than five times his or her yearly income. Especially if they didn't even have enough cash on hand to survive a job loss or other personal crisis. But that is what people have done. Barraged by ads screaming "lowest mortgage rates since the '60's," people have rushed out and bought homes whether they could afford it or not. And they've done it gladly, even though they know they can never hope to pay it back. Instead, they are counting on housing prices to continue to rise...counting on the next "fool" to come along and pay the inflated price. What they didn't count on was that housing prices couldn't rise forever.

The mistaken premise in the whole scheme is that in the modern economy, a house isn't just a house anymore--it's an "investment." And, as our new national mantra seems to be "you've got to spend money to make money," people have figured that buying houses in a rising market is a sure bet. The richer people have been chasing bigger, more beautiful homes because low payments make them seem affordable (and/or buying properties and "flipping" them), while the poorer people have been persuaded that if they don't pull out all the stops to buy a house now, they'll be priced out of the market. What hasn't been looked at is that owning a house carries costs--and those costs only increase along with risk when the hapless homeowner begins to see himself as a fledgling entrepreneur.

This story is one that I've lived, as my father chased one real estate boom after another. He lost his shirt in '91 and had to declare bankruptcy, which forced the course of my life to where it is today. I never forgot--and resolved not to get in over my head when it came to real estate.

This is not to say that there are no benefits to owning a home. Provided you can maintain the home and keep ahead of the loan while building equity, a home is one of the few investments we "little people" can make that stand to dramatically increase our net worth. Homes are assets that typically appreciate in value over time, fattening the bottom line. In the right market, a superb sale can bring a capital gains windfall for the homeowner. In the meantime, private homes offer the maximum in status, satisfaction, privacy, sense of control, and dignity over any other form of housing. Home ownership is also touted for being an excellent tax shelter, whether through the mortgage interest deduction alone, or as a partial business expense deduction. However, there is a right way and a wrong way to approach it.

The costs of home ownership are hardly ever considered when eager buyers begin to scan the local MLS. They include substantial front-end costs: loan fees and points ("closing costs"), the cost of inspection and/or appraisals, a down payment or "earnest money," and private mortgage insurance. While living in the home the owners are responsible for maintenance and repair, property taxes and insurance, improvements to the home, and repair and replacement of major appliances (the furnace, for instance). All of this is on top of the monthly mortgage payment and all utilities for the home--a shock to the former apartment dweller.

Houses cost out the back end as well. An owner seeking to sell must ensure that he will earn enough off the sale of the home to cover the remainder of the mortgage as well as steep realtor fees, "spiffing up" the house for market, and last-minute repairs. And while most homeowners don't usually consider it, selling a house only makes sense if one can get back all the money one has put into the home already, including what it cost to buy the home plus all the major improvements. I think most homeowners would be shocked to realize that, even if they could get all their money back out (including some free and clear capital gain), the inflation accompanying the boom has eroded the value of what remains. In 2001, the buck bought 25% more than it does today. Take that out of your equity, and the over-enthusiasm for home ownership seems misplaced.

But despite the high cost, people still buy houses. Is there any way to win? There is--but the hitch is that it takes long-term planning. If you bought a subprime ARM in 2005, you can forget winning in the short term. Your might just have to walk away. Others might be able to "start over" only after getting out from under their current mortgages. If you're in an apartment, stay tuned and take notes. The fact is that most homeowners do not intend to really "own" the home. Most people plan on selling sooner or later and netting a profit. Hoping against that event, you should take care of your house, but don't just throw money at it. Instead, work at paying off non-mortgage debt as discussed in my first post. This frees up money to pay for needed improvements and/or a 6 month emergency savings fund, depending on which need is more urgent (some people are in such bad loans that getting out is more important than saving money). Once you've set that part in motion, you can plan your next move with precision. Ask yourself these questions:

Can we move to a less expensive region? You'll want to consider overall income/cost of living ratio and the availability of jobs, not just home prices.

Can we live in a smaller and/or older house? May involve safety issues...and neighborhoods can be iffy--research carefully.

Can we live in the house long-term? Moving every few years is an enormous strain financially, physically, and emotionally--even more so if you buy houses everywhere you go.

Can we pay off the property? Early? This is the best way to ensure affordable housing, despite property taxes. You'll also save a fortune in interest if you pre-pay.

Can we live in unconventional housing and/or buy in an unconventional way? Consider auctions, foreclosures, or buying land and building your own house.

Can we be completely debt free before we buy again? The best scenario if you have to carry a mortgage--better yet, save up a substantial down payment, at least 20%.

Once you have the answers to these questions, you can be honest with yourself about what you can and cannot afford. If you can do any or all of the above, you can minimize some costs imposed by home ownership. But why not go for the gold? The bank's gold, that is. They make big money on millions of "owners" faithfully paying principal and interest every month. What they aren't telling us is that the ratio that makes up the payment is heavily skewed toward interest for the first 2/3 of the life of your loan! It's only after you've been paying on the thing for 20 years that you finally begin to pay more in principal than interest--if you follow the bank's payment schedule. That's why pre-paying is such a boon. Your first year of principal payments probably amounts to a little over one month's mortgage payment. Pay 12 extra principal payments a year, and you've cut the bank out of a year's worth of interest. But that isn't all you can do. You should have as your goal the elimination of the mortgage payment itself.

Why? It's wasted money, for the most part. If you don't have the cash on hand to buy a house outright, you are stuck paying interest to some bank for a number of years, no matter how aggressively you prepay. Add in all the other attendant costs of owning a home, and it's owning, not renting, that seems to be "throwing away money." Better to rent an apartment or house, take advantage of not being responsible for the whole kit and caboodle, and pile up your cash. Here is where my zany title comes in. Some people take this idea so far as to live in VERY unconventional housing. I've heard of people living "off the grid" on forest land (yes, even a family that lives in a bus). My favorite knitting writer, Elizabeth Zimmermann, lived with her husband in a one-room schoolhouse in Wisconsin. An old boyfriend of mine was enamored of yurts, and I even read a news story once about a young single guy who was homeless on purpose (he pitched a tent every night and took showers at a gym).

When I think of my own family, I consider the fact that we've always been trailer people. It wasn't until the post-WWII period that we experienced any kind of prosperity, and even that is draining away. My uncle lives in a trailer. My dad and stepmom lived in an RV for over two years. But there's no shame in living in a trailer park if you have no debt and can meet your obligations every month while building up your savings. It only seems unpleasant because we've been caught up in the illusion of a higher standard of living--financed by debt.

If we are lucky enough to sell our current house and get out from under this mortgage, my goal is to never carry a mortgage again. Think about it. In the pie chart of where all your money goes, after taxes the mortgage is the biggest single expense in a homeowner's budget. Put another way, you could survive on a lot lower income if you didn't have to pay mortgage or rent. Hence, the basic home ownership survival plan is: rent a house or apartment as cheaply as you can. Practice your savings strategy and/or sit on your investments until you can afford to buy "something" in cash, even if it isn't the ideal house. The point is, it's paid for. As long as you have clear title, it's liveable, and not a money pit, you can always live in it, improve it, borrow against it, and eventually sell it when the market gets better. Then you go out and look for a better one. If you're sick of moving or are already an apartment dweller, consider buying a plot of land, and building your home in stages that you control and that you can afford. Lately I've settled on what is a soon-to-be glutted foreclosure market for our next real estate purchase.

This plan may not appeal to everyone. The big, expensive, brand-new home on the billboard will always sing a siren song to American hearts. But it is the safest way. If you've eliminated your mortgage payment, you've increased your income by 1/3. If the house gets you down at times, you can afford a trip to Rome. But jumping from one house to another, or worse, refinancing the same house over and over, is madness. You're throwing away money on interest and bank fees while decreasing your equity with every move. You may as well light your money on fire.

To sum up, you have to look at the total picture and take control. Just because "everyone else" is buying a house doesn't mean you should. Instead of "buying a house," plan on owning a house.

Another knitting bleg

Phew! The mortgage article is 99% done! Yes, it took another 3 am nite to do it, but I am excited about sharing it with ya'll. Just need to sleep on it and maybe tweak the ending a bit.

HOWEVER...

This top-heavy (read: 27 1/2 wks pregnant) mom of 2 active little boys has been tapped to do a knitting class for the parish American Heritage Girls group. I knew I should have kept my mouth shut about my husband's sweater!

I've never taught a class before. I have some ideas, but if anyone has done this or knows of a quickie online resource for teaching tips, I'm all ears! I don't know how old the girls are...I was asked to just teach them to make something simple, like a scarf.

Thanks!