The Slow Death of Coffee

I have been drinking coffee for the past 48 years, and currently, I am good for around 6 cups a day. Therefore, I think I am qualified to judge the devolution of the cup of coffee. What has caused this tragic degeneration of coffee from a tasty liquid delivery system for caffeine to a bland brown coloured and limply flavoured liquid delivery system for caffeine is speed and simplicity of preparation.

This process has been going on since I've been drinking the beautiful brown liquid. Let me explain.

When I first began drinking coffee, it was brewed in a pot that looked a lot like this.

 Inside the pot taking up the top third of the container was a basket which you filled with ground coffee.

 The stem of this basket was hollow and as you see above, the stand was shaped such that water could get inside the stand. When this water boiled, pressure forced it up into the stem, it hit the top of the pot, cascaded down the basket, through the ground coffee beans, and back into the boiling liquid. (note: this process is called percolating). Approximately 20 minutes later, voila, you had a brewed pot of coffee.

In 1968, my mother, one of the original Beauty Sisters, purchased a "cold water" brewing coffee maker, for me, from Faberware.

 Through the re-design of the stem and making it spring loaded, coffee could now begin brewing even before the water came to a boil. The result was a savings of about 5 minutes of time (25%), and, an almost just as good, but not quite, cup of coffee.

In 1972, Mr. Coffee(r) came out with the drip coffee machine.

This signaled the death of percolated coffee. The drip coffee machine used a slightly different process to brew coffee. Rather than having the water flow through the basket of grinds, Mr. Coffee accumulated boiling water inside a basket and forced the water to flow through the grinds as it eventually made its way through a small hole in the middle of the basket into the coffee pot. This process reduced the brewing time to approximately 10 minutes (another 5 minute time saver), and again, with a only a minimal degradation of flavour, and certainly, an improvement in reduced acidity.  Perhaps that why the process has had such a long life, it can actually point to an improvement over percolated coffee.

In the early 2000's, the single cup brewing machine came onto the commercially available market.

While this technology converted the process of coffee making into an almost instantaneous event, under 1 minute, it destroyed the flavour of a cup of coffee. Not only that, it created a giant amount of waste, just what we didn't need more of.

According to the experts, the Six Most Important Things For Making a Great Cup of Coffee are, in order of importance:

 Using the Best Beans
         Grinding Your Own Beans
     The Right Coffee Maker
            Cleanliness of Coffeee Maker
              A Stainless Steel Insulated Pot

The Water

You can't grind your own beans just before making your coffee when you use the single cup packet machine, and to me, that's one of the two big problems with the single cup brewers.

The second big problem is the conversion of a 10 cup drip basket to a 1 cup basket. With the 10 cup drip basket, the first 3-4 cups are extremely strong because they are going through fresh beans. The middle cups are somewhat diluted, and by the end of the process, the last few cups are weak. Nevertheless, the blend is perfect. We've all taken coffee from the pot before it was finished dripping and know how bad it is. In the single cup drip process, there just aren't enough grounds in total to allow the water to extract enough flavour to make a great cup of coffee.
To paraphrase an old truism, FASTER IS NOT ALWAYS BETTER.

Jakey's Birthday and the Birthday Train Cake

Twas the night before Jakey’s  Birthday, and please let me explain,

Mommy Stephanie was in the kitchen, making Jakey a BD train.

The train was from a mold, that makes 9 train cars out of cake,

And while the cake was baking, Mommy made a track for little Jake.

Each train cake was decorated with candy and with icing galore,

And if the boys upstairs were not sleeping they would say, ‘put on some more’.

There was Licorice and Smarties, that’s M&M’s as the Yanks would say,

And, all in all it looked like it was going to be a great Train Cake Day.

Finally the next day arrived and here came all the guests,

There was Grace, the two Brother Bens', and Baby Liam and all the rest.

As with every birthday party, there were balloons and hats and toys

And when it was all over, a great time was had by all the girls and boys.

Happy # 2 Jakey!!!

Shame on you Gordon Pape: OAS is for People in Need, Not People in Greed

Today is Family Day in Ontario, so, I had lots of time to read the papers. On the front page of the Business Section of the Toronto Star was an article by Gordon Pape entitled TFSA or RRSP? Try these five tests. The full article can be found online at: http://www.thestar.com/business/personal_finance/2013/02/17/tfsa_or_rrsp_try_these_five_tests.html

To summarize, Mr. Pape says there are five tests to determine which one of TFSA or RRSP you should choose. In four of the five tests, a major consideration is the fact that if in retirement, your net income is higher than $70,954 than the government claws back your Old Age Security (OAS).
Oh spare me your selfishness!
Using the RRIF Calculator in TaxTips.ca, I said that the person in the example had $950,000 in the bank and wanted to get at least $70,950 a year from their current RRSP when they turned 71.

The results show that this person will have an income of between $70,950-$81,555 per year until they turn 86.

However, you are entitled to keep removing funds from your RRIF until the age of 91. So, if we take Mr. Pape's money saver and re-calculate his/her withdrawals so that he/she keeps getting withdrawals until the age of 91, and, keeps losing his OAS up until that age, it turns out he actually had $1,280,000 in RRSP's at age 71, and he received an income of between $76,068-$94,464 per year until he /she turned 91.

Does a person who has almost $1.3 million in savings need another $544 per month from Canada, or is the country better off giving that money to people who really need it?
Keep on clawing back Canada, and Shame on You, Gordon Pape!

The Gettys Mother Burg Address by Lord Buckley

As my salute to President Lincoln, on his birthday, I am pleased to present you with Lord Buckley's wonderfully brilliant interpretation of The Gettysburg Address.

RRSP 101 or What Uncle Louie Taught Me 35 Years Ago

It's that time of year again folks. RSP season. (Note: when you purchase an RSP, it is called an RSP. When you then declare it and file it with your income tax return, it becomes an RRSP or a "R"egistered RSP). Many people debate on whether it is good or bad to invest in an RSP.  Shockingly, if that's a word, only 26% of eligible tax filers contributed to RRSP's in 2010 according to Statistics Canada (latest stat I could find).
This is silly folks, and here's why.
Uncle Louie told me the following in the mid-70's, and Uncle Louie is the family expert on finance. He was a working man all of his life, and yet he and Auntie Kaye lived a wonderful prosperous life without any money concerns until they passed away. And, left no debt, and, on the other hand, an estate upon their passing.
Now, back to the story. Uncle Louie said the following. If you do not have any money to put into an RSP, you should do it anyway, and here's how. First, go to your bank and borrow the money. Then, put it into an RSP. Then file your taxes, get your refund, use it to pay off a reasonable portion of the borrowing and make sure that you pay the rest of it off before next RSP tax time rolls around so that you can do it all again.
Watch the math:
Let's say you have $60,000 in taxable income (before any RRSP investments). Here is what Ernst & Young say you will pay in taxes on their website at http://www.ey.com/CA/en/Services/Tax/Tax-Calculators-2012-Personal-Tax :

So, let's use Ontario as the example. If you live in Ontario, then on your $60,000 taxable income, you are donating $12,002 to Mr. Harper and Ms. Wynn to help keep Ottawa and Ontario afloat.
Now, your RSP contribution amount, is 18% of the previous year earned income. So, let's say that's probably around $12,000.
O.K., how will $12,000 affect your tax payable. So, below:

Now, your tax payable is $8,264. That means that while you think you contributed $12,000 to an RSP, you actually contributed $8,262, and the Government(s) contributed $3,738. Yet, you have a RSP savings account that says $12,000 in it. In other words, on the day you contributed, you got interest of 45%. However, you do have to pay back the loan. 

So, let's do that math. If we use the major banks as an example, the interest on RSP loan is approximately 4%. If we use the Golden Rule of RSP Payback, and pay the loan back in 12 months, just in time to borrow again, the monthly payments are $1,021.80. Or, $261.60 in interest. But, remember, the Goverment(s) just sent you a cheque for $3,738 which covers almost 4 months of payments. 

So, what's the bottom line. You put $8,262 in principal plus $261.60 in loan repayment amounts and wound up with a savings account worth $12,130.44 (The extra $130.44 is interest earned at a measly 2%). This is a no brainer.

Further, if you start in your 20's, you retire wealthy, at least wealthy enough not to have to worry about whether the Goverment(s) will have any money to help you in retirement, and, without having to burden the next generation with your retirement needs.

Drop what you're doing, run to the bank, buy an RSP and thank Uncle Louie for his sage advice!

What I Did on my XMAS Vacation or What I Learned About Rotten Tomatoes

We had a wonderful holiday. At some points during the season, we had 2 children plus spouses plus 2 grandchildren plus 2 cats sleeping over, plus the Georgetown daughter and son-in-law visiting, and it was a blast.
Oddly, for some unknown reason, we also had time to go to (or rent 9 movies), and The Beauty and I are in much better shape than in most years to critique the upcoming Oscars. Further, experience has also given us a much better understanding of Rotten Tomatoes, heretofore the penultimate indicator of whether or not I should see and movie, now, just another website, sometimes right, sometimes wrong.
So, I thought it was time to create my own movie ranking. And, I officially name this ranking MeOpinion. (Sorry, it's the best I could do, alas).
So, for all of you who can't wait to hear what I think of this seasons movies, and stuff on Rogers on Demand, here goes, from my favourite to I couldn't even finish it.

The Best: Silver Lining Playbook

What's not to love. Two young people overcome their personal demons to fall in love while Robert DeNiro is also on the screen. I loved the couple, loved the dialogue, loved the Philadelphia Eagles Tailgate party. If I had one complaint, it was, how come Bradley Cooper can learn to dance in a 3-4 week period while I've been taking lessons for over 10 years and still can't master anything other than the Lindy hop, which, truth be told, I mastered in the '50s.

Parental Guidance

Are you kidding me, Rotten Tomatoes gave this movie a 19? Even the fans, many of whom are under 60 years old gave it a 66. What's not to like? It's Billy Crystal. You laugh, you cry, you know you're going to see a happy ending. And, as a bonus, you get Bette Midler and the 1950 Bobby Thompson home run. This is the stuff that movies are supposed to be made of. GET SERIOUS ROTTEN TOMATOES.

Django Unchained

This is a great movie. It's got spaghetti western film techniques, spaghetti western music, and a cameo of Quentin Tarantino attempting to speak with an Australian accent. I don't understand how it's possible not to recognize the outstanding performance by Jamie Foxx.

Argo

Another great movie. To find out after all these years that we Canadians didn't actually smuggle the hostages out with our Embassy staff, but, rather, there was an elaborate CIA undertaking to get their people out, and, we, the great Canadians that we are, were willing to hide the Americans in our Embassy and then, to keep the heat off of the remaining American hostages in Iran, put our country in the Iranian bad books by claiming it was our scheme that got them out, is a mind blower. Again, what's not to like, Alan Arkin and John Goodman playing off of each other as two wild and crazy Hollywood guys. Well done.

The Girl With The Dragon Tatoo (the Swedish version)

I loved the book. And, that usually means that I won't like the movie made from the book. But, this was different. The movie held its own, and, the gorgeous views of the Swedish countryside, and really, the entire filming of the movie was top notch. As a bonus, my son-in-law and I got to watch it on TV while the ladies went to see Les Mis. The Beauty loved Les Mis and I loved not having to see Les Mis.

The Guilt Trip

I must admit, I was a bit nervous about seeing this as Rotten Tomatoes panned it so strongly. Then, our Step-Cousin (don't ask), had lunch with The Beauty and said we would like it? And, she was right. How could the critics not like it. It was Barbra playing the same role as in Meet the Fockers, or even, Funny Girl. And, she looked great. By the way, the only other person in the movie, as far as I could tell, was Seth Rogan, and he played Martin to Barbra's Lewis. Just like with a Billy Crystal movie, you laugh, you cry, you know it will be a happy ending. Rotten critics, wake up and have some escapism fun like the rest of us.

Zero Dark Thirty

Once again, Hollywood is on its kick that movies should be almost 3 hours long. WHAT? Only in New York City where they don't force you to drink those 700 ounce soft drinks for $3,000 (but only 50 cents more than the 3 ounce cups). Nonsense. If they're going to make us watch these forever long movies, either give us an intermission, or equipped our chairs with potty seats. (You can tell I have young grandchildren). My first comment when I left the theatre was, I wish they had captured and killed Bin Laden 5 years earlier, so, the movie would have been half the length. Then, I probably would have enjoyed it a lot more than a 75% A pock on your house W.

That ends the good movies... There were 2 Rogers on Demand Movies that we paid for that were the stinkers of the holidays.

The better of the two was.....

Magic Mike

Again, it's the audience and I vs. Rotten Tomatoes. They give this silly movie an 80. How is that possible, was it marked on a curve in comparison to that Striptease movie with Demi Moore and Burt Reynolds? I admit, there were some moments, but all in all, they failed. I didn't really connect with any of the characters and there was no depth to any of their personalities. Who were those people and why were they doing what they were doing?  And, where was Jennifer Beals (Flashdance) when we needed her?

Hope Springs

Even the great Meryl Streep couldn't save this movie. As a matter of fact, we gave up about half way through. Do you think I could ask for my money back from Rogers? This movie was up for best picture at the Golden Globe, as a COMEDY. A comedy, my aching back is funnier than this movie. And, Rotten Tomatoes gave it a 74. And even 59 percent of audiences like it? What did I miss. Help me out here folks, what did I miss.

Thank You Jon Stewart and Shame On You House Republicans For Not Providing Timely or Sufficient Hurricane Sandy Relief Funding

Last night, on his return to TV following the XMAS break, Jon Stewart was right back in form with the following segment on the disgraceful behaviour of the last Republican House for not voting on relief aid for Hurricane Sandy victims.


 This is what Jon Stewart does best, expose the hypocrisy in politicians, and sometimes, it affects change (remember the funding for the 911 victims).

By the way, based on income, my family has contributed more to Hurricane Sandy Relief than the U.S. Congress, AND WE LIVE IN CANADA.

I haven't found it yet on youtube, but, here's a link to a blog from Crooks and Liars . Com that has succeeded in isolating this portion of last nights show. Enjoy

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/jon-stewart-slams-house-republicans-opposi