Election 2015: Will That Be Cost or Value?

IT BECAME ONE OF THE MOST TALKED ABOUT experiments in modern psychology. Around 1970, Stanford researcher Walter Mischel decided to sit a series of four-year-olds in a room and put a marshmallow on a table in front of them. He told them that they could eat the marshmallow right away, but that if they waited until he returned he would give them two marshmallows.Videos shot of the children during that time revealed a lot of squirming and kicking, even kids banging their head on the table. Mischel then followed them through subsequent years and learned some fascinating trends. Those kids that waited until he returned did much better at school and had fewer behavioural problems. Thirteen years later, those kids that waited for the second marshmallow had SAT scores that were 210 points higher than the kids who devoured the first marshmallow immediately. Twenty years later they had much higher college completion rates and 30 years later they had much higher incomes.The results fascinated the nation and effectively illustrated how kids who could picture longer term strategies in their thinking and exercise self-control (waiting for the second marshmallow) had an easier time of things as they matured. It has come to be known in the vernacular as the “marshmallow test.”In certain ways, Canadians are being asked to undergo a similar experiment during this federal election season. Sometimes we are asked by the parties to opt for the immediate baubles instead of the longer-term investments. We keep being treated as impulsive shoppers who can choose from an array of boutique items on a shelf that would bring some quick satisfaction – negligible tax credits, limited responses to the refugee crisis, meager investments in climate change adaptation, pension tinkering, even help with the purchase of sports equipment. They all sound great and enticing, but they get us little.Or we can exert more self-discipline focusing on Canadian arts, education, healthcare, research, environmental, true healing with our indigenous people, and transportation infrastructure that will yield dividends in decades to come. There are a scant few of these on our present election promise season. Why? Because political parties sense that we are more intrigued by costs than we are values. Yes, we desire affordable education, a clean planet, security for our older years, comprehensive healthcare coverage, and a political class that actually delivers on our aspirations. But, in truth, we really like those trinkets that in the end appear to provide a few extra dollars in our pockets.The problem is that post secondary education costs have already gone up over 200% since 1993, and we have to pay more for government services while waiting longer to acquire them. Is this honestly what we desire in this election? Does the political class feel we’ll opt for that first marshmallow? Of course they do, because that’s how they feel they’ll get our vote. They won’t change that approach until we align ourselves with the counsel of Jennifer Crusie: “Values aren’t buses. They’re not supposed to get you anywhere. They’re supposed to define who you are.”This is our dilemma during Election 2015: we are being forced to choose between the immediate satisfaction of the initial marshmallow or the deeper discernment that comes with waiting to acquire them both. Canadians pride themselves as a value people but all to often accept cost over values, which are ultimately priceless and were the basis upon which our parents and grandparents build an equitable country. The things we truly value and share in common are those things we simply can't put a cost to but which form the sinews of our civilization.  If we make the proper choice, we will change the future, and that of our children. This could be an election for the ages, or merely for the next four years. It’s time to play the long game.