I'd be willing to bet that more than 70% of the American public is completely ignorant with regards to the responsibilities of the U.S. federal Congress. Article I Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution states: "All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills."
But the partisanship being displayed by both the Republicans and Democrats have made the environment in Washington so toxic that Congress has utterly failed in this fundamental and Constitutionally mandated responsibility.
A federal income-tax hike in the midst of our weak economic recovery seems unfathomable. Such a hike will surely stifle consumer spending and either stall or dampen any recovery we might experience going into 2011. And yet, our Congress completely failed to come to any agreement on the extension of the "Bush tax cuts", which are scheduled to expire on December 31st of this year. Worse yet, here we are in late September of 2010 and we don't even know what the tax tables are going to look like for next year. How can our vaunted and esteemed Congress possibly budget when they don't even have a GUESS as to what revenues will be?
So we don't get a federal budget. Of course, the political junkies will tell you that Congress is not required to provide a federal budget. And they're mostly right. But how can you possibly control spending unless you create a budget and then try and stick to it? Or maybe it's that our "transparent Congress" doesn't want to pass a budget because then they might be expected to actually control spending. Hmmm...
That same "transparent" Congress (reference to Speaker Nancy Pelosi's infamous promise) has failed to adequately investigate misconduct charges leveled against Representatives Charlie Wrangle (D-NY) and Maxine Waters (D-CA).
But Congress CAN raid our empty treasury to authorize a $42 billion "small business stimulus" bill even though small business aren't likely to borrow money for expansion or hiring because the tax hike will discourage consumers from parting with what little discretionary spending they still have in their own household budgets. More "chicken in every pot" politics and Americans LOVE it.
Every taxpaying citizen I talk to (I don't talk to non-taxpaying citizens because they have no skin in the game so why in the hell do I care about THEIR opinion?) laments the fact that the government spending is completely out of control. And yet, when I start mentioning reduction of the budgets for the Dept. of Education, teachers scream. Or if I mention reduction in Medicare/Medicaid then seniors and the unfortunates of our society scream. Or if I mention reduction in military spending, then the hawks and those serving in the military scream.
Our elected leadership has utterly failed (for at least 60 years) to give it to us straight, to give us the plain, unvarnished truth. If you want to have a healthcare system like Sweden's, or Canada's, or the United Kingdom's, then you have to pay taxes like a Swede, a Canadian or an Englishman. Or, if you want lower taxes, then you must do more for yourself and your community and expect less from your government, especially with regards to entitlements and the redistribution of wealth. But our Congress and our President (again, for over 60 years), has told us we can lower taxes and still provide all the entitlements that you could ever ask for.
I do not lay the huge mess, the possibly unrecoverable mess, at the feet of Pelosi, Reid and the President. I lay it instead at the feet of every Congressman that ever asked for an earmark, every President that pushed social-engineering through government programs, every Senator that ever tacked on unrelated resolutions to authorizations (ala Harry Reied and the "DREAM" act for the current Defense Spending Authorization). Ultimately, I lay our huge mess on every American that still refuses to do with less of their piece of the entitlement pie and still expects our bloated federal government to reduce spending.
So Congress is going into recess. Well, during that period I guess the important and constitutionally mandated business of the people will have to wait. But by the same token, if they are in recess then they can't do any more harm to us. I guess that's the silver lining. But that sure isn't the American Exceptionalism I grew up with.
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Monday, August 30, 2010
Glenn Beck cranks up the culture wars.
Rich Benjamin, in an article on cnn.com (click here) made a series of arguments designed to support the position that Glenn Beck, the wildly popular conservative pseudo-religious radio and talk-show host, has "cranked up" the culture wars.
His first argument is based on the claim that despite Beck's assertions to the contrary, the August 28th rally in on the Washington Mall was a political rally. He points to the presence of a rally participant wearing a t-shirt with the message "If you can't love America, move back to Kenya." Even though Beck specifically directed the attendees to not bring signs of any kind. Even though not one speaker mentioned President Obama by name, or the Democratic party. It's reaching way down into the barrel to label this a patriotic rally based on a few t-shirt slogans.
With regards to the "tea-party" opinion that President Obama is a marxist/socialist, well, it does seem to be that way. The massive expansion of nationalized health care at the same time that 47% of American workers (the majority who are in the poor, lower income and lower middle income brackets) do not pay any income taxes at all is seen by most fiscal conservatives as redistribution of wealth, a fundamental tenet of socialism. He also rammed cash for clunkers down our throats, encouraging people to buy cars with taxpayer subsidies. Again, money moving from those who pay taxes to many who do not. This was followed by cash for toasters, encouraging people to buy new appliances with... you guessed it... taxpayer subsidies.
And for good measure let us not forget the first time homebuyer credit of $8,000 dollars (in 2009) and homebuyer assistance program of $6,500 dollars, again targeting those in the lower income brackets (most of whom pay no or little in income taxes) with money taken from the income tax payers.
There's lots more where that came from, but I think that the citations above are a clear indication of a political motivation on the part of the president and his party to move money from those who can afford to pay taxes to those who cannot. Is, or is that not socialism?
He further claims that the claims on the part of the conservative factions that President Obama is a communist or marxist or socialist is similar to admittedly similar claims against Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr in the 1960's The huge difference is that the attacks against Dr. King where clearly fueled by racist hatred, especially in the South. But in the case of President Obama, we only have to look at the record of legislation passed during his administration to see what is plainly written.
As an aside, Reverend Al Shaprton claimed that the push by the "tea party" to restore "state's rights" is a direct assault on the civil rights movement and is a conscious effort to rollback those hard won gains.In this case the US federal government through civil-rights legislation signed in the late 60's forced states to accept a federally mandated standard for guaranteeing the protection of the civil liberties and rights of minorities. There is no question that under the guise of state's rights, many states (again especially in the South) implemented legislation that unarguably were designed to deny or obstruct the rights of minorities, and particularly blacks, to vote, equal access to education and government services.
But today, the resurgence of state's rights advocacy is couched firmly in the US federal government's failure to uphold its end of the contract that binds the states of our union together. The federal government continues to spend more and more and yet services seem to decline or fail altogether. Immigration laws, especially with respect to the prosecution and deportation of aliens living here illegally, including border security is one aspect of the federal failure. Another is the inability of the government to respond quickly to natural disasters. The 2005 hurricane Katrina disaster clearly demonstrated the red-tape that obstructs swift response by the federal government as well as the complete and utter lack of coordination between federal, state and local emergency response agencies. Our national infrastructure is coming apart. Roads, bridges and dams are falling into disrepair before our very eyes, and yet there is no money to fix them! People who genuinely need government assistance can't get it while shysters and thieves who have studied the system collect "overpayments" from the government with impunity. The US Dept of Education consumes more tax revenue than ever and yet our nation continues its slide into mediocre scholastic performance among industrialized nations.
States are understandably outraged. They are being forced by federal mandate to spend more money on federal programs and yet they do not have the access to print more money when their budgets are bled dry. Not to mention that progressive legislation in states like Michigan, California, Arizona and Ohio have literally bankrupted them. States and local communities would very much like to have more say in the standards of education and welfare that they provide to their citizens, but are continually stymied by an outrageous and bloated bureaucracy that is reflected in the HUGE amount of regulatory law that those bureaucracies are expected to enforce.
I understand the need for regulations, but when the process for getting FDA approval to get a drug to market can cost multiple billions of dollars. And yet, after getting such approval, a drug company is completely unprotected against expensive lawsuits when unknown side-effects not discovered during the FDA approval process inevitably arise. Question: If the FDA won't stand behind its approval process by helping to defend the pharmaceuticals, why in the hell do we force them to seek FDA approval?
With regard to Mr. Benjamin's concern that a third of the nation thinks that President Obama is a muslim. Well, I don't get that either. And we further agree that birthers are idiots.
But I think that the charge of the current administration's movement of the nation to a more socialist government is completely founded and beyond debate.
His first argument is based on the claim that despite Beck's assertions to the contrary, the August 28th rally in on the Washington Mall was a political rally. He points to the presence of a rally participant wearing a t-shirt with the message "If you can't love America, move back to Kenya." Even though Beck specifically directed the attendees to not bring signs of any kind. Even though not one speaker mentioned President Obama by name, or the Democratic party. It's reaching way down into the barrel to label this a patriotic rally based on a few t-shirt slogans.
With regards to the "tea-party" opinion that President Obama is a marxist/socialist, well, it does seem to be that way. The massive expansion of nationalized health care at the same time that 47% of American workers (the majority who are in the poor, lower income and lower middle income brackets) do not pay any income taxes at all is seen by most fiscal conservatives as redistribution of wealth, a fundamental tenet of socialism. He also rammed cash for clunkers down our throats, encouraging people to buy cars with taxpayer subsidies. Again, money moving from those who pay taxes to many who do not. This was followed by cash for toasters, encouraging people to buy new appliances with... you guessed it... taxpayer subsidies.
And for good measure let us not forget the first time homebuyer credit of $8,000 dollars (in 2009) and homebuyer assistance program of $6,500 dollars, again targeting those in the lower income brackets (most of whom pay no or little in income taxes) with money taken from the income tax payers.
There's lots more where that came from, but I think that the citations above are a clear indication of a political motivation on the part of the president and his party to move money from those who can afford to pay taxes to those who cannot. Is, or is that not socialism?
He further claims that the claims on the part of the conservative factions that President Obama is a communist or marxist or socialist is similar to admittedly similar claims against Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr in the 1960's The huge difference is that the attacks against Dr. King where clearly fueled by racist hatred, especially in the South. But in the case of President Obama, we only have to look at the record of legislation passed during his administration to see what is plainly written.
As an aside, Reverend Al Shaprton claimed that the push by the "tea party" to restore "state's rights" is a direct assault on the civil rights movement and is a conscious effort to rollback those hard won gains.In this case the US federal government through civil-rights legislation signed in the late 60's forced states to accept a federally mandated standard for guaranteeing the protection of the civil liberties and rights of minorities. There is no question that under the guise of state's rights, many states (again especially in the South) implemented legislation that unarguably were designed to deny or obstruct the rights of minorities, and particularly blacks, to vote, equal access to education and government services.
But today, the resurgence of state's rights advocacy is couched firmly in the US federal government's failure to uphold its end of the contract that binds the states of our union together. The federal government continues to spend more and more and yet services seem to decline or fail altogether. Immigration laws, especially with respect to the prosecution and deportation of aliens living here illegally, including border security is one aspect of the federal failure. Another is the inability of the government to respond quickly to natural disasters. The 2005 hurricane Katrina disaster clearly demonstrated the red-tape that obstructs swift response by the federal government as well as the complete and utter lack of coordination between federal, state and local emergency response agencies. Our national infrastructure is coming apart. Roads, bridges and dams are falling into disrepair before our very eyes, and yet there is no money to fix them! People who genuinely need government assistance can't get it while shysters and thieves who have studied the system collect "overpayments" from the government with impunity. The US Dept of Education consumes more tax revenue than ever and yet our nation continues its slide into mediocre scholastic performance among industrialized nations.
States are understandably outraged. They are being forced by federal mandate to spend more money on federal programs and yet they do not have the access to print more money when their budgets are bled dry. Not to mention that progressive legislation in states like Michigan, California, Arizona and Ohio have literally bankrupted them. States and local communities would very much like to have more say in the standards of education and welfare that they provide to their citizens, but are continually stymied by an outrageous and bloated bureaucracy that is reflected in the HUGE amount of regulatory law that those bureaucracies are expected to enforce.
I understand the need for regulations, but when the process for getting FDA approval to get a drug to market can cost multiple billions of dollars. And yet, after getting such approval, a drug company is completely unprotected against expensive lawsuits when unknown side-effects not discovered during the FDA approval process inevitably arise. Question: If the FDA won't stand behind its approval process by helping to defend the pharmaceuticals, why in the hell do we force them to seek FDA approval?
With regard to Mr. Benjamin's concern that a third of the nation thinks that President Obama is a muslim. Well, I don't get that either. And we further agree that birthers are idiots.
But I think that the charge of the current administration's movement of the nation to a more socialist government is completely founded and beyond debate.
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Alan Simpson Calls It Like He Sees It on Social Security, a Giant Milk Cow
Read the article here on CNNMoney.com
Things have gotten so bad here in the United States that I have just about given up blogging about it. Why bother? No matter what I say (or I do) it doesn't look like anything's going to change.
Republicans are going to win some seats in the House and Senate. So what? Who cares? Republicans spend money almost as fast as Democrats do and what's worse. Americans are learning their lesson. Consumer credit card debt has dropped to it's lowest level in 8 years, and that trend seems to continue. No kidding. I wish Congress and our state legislatures would go to town on that little lesson. When times are tough, you stop or slow spending and you sure as heck don't rack up even more crappy debt.
Speaking of trying to stop or slow spending... our country is in big trouble. We've added 3 trillion (with a "t" folks!) to the national debt in just two years and at the rate we are going, we will be unable to even pay the INTEREST on that debt. At that point, insolvency is just around the corner and then everything will become unhinged. Whether it's the military, the welfare state, or social and civil engineering, the fact is that the American people are about to face the biggest crisis of this nation's history, and that is that unless we accept some pain (quite a lot actually) RIGHT NOW, we will completely collapse before the end of the decade if not sooner.
Americans expect to receive their Medicare and Medicaid, and WIC, and Food Stamps, and Social Security payments, etc. And any time anybody talks about cutting them, the political discourse turns into a caterwaul of biblical proportion. Social welfare programs represent about 37% of our nation's total annual expenditure. The other big pole under the tent? The military, which accounts for about 32% of our total annual expenditure. When you include the money we spend annually to service the national debt, only about 20% of our annual budget (budget, ha ha, that's a good one, we aren't running on a budget right now and Pelosi & Co. have informed us that we won't get one this year) is "discretionary spending" on items like... regulation enforcement (FAA, SEC, SCC, HUD, Dept of Education, USDA, USFS, USPS, etc....) all the other services that we like to have. So... as I've previously stated on this blog. Not only must taxes go UP, but government spending in ALL areas of the budget has to go down. Which means a lot more people out of work... If you cut the military, then all those soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines find themselves without work. You get the idea.
Finally, Americans themselves are addicted to entitlements. Former US Senator Alan Simpson (R-WY) is in hot water because in an email response directed to an executive of the Older Women's League called it right on the nose when he said in part:
"I've made some plenty smart cracks about people on Social Securityy who milk it to the last degree. You know 'em too. It's the same with any system in America. We've a point where it's like a milk cow with 310 million tits! Call when you get honest work!"
Yah, it's probably a bit more blunt than the email's recipient (a woman) probably can handle. But it's right on the nose. We've been getting dire warning and predictions from wizards of smart for more than two decades that the national debt and the entitlement system in this country were going to push us into national insolvency. And while the sky was falling we continued along as those everything was just fine.
Well, everything is not just fine. Standard and Poors, a premier financial ratings company, has warned the United States just today that it better do something about the ballooning debt right now or our AAA credit rating will be lost. Once that happens, you can kiss any chance of getting anybody to buy anymore of our debt goodbye. And when that happens, the Federal government will run out of money. Not just to help fund stimulus packages, but to pay out social security checks, pay for interstate highway maintenance, and send out federal inspectors to make sure our eggs don't have salmonella poisoning in them. Oh wait.... we're paying for that? Didn't work out so well, did it.
Have a nice day.
Things have gotten so bad here in the United States that I have just about given up blogging about it. Why bother? No matter what I say (or I do) it doesn't look like anything's going to change.
Republicans are going to win some seats in the House and Senate. So what? Who cares? Republicans spend money almost as fast as Democrats do and what's worse. Americans are learning their lesson. Consumer credit card debt has dropped to it's lowest level in 8 years, and that trend seems to continue. No kidding. I wish Congress and our state legislatures would go to town on that little lesson. When times are tough, you stop or slow spending and you sure as heck don't rack up even more crappy debt.
Speaking of trying to stop or slow spending... our country is in big trouble. We've added 3 trillion (with a "t" folks!) to the national debt in just two years and at the rate we are going, we will be unable to even pay the INTEREST on that debt. At that point, insolvency is just around the corner and then everything will become unhinged. Whether it's the military, the welfare state, or social and civil engineering, the fact is that the American people are about to face the biggest crisis of this nation's history, and that is that unless we accept some pain (quite a lot actually) RIGHT NOW, we will completely collapse before the end of the decade if not sooner.
Americans expect to receive their Medicare and Medicaid, and WIC, and Food Stamps, and Social Security payments, etc. And any time anybody talks about cutting them, the political discourse turns into a caterwaul of biblical proportion. Social welfare programs represent about 37% of our nation's total annual expenditure. The other big pole under the tent? The military, which accounts for about 32% of our total annual expenditure. When you include the money we spend annually to service the national debt, only about 20% of our annual budget (budget, ha ha, that's a good one, we aren't running on a budget right now and Pelosi & Co. have informed us that we won't get one this year) is "discretionary spending" on items like... regulation enforcement (FAA, SEC, SCC, HUD, Dept of Education, USDA, USFS, USPS, etc....) all the other services that we like to have. So... as I've previously stated on this blog. Not only must taxes go UP, but government spending in ALL areas of the budget has to go down. Which means a lot more people out of work... If you cut the military, then all those soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines find themselves without work. You get the idea.
Finally, Americans themselves are addicted to entitlements. Former US Senator Alan Simpson (R-WY) is in hot water because in an email response directed to an executive of the Older Women's League called it right on the nose when he said in part:
"I've made some plenty smart cracks about people on Social Securityy who milk it to the last degree. You know 'em too. It's the same with any system in America. We've a point where it's like a milk cow with 310 million tits! Call when you get honest work!"
Yah, it's probably a bit more blunt than the email's recipient (a woman) probably can handle. But it's right on the nose. We've been getting dire warning and predictions from wizards of smart for more than two decades that the national debt and the entitlement system in this country were going to push us into national insolvency. And while the sky was falling we continued along as those everything was just fine.
Well, everything is not just fine. Standard and Poors, a premier financial ratings company, has warned the United States just today that it better do something about the ballooning debt right now or our AAA credit rating will be lost. Once that happens, you can kiss any chance of getting anybody to buy anymore of our debt goodbye. And when that happens, the Federal government will run out of money. Not just to help fund stimulus packages, but to pay out social security checks, pay for interstate highway maintenance, and send out federal inspectors to make sure our eggs don't have salmonella poisoning in them. Oh wait.... we're paying for that? Didn't work out so well, did it.
Have a nice day.
Monday, June 28, 2010
Capitalist Hogwash Concerning SB1070
I've never heard of Alex Nowrasteh before today and I've only heard in passing of the Competitive Enterprise Institute. But the headline in his June 28th FoxNews.com opinion article, "Arizona Declares War on on Capitalism", certainly caught my eye.
A summary of his dissertation is as follows: Illegal immigrants don't commit a disproportionately high rate of crime and Arizona is simply punishing businesses. He then cites US Bureau of Justice Statistics to show that from 2006 to 2008 both violent and property crimes dropped significantly.
Mr. Nowrasteh doesn't bother to mention that in that time frame (specifically, 2007) Arizona passed the Legal Arizona Workers Act, which requires that all employers use the Federal e-Verify system (admittedly a flawed system) and that any employer that knowingly hires undocumented workers will face a 10-day suspension of their business license on the first offense and permanent suspension of their business license on any subsequent violations.
It is believed by many in Arizona that the drop in crime can be at least partially attributed to the enforcement of this act, which went into effect on January 1, 2008, because of a sudden migration of undocumented persons away from Arizona (to Texas, I am told. Sorry, Texas).
Mr. Nowrasteh then goes on to say that SB 1070 and the Legal Arizona Workers Act essentially turns every business and employer into an immigration agent of the state. Well... in a word, Yes. There is precedence for this. Every business that sells goods or services to consumers are expected to collect local, state and federal sales taxes. Every business that hires employees (as opposed to contract workers) must withhold federal taxes from employee paychecks and forward that money to the IRS. Every business must conform to OSHA, Dept. of Labor, or Dept. of Sanitation requirements. Every business must conform to equal employment opportunity regulations to prevent discrimination. Every business must pay a wage not less than the federally mandated minimum wage. So, Mr. Nowrasteh's point is somewhat muted by the fact that businesses are already conforming to a myriad of laws, rules and regulations being mandated from all levels of government.
What Mr. Nowrasteh does not point out is that any undocumented worker must provide some form of identification in order to be employed. That's what e-Verify is all about. So of course, any illegal immigrant that is using bogus identification is causing material harm to a legal U.S. citizen. That illegal immigrant can cause irreparable damage to credit ratings and worse, legal history.
Mr. Nowrasteh makes the claim that many of the people that illegally migrate to the United States do so because they have no chance of doing so legally. Really? It may be hard, yes. It may cost money, yes. But have "no chance of doing so legally"? Please, Mr. Nowrasteh, would you mind submitting any kind of example or proof to support this statement. What utter hogwash.
I believe that Mr. Nowrasteh's underlying motive for this article is exposed in this one sentence buried deep in the midst of this article: "Now, businesses are going to be further punished when they do what naturally comes to them: lowering costs and passing those savings onto consumers." Yup, if you run a business that is caught hiring illegal immigrants and paying them sub-minimum wage or worse, under the table in order to avoid federal tax withholding collection, then you are going to be punished. Mr. Nowrasteh's capitalist world of minimized costs at all costs is creating and perpetuating a permanent serf-class in this country. Is that really what America is all about in your world, Mr. Nowrasteh? Laborers who are viewed as two-legged mules, to be fed and watered occassionally, but who ought not to expect any joy in life?
If Americans want a high standard of living (high pay), then they have to expect that they will have to pay for that standard when buying goods and services from domestic businesses. I take pride in the fact that many of the companies that I do business with aren't the cheapest, but that every time I make a purchase, I'm helping their employees to live the "good" life.
A summary of his dissertation is as follows: Illegal immigrants don't commit a disproportionately high rate of crime and Arizona is simply punishing businesses. He then cites US Bureau of Justice Statistics to show that from 2006 to 2008 both violent and property crimes dropped significantly.
Mr. Nowrasteh doesn't bother to mention that in that time frame (specifically, 2007) Arizona passed the Legal Arizona Workers Act, which requires that all employers use the Federal e-Verify system (admittedly a flawed system) and that any employer that knowingly hires undocumented workers will face a 10-day suspension of their business license on the first offense and permanent suspension of their business license on any subsequent violations.
It is believed by many in Arizona that the drop in crime can be at least partially attributed to the enforcement of this act, which went into effect on January 1, 2008, because of a sudden migration of undocumented persons away from Arizona (to Texas, I am told. Sorry, Texas).
Mr. Nowrasteh then goes on to say that SB 1070 and the Legal Arizona Workers Act essentially turns every business and employer into an immigration agent of the state. Well... in a word, Yes. There is precedence for this. Every business that sells goods or services to consumers are expected to collect local, state and federal sales taxes. Every business that hires employees (as opposed to contract workers) must withhold federal taxes from employee paychecks and forward that money to the IRS. Every business must conform to OSHA, Dept. of Labor, or Dept. of Sanitation requirements. Every business must conform to equal employment opportunity regulations to prevent discrimination. Every business must pay a wage not less than the federally mandated minimum wage. So, Mr. Nowrasteh's point is somewhat muted by the fact that businesses are already conforming to a myriad of laws, rules and regulations being mandated from all levels of government.
What Mr. Nowrasteh does not point out is that any undocumented worker must provide some form of identification in order to be employed. That's what e-Verify is all about. So of course, any illegal immigrant that is using bogus identification is causing material harm to a legal U.S. citizen. That illegal immigrant can cause irreparable damage to credit ratings and worse, legal history.
Mr. Nowrasteh makes the claim that many of the people that illegally migrate to the United States do so because they have no chance of doing so legally. Really? It may be hard, yes. It may cost money, yes. But have "no chance of doing so legally"? Please, Mr. Nowrasteh, would you mind submitting any kind of example or proof to support this statement. What utter hogwash.
I believe that Mr. Nowrasteh's underlying motive for this article is exposed in this one sentence buried deep in the midst of this article: "Now, businesses are going to be further punished when they do what naturally comes to them: lowering costs and passing those savings onto consumers." Yup, if you run a business that is caught hiring illegal immigrants and paying them sub-minimum wage or worse, under the table in order to avoid federal tax withholding collection, then you are going to be punished. Mr. Nowrasteh's capitalist world of minimized costs at all costs is creating and perpetuating a permanent serf-class in this country. Is that really what America is all about in your world, Mr. Nowrasteh? Laborers who are viewed as two-legged mules, to be fed and watered occassionally, but who ought not to expect any joy in life?
If Americans want a high standard of living (high pay), then they have to expect that they will have to pay for that standard when buying goods and services from domestic businesses. I take pride in the fact that many of the companies that I do business with aren't the cheapest, but that every time I make a purchase, I'm helping their employees to live the "good" life.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Kevin Costner, Actor and Environmentalist Entrepreneur
British Petroleum has been largely "stymied" for 52 days with a oil spill disaster of immense proportions. Some estimate that the amount of crude oil gushing into the Gulf of Mexico may actually be 100,000 barrels, or five and one-half million gallons per day. I think this is a highly pessimistic value, but even one-tenth of that is far too much.
While BP has spent nearly two months either trying to stifle, plug or siphon the gusher results appear to be disappointing. On June 5 they claimed to capture 640,000 gallons and yet the "spill cam" looked like most of the oil was escaping into the ocean. BP is also employing clean-up crews to begin the labor-intensive process of cleaning decaying crude oil from the coast line of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas and Florida. CNN reporters have caught video images of many of their workers spending most of their time sipping water under pop-up tents instead of actually cleaning, so this effort is questionaable.
It may not be too facetious to say that God is doing his part. So far, the weather has kept the oil slick away from the dreaded "loop" current that would whisk the oil out of the Gulf around the Florida peninsula and north along the U.S. eastern seaboard. But we can't count on that forever, especially with hurricane season's official start on June 1st.
It's hard to tell what the hell the federal government has been doing. There is no question that Vice-admiral "Thad" Allen of the U.S. Coast Guard has been working hard monitoring the situation and coordinating efforts. In fact, he officially retired in May but he's still the operational commander. Kudos to him.
Congress, on the other hand, wants to criminally investigate BP. Good timing. BP's stock prices plummeted on that news. That removes money from BP's liquid assets that are going to be needed to pay for the repairs to the wellhead, cleanup effort as well as the loss of income from tens of thousands of Gulf residents who directly make their living from the sea.
President Obama is looking for whose "ass" to kick. Good for him.
With all this... up steps Kevin Costner, the star of the much-maligned movie "Waterwold", a forgettable movie. In the wake of the Exxon Valdez oil spill of 1989 it occurred to his research scientist brother Dan Costner that there must be a way to separate oil and other fluids from water, as long as their specific gravity is different. What they developed was a high-speed high-capacity centrifuge. Since oil is lighter than water, when spun rapidly in a cylinder the water will pool around the outside off the cylinder while the oil will collect in the center of the fluid column. The oil is then pulled from the center while the water "spills" out of vents at the top of the center. Testing has shown that water heavily contaminated with Alaska crude was extracted with a better than 99% purity level.
He applied for a federal license from the U.S. Department of Energy in 1993 and the devices have been shown to work for nearly two-decades. Kevin Costner is a partner in the two companies that manufacture and sell these devices: Ocean Therapy Solutions (http://www.ots.org) and Costner Industries Nevada Corp (http://www.cincmfg.com). While these devices were designed with oil-spill cleanup in mind, they can be used for other purposes, such as water-contaminant removal. Considering the magnitude of the Prince William Sound contamination, you would have thought that these things would be purchased by the federal government and/or the oil companies by the dozens. Mr. Costner has to date sunk nearly $26 million of his own money into this idea, and was quoted by the London Mail in 2007 as having lost $40 million in all the technologies that his companies have invented. But for some reason, neither the U.S. federal government (especially MMS or DOE) or the oil industry seemed to be very interested in this technology.
Until now.
Mr. Costner is reported to have said that the ideal use would have been to immediately collect the oil/water from the gusher and process it. The largest unit that his company makes, a 2 1/2 ton stainless steel monster called the "V-20", can process 200 gallons per minute, or 12,000 gallons per hour. The other beautiful thing about his centrifuges is that they are chemical-free. That's right. No dispersants of any kind. Additionally, they are relatively mobile and easily installed on barges, sea platforms or ships. Ten of these devices theoretically can process 2.8 million gallons of fluid per day.
Why the hell aren't these devices on every drilling rig and oil platform? Why is there no stockpile of these devices?
Having reviewed the information from the literature on their websites, I'm comfortable in stating that had these devices been in place, the Gulf Coast would have seen little to no contamination.
If one assumes that these centrifuges work as advertised and the video shown on OTS.org is not doctored, then the fact that the MMS did not insist that there be a stockpile of these devices, purchased by the oil industry and stored by the federal government as a hedge against disasters such as this should be the real criminal investigation.
Mr. Costner and his companies are the proof of what people like Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and other so-called "right-wing wackos" have been braying: Private entrepreneurs will always be the provider of solutions to our problems. Kevin Costner can apparently do what neither BP or the U.S. federal government cannot; turn oil back into water.
While BP has spent nearly two months either trying to stifle, plug or siphon the gusher results appear to be disappointing. On June 5 they claimed to capture 640,000 gallons and yet the "spill cam" looked like most of the oil was escaping into the ocean. BP is also employing clean-up crews to begin the labor-intensive process of cleaning decaying crude oil from the coast line of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas and Florida. CNN reporters have caught video images of many of their workers spending most of their time sipping water under pop-up tents instead of actually cleaning, so this effort is questionaable.
It may not be too facetious to say that God is doing his part. So far, the weather has kept the oil slick away from the dreaded "loop" current that would whisk the oil out of the Gulf around the Florida peninsula and north along the U.S. eastern seaboard. But we can't count on that forever, especially with hurricane season's official start on June 1st.
It's hard to tell what the hell the federal government has been doing. There is no question that Vice-admiral "Thad" Allen of the U.S. Coast Guard has been working hard monitoring the situation and coordinating efforts. In fact, he officially retired in May but he's still the operational commander. Kudos to him.
Congress, on the other hand, wants to criminally investigate BP. Good timing. BP's stock prices plummeted on that news. That removes money from BP's liquid assets that are going to be needed to pay for the repairs to the wellhead, cleanup effort as well as the loss of income from tens of thousands of Gulf residents who directly make their living from the sea.
President Obama is looking for whose "ass" to kick. Good for him.
With all this... up steps Kevin Costner, the star of the much-maligned movie "Waterwold", a forgettable movie. In the wake of the Exxon Valdez oil spill of 1989 it occurred to his research scientist brother Dan Costner that there must be a way to separate oil and other fluids from water, as long as their specific gravity is different. What they developed was a high-speed high-capacity centrifuge. Since oil is lighter than water, when spun rapidly in a cylinder the water will pool around the outside off the cylinder while the oil will collect in the center of the fluid column. The oil is then pulled from the center while the water "spills" out of vents at the top of the center. Testing has shown that water heavily contaminated with Alaska crude was extracted with a better than 99% purity level.
He applied for a federal license from the U.S. Department of Energy in 1993 and the devices have been shown to work for nearly two-decades. Kevin Costner is a partner in the two companies that manufacture and sell these devices: Ocean Therapy Solutions (http://www.ots.org) and Costner Industries Nevada Corp (http://www.cincmfg.com). While these devices were designed with oil-spill cleanup in mind, they can be used for other purposes, such as water-contaminant removal. Considering the magnitude of the Prince William Sound contamination, you would have thought that these things would be purchased by the federal government and/or the oil companies by the dozens. Mr. Costner has to date sunk nearly $26 million of his own money into this idea, and was quoted by the London Mail in 2007 as having lost $40 million in all the technologies that his companies have invented. But for some reason, neither the U.S. federal government (especially MMS or DOE) or the oil industry seemed to be very interested in this technology.
Until now.
Mr. Costner is reported to have said that the ideal use would have been to immediately collect the oil/water from the gusher and process it. The largest unit that his company makes, a 2 1/2 ton stainless steel monster called the "V-20", can process 200 gallons per minute, or 12,000 gallons per hour. The other beautiful thing about his centrifuges is that they are chemical-free. That's right. No dispersants of any kind. Additionally, they are relatively mobile and easily installed on barges, sea platforms or ships. Ten of these devices theoretically can process 2.8 million gallons of fluid per day.
Why the hell aren't these devices on every drilling rig and oil platform? Why is there no stockpile of these devices?
Having reviewed the information from the literature on their websites, I'm comfortable in stating that had these devices been in place, the Gulf Coast would have seen little to no contamination.
If one assumes that these centrifuges work as advertised and the video shown on OTS.org is not doctored, then the fact that the MMS did not insist that there be a stockpile of these devices, purchased by the oil industry and stored by the federal government as a hedge against disasters such as this should be the real criminal investigation.
Mr. Costner and his companies are the proof of what people like Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and other so-called "right-wing wackos" have been braying: Private entrepreneurs will always be the provider of solutions to our problems. Kevin Costner can apparently do what neither BP or the U.S. federal government cannot; turn oil back into water.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Boycotts work two ways.
My beloved wife and I had planned on going to Anaheim this October and spend a fun weekend at Disneyland. I've been wanting to see the "Haunted House on Holiday" exhibition for the last couple of years and we finally seemed to able to arrange things so that we could go this fall.
Well, all of a sudden, California cities started making a fuss about Arizona's anti-illegal immigration enforcement laws, also known as "SB 1070", also known as "Arizona Safe Neighborhoods and Law Enforcement Act". Cities like Los Angeles, San Diego and Berkeley (OK, Berkeley isn't a surprise, really) have indicated that they will boycott contracts with Arizona.
Clearly, they've not actually read the law (even though the total number of changes to existing Arizona state statutory laws account for only about 16 pages or reading). Clearly, they've not yet seen that the law can only be enforced as part of a "contact by law enforcement officials" for other reasons and that questions can only be asked about immigration status if "reasonable suspicion" arises as part of that lawful contact. They've also clearly not read the even more strongly worded amendment that specifically prohibits the use of race in evaluating "reasonable suspicion".
OK, California. Have it your own way. But although your contracts with us are important to us, I know that tourism from out of state visitors is also important to you. So let me point out a few things:
You remember that California vacation I alluded to earlier? Well, we're going to Jackson Hole, Wyoming instead.
Well, all of a sudden, California cities started making a fuss about Arizona's anti-illegal immigration enforcement laws, also known as "SB 1070", also known as "Arizona Safe Neighborhoods and Law Enforcement Act". Cities like Los Angeles, San Diego and Berkeley (OK, Berkeley isn't a surprise, really) have indicated that they will boycott contracts with Arizona.
Clearly, they've not actually read the law (even though the total number of changes to existing Arizona state statutory laws account for only about 16 pages or reading). Clearly, they've not yet seen that the law can only be enforced as part of a "contact by law enforcement officials" for other reasons and that questions can only be asked about immigration status if "reasonable suspicion" arises as part of that lawful contact. They've also clearly not read the even more strongly worded amendment that specifically prohibits the use of race in evaluating "reasonable suspicion".
OK, California. Have it your own way. But although your contracts with us are important to us, I know that tourism from out of state visitors is also important to you. So let me point out a few things:
- Rasmussen polls:
- 53% in Pennsylvania favor passing legislation similar to AZ SB1070 in their state.
- 57% in Texas support passing legislation similar to AZ SB1070 in their state.
- 68% oppose boycotts of Arizona over SB1070.
- 55% nationally favor immigration law similar to AZ SB1070 in their state.
- Pew Research Center
- Broad approval for New Arizona Immigration Law
- 73% approve requiring people to produce documents verifying status. (86% of Republicans, 65% of Democrats, 75% of Independents)
- 67% approve allowing police to detain anyone unable to verify status.
- 59% approve the general provisions of SB1070.
- Gallup Poll
- Among those who have heard of the law, 51% favor and 39% oppose it.
- MSNBC/Telemundo
- 61% favor AZ SB1070, although only 31% of Latinos favored it.
You remember that California vacation I alluded to earlier? Well, we're going to Jackson Hole, Wyoming instead.
Yes! The American Way! Sue Google Instead of Trusting Your Own Eyes!
I was wandering around the internet on Tuesday after Memorial Day when I came upon this article. Once again, I felt my blood rising to a boil as yet another American citizen, probably spurred on by a money-seeking ambulance chaser lawyer, tries to turn an irresponsible tragedy into a trip to the great American lottery.
Lauren Rosenberg, a California visitor to Park City, Utah, was struck by a vehicle while walking along State Route 224, which is a rural highway with no sidewalks. I have found no details of the incident to determine if Ms. Rosenberg was on or off the roadway when she was struck.
She is suing for damages, which is expected. However, she is suing Google because when she used the Google walking paths mobile phone application, the route suggestion did not warn her that pedestrian right-of-ways or sidewalks might not be present during all stages of her route.
So, when she arrived at State Route 224 instead of turning around or trying to find a safer route, she continues on in reckless disregard for her own safety. Once again, a human being finds themselves victim to an unquestioning reliance upon technology, even when the manifest evidence before their eyes shows that such reliance is questionable at best and downright dangerous.
While drivers of motor vehicles have a responsibility to operate them in a safe manner, pedestrians are expected to stay out of the way of roadways which are not designed for foot traffic. Her own eyes and wisdom should have warned her that State Route 224 was unsafe, but she willingly placed her own safety in jeopardy. She rolled the dice, and she lost.
I do not know the specifics of this incident. Was Ms. Rosenberg on the roadway when she was struck? Did Mr. Harwood, the vehicle's driver, maintain control and a safe lookout while he was driving? Were there lapses in judgment or alertness on either or both parties? Mr. Harwood stands at significant legal peril, but Google should be held blameless in this matter. Users of Google maps, which is in my opinion an extraordinary tool of immense usefulness, should be expected to use discretion at all times. Should Google maps present a suggested route that physical examination proves to be unsafe then by all means other routes should be considered. That's what being an adult is all about.
Lauren Rosenberg, a California visitor to Park City, Utah, was struck by a vehicle while walking along State Route 224, which is a rural highway with no sidewalks. I have found no details of the incident to determine if Ms. Rosenberg was on or off the roadway when she was struck.
She is suing for damages, which is expected. However, she is suing Google because when she used the Google walking paths mobile phone application, the route suggestion did not warn her that pedestrian right-of-ways or sidewalks might not be present during all stages of her route.
So, when she arrived at State Route 224 instead of turning around or trying to find a safer route, she continues on in reckless disregard for her own safety. Once again, a human being finds themselves victim to an unquestioning reliance upon technology, even when the manifest evidence before their eyes shows that such reliance is questionable at best and downright dangerous.
While drivers of motor vehicles have a responsibility to operate them in a safe manner, pedestrians are expected to stay out of the way of roadways which are not designed for foot traffic. Her own eyes and wisdom should have warned her that State Route 224 was unsafe, but she willingly placed her own safety in jeopardy. She rolled the dice, and she lost.
I do not know the specifics of this incident. Was Ms. Rosenberg on the roadway when she was struck? Did Mr. Harwood, the vehicle's driver, maintain control and a safe lookout while he was driving? Were there lapses in judgment or alertness on either or both parties? Mr. Harwood stands at significant legal peril, but Google should be held blameless in this matter. Users of Google maps, which is in my opinion an extraordinary tool of immense usefulness, should be expected to use discretion at all times. Should Google maps present a suggested route that physical examination proves to be unsafe then by all means other routes should be considered. That's what being an adult is all about.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
