HomeMy WebLinkAboutThe Citizen, 2017-03-16, Page 5THE CITIZEN, THURSDAY, MARCH 16, 2017. PAGE 5.
Other Views
Where are kids on the priority list?
Last month a number of articles came out
about how young couples are deciding
it's just too expensive to have children.
They might have been saved this problem if
their parents had made the same decision,
because they might not have been born in the
first place.
I don't want to seem unsympathetic to
people starting out today but deciding if you
can afford to have a child is a relatively new
luxury. Until 50 years ago married couples
knew that creation was a definite possibility if
they indulged into a little bedtime recreation.
Birth control options were very limited and
often not all that effective. Lots of families got
started long before couples had any of the
creature comforts felt to be essential today.
You could say it was the cost of loving.
My generation was the first to experience
the revolution brought on by the contraceptive
pill. Even then, we didn't seem to be very
rational about choosing to start a family. I was
in my first steady job, we were living in rented
accommodation with used furniture and
appliances when we had our first daughter.
If anything, we were even less able to
afford our second child, having recently left
that secure job and gone way out on a financial
limb to purchase the old Blyth Standard in a
sweetheart deal from Doug and Lorna
Whitmore. After that, along came numbers
three and four, each arriving under
circumstances that modern couples would
probably say weren't fit to bring a child into.
It's a wonder child welfare authorities didn't
step in!
We were finished having our family of four
by the age many couples today think they're
ready to have their first. We didn't seem to be
that unusual. Most other couples were having
children at what would be considered a
scandalously young age today.
Now I know things are different. I came
Keith
Roulston
From the
cluttered desk
from a generation that's seen as incredibly
privileged these days and we were — compared
to our parents who were children of the Great
Depression and survivors of World War II.
Compared to today, the price we paid for our
first house seems ridiculous — but of course so
was our annual income.
Housing and childcare are the biggest
changes. The cost of buying a house is way out
of whack compared to the increase in the price
of other living costs like food. I can't help
wondering if it has something to do with the
fact our families transitioned from one -income
in the 1950s and early 1960s to having two
good incomes in later years, and developers
grabbed more than their share of this bonanza,
leaving people as badly off, or worse, than
when one person brought home the bacon.
Childcare has also become a daunting
expense. When we were having kids many
young mothers, recalling being raised by full-
time moms themselves, chose to stay home at
least until their kids went off to school. For
those who didn't, a neighbourly babysitter was
an accepted alternative. Today, the high cost of
housing means that two incomes are needed
just to support the mortgage. Leaving your
child with a babysitter is considered to be
nearly child abuse so more people turn to
licensed daycare facilities where the rates are
rising faster than the cost of living.
Many young people are also burdened with
a ridiculous amount of student debt.
Governments seeking to avoid the wrath of
taxpayers have shirked on providing
universities and colleges with adequate
funding increases, unfairly putting the burden
instead on students through soaring tuition
fees.
But part of the problem also is perception
and, frankly, scare tactics. Recently, south of
the border, the U.S. Department of Agriculture
put the cost of raising a child born in 2015 until
his/her 18th birthday at $250,000. It's one of
those scary figures that reminds me of all the
experts who say I need to have $1 million in
savings before I can retire. I guess I'll be
working until I'm 150.
Luckily, nobody helpfully provided my
generation with that sort of figure when we
were young. We wanted kids. We had them.
We didn't, as one professional double -income
Alberta couple quoted in a Globe and Mail
article said, worry that our kids would "starve
to death". Maybe because we were too young
and naive to know better.
I do know we had to say "no" a lot when
our kids wanted things, which is maybe why
succeeding generations didn't want to have to
say "no" to their kids, since each generation
seems to feel required to make their kids' lives
better than they had it. In the long run, which
matters more though: that a kid never gets to
go to Disney World or that she/he was never
born because parents thought missing out was
worse than not living?
If middle class parents think they can't
afford to have children we're going to need to
depend even more on immigration of people
who either couldn't, or didn't, delay having
kids until they thought they could afford them.
In the long run, what's the priority? If kids
come before the perfect house, the February
cruise and the 60" television, you'll find a way
to make it work — just as your grandparents
did. Don't overthink what came naturally to
them.
One of the best parts of a Huron winter
0 ver the past two weeks, I've had the
pleasure of visiting a few different
maple syrup producers in Huron
County.
I won't divulge which ones (aside from
Blyth Creek Maple Farm as the photos from
my visit are in this edition of The Citizen), but
you can check out our upcoming Salute to
Agricultural special section for more
information.
Huron County has a great number of maple
syrup producers which is a very good thing for
someone like me who loves pancakes.
It used to be that some mornings I would
wake up early and make pancakes for myself
and Ashleigh. I would throw whatever sweet
seasonings or additions I could find to make
them memorable.
Since then, I've started a family tradition of
breakfast. Every Saturday and Sunday
morning at the Scott household (unless I'm
out taking pictures at a breakfast) the sweet
smell of pancakes with a touch of vanilla will
waft out of the house, accompanied by the
smell of hash browns, bacon, fresh -ground
coffee and cooking eggs. That smell is
accompanied by the image of me running
around with bedhead, cursing at my poor
planning and several different things being
done at the same time.
Like I said, it hasn't always been that way —
I would always try and make pancakes on the
weekend with a dash of Huron County syrup,
but when my daughter Mary Jane was born I
decided it was time for a change.
One of my favourite memories of living at
my father's house in Goderich was the
weekend breakfasts.
I would grab a plate full of more bacon and
sausage than I had any right eating, pile a
couple pieces of buttered toast on top and sit
down to enjoy a great meal.
At the time, I didn't think much of it — this
was just how weekends were at my dad's
house unless he was working out of town.
When Mary Jane was born, however, I noticed
something missing on Saturday and Sunday
mornings: dad's big breakfast.
It wasn't the sausage or the bacon, but rather
the idea that we could sit down, talk about the
past week and look forward to the week ahead.
So I sat Ashleigh down and explained the
problem — that we didn't have any similar
traditions.
I told her I wanted to create something
similar, but something that was all my own.
I felt it was important enough to make it
work so I decided that Saturday and Sunday
I'd wake up and take to the kitchen, making
whatever classic breakfast foods I could.
After months of experimentation we've got
the basic recipe down. I start to cook the bacon
(in the oven, if you haven't tried this, you are
cooking bacon wrong) and then mix up the
pancakes (or waffles if we're feeling fancy)
and get them spread across the griddle.
It's a small thing, but it's become something
I look forward to all week. More so now that
Mary Jane can sit in her high chair and take in
the scents and sights of the meal if not the
fantastic tastes in it.
It's hard to mess up pancakes. Whether they
are from scratch or from a package, they are a
pretty simple thing to work with. What really
makes or breaks them as a meal is the syrup.
I used to be an Aunt Jemima butter -
flavoured syrup shopper, but things changed
when I started working for the media in Huron
County.
I started trying the syrup we have here and
was more than happy to discover it was the
best syrup I had ever tasted. I look forward to
sharing that culinary experience with Mary
Jane.
Fortunately, as I stated, Huron County
provides ample opportunities to have different
grades and brands of syrup. What makes it
special, however, and what I look forward to
introducing Mary Jane to, is how many of
these producers are willing to open up the
secrets of making the syrup to you.
You can visit them, ask them questions and
even experience, in some cases, what it takes
to make the best syrups around.
I look forward to the days when Mary Jane
and I can walk through a maple bush looking
at the taps and knowing that we either can or
have tasted the product coming out of those
trees.
Can you do that in other places? Sure. But
something about the producers in Huron
County seems to make them especially
open to showing people exactly how
the syrup goes from sap to the top
of the flapjacks.
Of course, you can't point at syrup as an
isolated product. Most producers in Huron
County I've run into are happy to talk about
what goes into their labours, be it meat, crops,
cheese, beer, cider or wine. It's a benefit of
being in Huron County.
Syrup will, however, be one of the best as
far as I'm concerned. It's sweet, it's natural
and, when it's fresh, it marks the end of winter.
Shawn
Loughlin
Shawn's Sense
Problemless solutions
Last Monday night, Central Huron
Deputy -Mayor Dave Jewitt, in speaking
about council's consideration of
abolishing its ward system, said it felt as
though council was, and I'm paraphrasing,
trying to find a solution in the absence of a
problem.
I thought that was an intelligent and
profound way to sum up the conversation that
night. More profound than, say, the classic, "if
it ain't broke, don't fix it", but both serve
essentially the same purpose.
How many problemless solutions local
municipal councils consider on a meeting -to -
meeting basis is perhaps a topic for another
day. But, take it from someone who sits in on
a lot of these debates: some of these
discussions are warranted, while many, many
others are not.
Jewitt's comments came at a time when it
seemed as though another solution was being
proposed that didn't quite identify with a
corresponding problem, but, more specifically,
a manufactured corresponding problem.
With a provincial election right around the
corner, Premier Kathleen Wynne announced
that she would be slashing hydro bills by 25
per cent.
Hydro costs have plagued the Wynne
government based on an issue that started with
her predecessor, Dalton McGuinty and his
Green Energy Act and the cancellation of
planned gas plant projects at an estimated cost
of over $1 billion to Ontario ratepayers.
Wynne's plan to buy votes with hydro cuts —
SURPRISE! — comes with a catch. Apparently
it will cost Ontarians more in the future, but
will result in savings in the here and now.
I won't, for a second, try to make the case
that hydro costs aren't a problem. The title of
this column, after all, is "Problemless
Solutions" so this isn't exactly one of those.
Many people across the province, especially in
our communities, are being suffocated by the
sharp rise in hydro costs. What I will say,
though, is that this wasn't a problem just a few
years ago.
So... what we have here is a case of Kathleen
Wynne creating a problem and then, once the
people have finally had enough (or when she
has an approval rating of 14 per cent),
proposing to "fix" it and wanting the my -other -
car -is -a -white -horse treatment.
It takes a special kind of egomaniac to create
a problem and then want the hero treatment for
fixing it — remembering, of course, that if
Wynne/McGuinty hadn't created the problem,
it wouldn't need a solution. In fact, it wouldn't
even exist.
The topic of self-created importance and
reliance has been hot at The Citizen offices as
of late. As I have mentioned in a previous
column, new computers and new programs for
those computers have made for some stressful
days. And, as Publisher Keith Roulston
pointed out in one of his recent columns, the
problems we're dealing with didn't exist on
earlier computers and previous versions of
software.
It's a simple system: You create a problem
that only you can fix to ensure repeat business.
It's been done by car companies, technology
companies and just about every industry under
the sun.
Politics should be different. You're playing
with people's lives and their incomes. To play
the games that are being played is just a shame.
To see how low some Canadian politicians
have sunk to try and earn four more years at a
job is just a slap in the face to those simply
trying to scrape out a living.