Lately I've noticed a steep uptick in the number of people brought to my little interwebby home with searches on things like "Dave Ramsey rice beans" or "beans and rice rice and beans" or even "ramsey bean rice do i have to" (yes, really). In the year and a half since I posted my thoughts on the subject of Mr. Ramsey's dietary recommendations the hits have been steady, if not numerous. A few a week, here and there, with the occasional e-mailed question of what, exactly, did I mean by paneer or how dare I compare the man to Martha Stewart. All very workaday. In the last month those weekly few have turned into a daily few dozen.
It's not hard to understand why. Some folks are getting serious about their personal debt load and are embracing Dave Ramsey's methods for coping with and eliminating it. Others are just trying to figure out how to put a decent meal on the table while using as few of their scarce dollars as possible. One doesn't have to be an, ahem, news analyst to make sense of their interest in Ramsey's anti-debt empire or his ever-so-catchy admonishment.
To the extent that my referrals are economic coalmine canaries (o.k., they aren't at all, but go with me, yes?) there's more that brings me pause. The same day that CNN.com posted an article about white-collar, educated, professional folks utilizing foodbanks in California I received two separate e-mails and perhaps half a dozen hits all asking essentially the same question: can home canning help me feed my family cheaply.
Leaving aside the many unpalatable issues brought to bear in the CNN.com article - and I believe there are many besides the regrettable fact that people are hungry - it, the e-mails and referrals all underscore a key point that I've made before (here and here and here) and which I am going to make again right now. Knowing how to cook, how to can and even the basics of shopping for food are not luxuries, they are shields against all manner of weapons. Choosing a steady diet of rice and beans for any reason can be a grand and noble thing, but better if one can do it in a way that doesn't feel like a punishment or, worse, a consequence for decisions made in meeting rooms in far away cities by people never encountered. If one knows how to cook, there is endless (frugal) variety and pleasure to be found in beans and rice. If one knows how to shop for ingredients and is able to use them, the household impact of ever-increasing costs for pop tarts or boxed soup mix or anything else might be diminished (although admittedly not eliminated - there are limits, after all).
The talking heads have been agog at their wondering what the economy might mean for family life. Might people entertain at home more? Throw less elaborate home parties for birthdays? Vacation closer to home, camping perhaps? I suppose any or all of this is possible (although I remember the early-90s recession-influenced fashion of flannel and tightwadery didn't last all that long, did it?) I'd like to throw another possibility out there.
Maybe we'll learn to cook. For real, like with cutting and mixing and applying heat and measuring. Maybe we'll learn to do it with our kids, filling their metaphorical toolbox with the skills they'll need to be not as vulnerable as their parents to the vagaries and whims of large corporations. Maybe we'll be more ant-like, shunning our internal grasshopper voices to pick fruit and make jam, even when the day returns that we don't have to. Maybe we'll do it because it's a good thing to learn to do with our families, working together side by side to feed ourselves and each other. Maybe.
And to answer the question, yes, it's possible that preserving food at home can contribute to a lower grocery bill. For all of you who asked, I hope you found what you're looking for in your search here. Stick around and we'll learn even more together. As with most things, cooking and canning are more fun with friends.